Proposed specificationSource-located exemplarH2 H3

Observability-driven harness evolution

Use traces to guide candidate changes.

JOIN POINTtrace_to_harness_changeRECORD STATUSCandidate · v0.1.0

UML class view

The proposed contract drawn as participant roles, received calls, and numbered dependencies.

Object interactions

The same roles and calls as a class collaboration and a numbered message sequence.

Object interaction diagram for Observability-driven harness evolution, showing role collaboration and a numbered message sequence — FIG. E10 / OBJECT INTERACTIONS
Open full SVG Download PDF

Pointcut

Where the mechanism applies. All four dimensions belong to the proposed match, not just its vocabulary.

Context: Harness traces and evaluation results are available for improvement.
Trigger: Analysis identifies a failure or opportunity and proposes a harness change.
Structure: Trace schema, analyzer, authorized edit scope, evaluation gate, and regression suite.
Effect: The harness change is trace-linked and accepted only after evaluation.

Protected contract

The obligation that clients, operators, and auditors should be able to rely on.

Requires: Trace links compare runs and identify the affected harness component.
Ensures: Accepted changes retain observation, hypothesis, diff, and evaluation provenance.
Invariant: A changed harness still passes regression and security checks.
Violation: Non-reproducible traces or regressions reject or quarantine the change.

Negative control

Logging without a trace-to-change decision is not E10.

Variation & lifecycle

The hot spot is admitted only where the protected semantics survive.

Permitted variation

Trace-guided edits, observability loops, automated diagnosis, and transfer tests.

Test obligation

Test diagnosis, accepted change, rejected regression, and cross-task transfer.

Evolution question

Did trace analysis become an explicit gate for harness edits?

Prompt + code design

An illustrative prompt and a small design sketch for the proposed contract. Names and APIs are invented; this is not a repository excerpt.

PROMPT SKETCH

Compare traces to identify an affected harness component, propose a change, and evaluate it before acceptance. Retain the observation, hypothesis, diff, and evaluation as one provenance chain.

CODE DESIGN / PYTHON

def evolve(trace_pair, harness):
    diagnosis = diagnose(trace_pair)
    if diagnosis.component is None:
        return NoChange(diagnosis)
    diff = propose_edit(harness, diagnosis)
    result = evaluate(harness.apply(diff))
    return EvolutionRecord(
        observation=trace_pair.evidence,
        hypothesis=diagnosis,
        diff=diff,
        evaluation=result,
    )

Illustrative design sketch. Observability becomes evolution only when the trace is tied to an evaluated change. This example is a teaching aid, not implementation evidence or a conformance claim.

Detection & matching

The frozen rule that retrieves this record, the canonical source exemplar, and the control that should stay unmatched.

Join point: trace_to_harness_change
Source locator: See the source record.
Lexical cue: (?i)\b(?:observability[_-]?driven|trace[_-]?(?:guided|driven)|trajectory[_-]?optimi[sz]ation)\bFrozen expression, v0.1.0. A match is a retrieval cue, not a confirmed implementation.
Aliases: observabilitydriven, tracedriven, traceguided, harnessevolution
Canonical exemplar: china-qijizhifeng/agentic-harness-engineeringevolve.py:5Support: README.md:169
Negative control: Logging without a trace-to-change decision is not E10.

Scope-anchored review. pohe-agent analyze <repo> --pattern E10 anchors the cue to its enclosing declaration and checks a separate operational signature for all four pointcut dimensions. Missing roles and negative-control risks remain visible; a structural match is not E2/E3. Calibration report ↗

Repository files

Up to five public files retrieved by the frozen cue and pinned to the audited commit. A match is a place to inspect, not a confirmed implementation.

01china-qijizhifeng/agentic-harness-engineeringevolve.py:5CANONICAL SOURCE

Evidence & provenance

Each layer answers a different question. Do not substitute retrieval for review.

Source-located exemplar

A concrete source anchor is available for this proposed record. It is one exemplar, not evidence that all repositories—or every contract field—conform.

Review boundary: this candidate and its specification come from an AI-assisted study. Independent human validation remains open.

ANY-EVIDENCE FAMILY COVERAGE1/36

2.8% of repository families in the frozen panel have at least one current cue, historical cue, or canonical source layer. This is not confirmed prevalence.

Current lexical-cue repositories: 1 / 41

Canonical source anchorchina-qijizhifeng/agentic-harness-engineering 182ea06e578devolve.py:5

Supporting surfaceREADME.md:169

Evaluate, analyze traces, improve harness, repeat.

Exploratory retrieval cue Regex / v0.1.0

(?i)\b(?:observability[_-]?driven|trace[_-]?(?:guided|driven)|trajectory[_-]?optimi[sz]ation)\b

This expression is a discovery instrument only. A match is a retrieval cue—not a confirmed implementation, pointcut match, or contract proof.