C.32.ADA:4 - Solution
Create ArchitectureDecisionAdequacyEvaluation@Project for one declared use. Evaluate the complete coordinate set. Do not average coordinate values. Use the weakest live coordinate to choose the next repair.
C.32.ADA:4.1 - Shared value meanings
Use the same ordinal value domain and labels as E.21. ADA specializes what counts as expression for architecture-decision adequacy; it does not create a second scale.
| Value | Label | Architecture-decision adequacy meaning |
|---|---|---|
0 | absent | The coordinate is not expressed for the declared architecture-decision use. |
1 | namedOnly | The coordinate is named or implied, but cannot support reliance, action, evaluation, or repair. |
2 | partiallyExpressedForDeclaredUse | The coordinate is present but incomplete, fragile, misplaced, or too narrow for the declared use. |
3 | sufficientlyExpressedForDeclaredUse | The coordinate can support the declared use in the current project, with limits visible. |
4 | wellExpressedForDeclaredUse | The coordinate has clear refs, boundaries, source-return, and repair path for likely project changes. |
5 | exceptionallyExpressedForDeclaredUse | The coordinate is well expressed and transferable across another team, later slice, or adjacent holon kind with minimal recovery work and no hidden neighbor loss. |
Values are ordinal content evaluations. They are not measures, averages, votes, maturity ladder names, evidence weights, assurance levels, gate statuses, or implementation approval.
The result-bearing coordinate row uses the E.21 label domain with an architecture-decision coordinate:
| Coordinate | Value | Label | ShortRationale |
|---|---|---|---|
<ADA coordinate> | <0..5> | <E.21 label> | <for 1..4, why the lower adjacent value would understate the expressed content and the higher adjacent value would overstate it; for 0, why 1 would overstate it and what would raise or reopen; for 5, what makes 4 too weak and what would lower or reopen> |
5 is not required for every use. Stop conditions are declared before evaluation. A lower diagnostic floor may be used for exploration or internal discussion, but it does not make the decision ready for developer work, implementation commitment, or governance enforcement.
C.32.ADA:4.2 - Complete coordinate set
Evaluate every coordinate. If a coordinate is not live, mark it notTriggered only with a short reason grounded in the declared use.
| Coordinate | What is evaluated | Repair when weak |
|---|---|---|
BoundedDecisionQuestionRecoverability | Decision subject, described holon, exact U.ClaimScope, relevant A.2.6 U.ContextSlice membership, effective reference scheme and plane, evaluation window, status, and decision question can be recovered; a selected BoundedModelUseStructure is named only when it independently changes interpretation. | Repair the exact missing decision-subject, scope, slice, or model-use-structure assertion using C.32.PAD, A.2.6, or A.1.1. |
CandidateBasisAndSelectionTraceability | Candidate palette, residual frame, comparison, selection, selected set, or reason no candidate-set question is live is recoverable. | Repair the missing candidate, comparison, or selection assertion using the exact applicable content in C.32, C.32.MLAO, A.19.CPM, A.19.SelectorMechanism, G.5, or C.11. |
AffectedStructureAndDescriptionAdequacy | Affected selected structures, views, architecture descriptions, correspondence, structural-information lens uses, and source-return are recoverable. | Repair the exact missing structure, description, correspondence, or lens-use assertion using C.30, C.30.ASV, C.30.AD, A.6.F, A.6.M, or C.29. |
ArchitectureCharacteristicTradeoffAdequacy | Architecture characteristics, criteria rows, Q-Bundles, eval readings, accepted losses, and guardrails are explicit. | Repair the exact missing characteristic, criterion, reading, loss, or guardrail assertion using C.32.ACS, C.32.HCS, C.25, C.32.ACE, C.16, C.31, or C.31.ASAP. |
MethodAndWorkDockingAdequacy | Method-use instructions, exact intended or acting Systems, Work boundaries, readiness, and expected structure effects are usable. Intended assignment requirements remain modal; actual assignment and F.6 attribution are required only when the instruction or evaluation expressly consumes precise assignment-bound attribution. Responsibility remains independently governed. | Repair the exact missing MethodDescription, Method, A.13 performer basis, A.15.1 Work fact, optional direct assignment species and F.6 attribution, responsibility predicate or missing governor, readiness, or expected-effect assertion using A.15, A.15.1, A.15.2, A.15.5, E.8, E.11.PUR, A.6.RCD, or C.24. |
ArchitectDeveloperSplitAdequacy | Structures fixed by the decision, refinement left open to developers, holon-transition or BOSC-triggered boundary refs, and source-return condition are explicit. | Repair the exact split or claim-kind assertion using C.32.PAD, A.15, or B.2.P; use B.2 only when whole reidentification is triggered. |
PublicationProjectionAdequacy | ADR-like or other publication projection carries the needed section functions for the declared readers. | Use C.32.ADR for the exact projection, E.17 for a source-backed publication face and source return, and E.24.PUB for the publication occurrence, form, carrier bearing, audience, and availability. |
EvidenceEvalAndGateExitAdequacy | Eval, evidence, assurance, gate, or institutional-governance assertions are named only when live, with their exact predicates and subject-pattern locators. | Repair the exact assertion using C.32.ACE, C.16, A.10, B.3, A.21, or the named institutional-governance content. |
EvolutionAndReopenConditionAdequacy | Reopen, supersession, stronger-source return, and changed-context triggers are clear. | Repair the exact reopen, supersession, archive/front, improvement, or source-currentness assertion using C.32.PAD, C.32.FAIL, C.18, C.19, or E.23. |
TransformerTransformedCorrespondenceAdequacy | Required correspondence between a separately typed influence-source architecture and the transformed-side architecture is recoverable when the decision depends on it. Keep a modal or unresolved synthesis frame distinct from an exact row about an obtaining influence occurrence under C.32.CONWAY. | Use C.32.CONWAY to repair the correspondence frame or exact pair row. Use A.15, A.3.4, A.3.4.P, or E.18 only for a separately current Method/Work, actual-change, or flow-structure claim. |
NonOverreadAndSubjectAssertionAdequacy | The decision, description, publication, Method, eval, evidence, assurance, and gate claims remain distinct subject assertions with exact defining or constraining ClaimGraphs. | Repair the exact overread, relation, wording, or name using A.7, A.6.P, E.10, F.18, or the subject pattern for the unresolved question. |
ConsequenceAndRepairGuidanceAdequacy | Consequences, accepted losses, weak coordinates, and next repair instructions are actionable for the declared use. | Repair the exact missing consequence, projection function, or coordinate assertion using PAD, ADR, or the coordinate-specific subject pattern. |
C.32.ADA:4.3 - Use-specific stop conditions
Declare the use before scoring. Common uses:
| Declared use | Ordinary stop condition |
|---|---|
| Internal architecture discussion | Every triggered coordinate is evaluated; 0 absent coordinates block reliance, and values below 3 sufficientlyExpressedForDeclaredUse name the patterns or sources that must be repaired. |
| Ready for architecture review | No triggered coordinate below 3 sufficientlyExpressedForDeclaredUse; candidate basis, trade-off, affected structures, work split, and reopen condition are strong enough for reviewers to inspect by value. |
| Ready for developer work or implementation commitment | Every triggered coordinate is at least 4 wellExpressedForDeclaredUse unless a governing project decision explicitly declares a lower diagnostic floor and says the result is not an implementation commitment. |
| Ready for ADR-like publication | Publication projection, section functions, status, source-return, and supersession are at least 4 wellExpressedForDeclaredUse; if the record will guide developer work, use the developer-work floor too. |
| Ready for governance enforcement | Every triggered coordinate is at least 4 wellExpressedForDeclaredUse; enforcement status requires a separate current gate, evidence-use, assurance, or governance result. |
Use these as ordinary defaults. A project can declare stricter stop conditions. It must not weaken a triggered coordinate by hiding it under an average, and it must not call a diagnostic result ready for developer work or governance enforcement.
C.32.ADA:4.4 - Small complete evaluation slice
ArchitectureDecisionAdequacyEvaluation@OrderFlow:
declaredUse: readyForDeveloperWork
claimScopeRef: OrderFlow developer-work readiness for the named decision and release slice
selectedContextSliceRefs: OrderFlow service, named product-family release, and current developer-work window slices
effectiveReferenceScheme: OrderFlow architecture decision scheme edition 4
referencePlane: selected architecture and developer-work commitment
evaluationWindow: review session 2026-08-12, 10:00–10:20
decisionQuestionInputProjectionRef: PAD decision relation plus its declared-use and source-return fields
evaluatorSystemRef: ArchitectureReviewService-4
evaluatorAssignmentSpeciesRef: ArchitectureReviewerAssignment
evaluatorAssignmentOccurrenceRef: ArchitectureReviewerAssignment-6
evaluationWorkRef: DecisionAdequacyEvaluationWork-12
evaluationPerformedUnderAssignmentRef: performedUnderAssignment(DecisionAdequacyEvaluationWork-12, ArchitectureReviewerAssignment-6)
adequacyResultEpistemeRef: DecisionAdequacyResult-12
architectureDecisionRelationRef: PAD:order-flow-event-integration
architectureDecisionRecordProjectionRef: ADR:order-flow-event-integration
noAveragePolicy: true
stopCondition: every triggered coordinate >= 4 wellExpressedForDeclaredUse
strongestBlockingCoordinates:
- MethodAndWorkDockingAdequacy
- ArchitectureCharacteristicTradeoffAdequacy
result: repairBeforeUse
| Coordinate | Value | Label | Short rationale and repair |
|---|---|---|---|
BoundedDecisionQuestionRecoverability | 4 | wellExpressedForDeclaredUse | Subject, holon, exact claim scope and selected slices, scheme and plane, window, status, and question are explicit for the named use, so 3 understates their clarity and boundaries; 5 would require a reinforcing transfer or source-return case beyond this local slice. |
CandidateBasisAndSelectionTraceability | 4 | wellExpressedForDeclaredUse | Candidate palette and selected option are cited in a recoverable local path, so 3 understates the explicit basis; 5 would require a reinforcing replay, such as another team recovering the selection without local assistance. |
AffectedStructureAndDescriptionAdequacy | 4 | wellExpressedForDeclaredUse | Module and information structures and the C.30.ASV refs make the affected structures and their local description use recoverable, so 3 understates that explicit fit; 5 would require a reinforcing worked source-return case. |
ArchitectureCharacteristicTradeoffAdequacy | 3 | sufficientlyExpressedForDeclaredUse | Substitutability gain and latency loss support a bounded reading of the trade-off, so 2 understates what is usable; incomplete guardrail eval rows prevent 4. Repair through C.32.ACS, C.32.ACE, C.25, and C.16. |
MethodAndWorkDockingAdequacy | 2 | partiallyExpressedForDeclaredUse | The directive to use events and the express accountability requirement give more content than 1 namedOnly. Missing MethodDescription, exact acting System for this instruction, readiness boundary, and expected structure effect prevent 3. The record also claims implementation Work under ServiceTeamAssignment but lacks the exact assignment species/current occurrence and required F.6 attribution. Repair those separate PAD and A.15 assertions; a Work-only instruction would not incur the attribution gap. |
ArchitectDeveloperSplitAdequacy | 3 | sufficientlyExpressedForDeclaredUse | The acting Systems and fixed-versus-open Work split are clear enough for a bounded local reading, so 2 understates them; the missing source-return threshold for schema refinement prevents 4. Repair that PAD boundary. If responsibility is claimed, cite its direct predicate, participants, applicability, and identity or return the missing governor; use B.2.P or B.2 only when the corresponding level or whole question is current. |
PublicationProjectionAdequacy | 4 | wellExpressedForDeclaredUse | The ADR maps section functions to the current reader use, so 3 understates the explicit local projection; 5 would require a reinforcing package-update or supersession replay. |
EvidenceEvalAndGateExitAdequacy | 3 | sufficientlyExpressedForDeclaredUse | Named evaluation and gate continuation conditions give a usable bounded next step, so 2 understates them; they are not yet replayable enough for developer commitment, preventing 4. Repair the exact triggered assertions through C.32.ACE, C.16, A.10, B.3, or A.21. |
EvolutionAndReopenConditionAdequacy | 4 | wellExpressedForDeclaredUse | Latency and schema-version-pressure triggers state concrete local reopen conditions, so 3 understates their clarity; 5 would require a reinforcing supersession slice. |
TransformerTransformedCorrespondenceAdequacy | notTriggered | — | The OrderFlow decision in this slice does not rely on the locally mentioned toolchain/product-structure correspondence. Keep that observation as a cue; reopen this coordinate and use C.32.CONWAY if the correspondence becomes decision-relevant. |
NonOverreadAndSubjectAssertionAdequacy | 4 | wellExpressedForDeclaredUse | The decision, ADR, Method, eval, and gate claims retain their separate subject assertions and direct patterns, so 3 understates the explicit local distinctions; 5 would require a reinforcing near-miss showing that the distinction prevents an actual overread. |
ConsequenceAndRepairGuidanceAdequacy | 4 | wellExpressedForDeclaredUse | Consequences and coordinate-specific repair loci give actionable instructions for this use, so 3 understates that guidance; 5 would require a reinforcing transfer case, such as another holon kind. |
PAD adequate, ADR weak. A fixture architecture decision relation can reach 4 wellExpressedForDeclaredUse on every triggered PAD, Method, work-split, trade-off, and reopen coordinate while the trade-study memo omits status and supersession. ADA identifies only the missing publication-projection assertion and cites C.32.ADR; it does not rewrite the PAD relation.
ADR readable, PAD weak. A Markdown ADR can have clear headings, status, context, decision, and consequences while the project relation lacks candidate basis, affected selected structures, and Method/Work docking. ADA identifies those missing assertions and cites C.32.PAD, C.32, and A.15 as their subject-pattern locators; template completeness does not make the architecture decision adequate.