Add AL implementation guidance skill

Co-authored-by: Copilot App <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
This commit is contained in:
Jesper Schulz-Wedde 2026-09-16 13:20:57 +02:00
parent d608d89cf0
commit 1cb2b32afe
16 changed files with 1120 additions and 31 deletions

View file

@ -168,3 +168,41 @@ article-read traces, resulting diffs, compile/test outcomes, and independent
review evidence, including failures, no-knowledge, partial, and unresolved
results. No compile/run or authoring-quality claim follows from the
credential-free checks above.
## Read-only implementation guidance
`implementation-guidance-fixtures.json` covers a distinct just-in-time
consultation contract. Its production-shaped synthetic AL contexts exercise a
new privacy constraint after the implementation surface expands beyond the
plan, exact consumed-guidance omission, an honest no-additional-guidance
control, missing current diff/decision context, and a public-interface
checkpoint. They are neutral fixtures, not copies of knowledge samples or
evidence of a production integration.
Validate and prepare the implementation manifest with the shared scorer:
```powershell
$run = Join-Path ([IO.Path]::GetTempPath()) 'bcquality-implementation-guidance-run'
pwsh ./tools/Test-DevelopmentGuidanceFixtures.ps1 -Root . `
-ManifestPath ./evaluation/implementation-guidance-fixtures.json `
-PrepareDirectory $run
pwsh ./tools/Test-ImplementationGuidanceEvaluator.ps1
```
The same runner-owned baseline and workspace-map flow used for plan guidance
proves that evaluated target repositories remain byte-for-byte and
Git-identity stable across scoring. The implementation regression adds strict
phase/decision/pin preservation and exact path + decision key + evidence
fingerprint deduplication checks. This remains before/after evidence, not an OS
sandbox; it cannot detect a transient reverted write.
BCQuality does not keep consumed state or run checkpoints automatically. The
consumer chooses explicit checkpoints, persists consumed triples, recomputes
evidence fingerprints, owns edits/build/tests/retries/delivery, and runs an
independent final review. `no-knowledge` is only an additive retrieval outcome,
never a functional-correctness or release-readiness claim.
A future experiment should compare four matched arms: baseline, plan-only,
implementation-only, and combined. Hold task, starting code, model, tools,
runtime, checkpoints, and gates constant. This is a recommended evaluation
design, not a claimed result.