Home Explore Help
Sign In
mxl_citu
/
DataOps-platform
1
0
Fork 0
Files Issues 0 Pull Requests 0 Wiki
Tree: fa99dd4148
Branches Tags
DataOps-plat...
/
docs
/
superpowers
/
plans
/
2026-07-29-wp07-device-quality.md

2026-07-29-wp07-device-quality.md 13 KB
History Raw

WP-07 Device Ledger and Fault Quality Implementation Plan

For agentic workers: REQUIRED SUB-SKILL: Use superpowers:subagent-driven-development (recommended) or superpowers:executing-plans to implement this plan task-by-task. Steps use checkbox (- [ ]) syntax for tracking.

Goal: Add versioned, explainable device-ledger and fault-maintenance quality policies that produce immutable execution results, bounded violation samples, and drill-down quality scores without changing source assets.

Architecture: Existing closed RuleSpec and quality.check remain the platform-level authoring and execution foundation. WP-07 adds a deterministic device-domain policy overlay for the canonical WP-04 asset catalog and WP-05 published fault/cause/action codes: one immutable policy version selects allowlisted device checks and weights, each run evaluates a bounded canonical snapshot, and append-only result tables preserve rule, asset, field, source, and mapping evidence. WP-08 will consume violations later; WP-07 does not create or mutate remediation tickets.

Tech Stack: Flask, SQLAlchemy, PostgreSQL JSONB, Alembic, Vue 2, Vuetify, pytest.

Global Constraints

  • Reuse device_assets, device_asset_source_mappings, device_asset_versions, and published device_semantic_codes; never rewrite or delete them during quality evaluation.
  • Reuse the platform's deny-by-default RBAC. Viewer may read. Editor/admin may create drafts and execute published policies. Publication requires admin permission plus the unique accountable asset_manager for device_quality/DEVICE_QUALITY.
  • Add device_quality to the governed responsibility resource types and require exactly one accountable device asset manager.
  • A device-quality policy is a closed allowlist, not arbitrary Python, SQL, CEL, regular-expression source, or an AI-generated executable.
  • The first policy contains exactly these checks: asset identity completeness, asset context completeness, normalized source-code uniqueness, component parent resolution, fault-code mapping, fault cause/action completeness, and maintenance closure.
  • Policy rule codes are stable. Draft revisions may change enabled state, severity, weight, and bounded allowlisted parameters only. Enabled weights must be positive and sum to 100.
  • Only one published version is active. Publishing a new version appends a new immutable version and supersedes the prior active version without deleting its evidence.
  • Every run binds the exact policy-version UID and content hash. A run captures evaluated asset/version/mapping evidence so later catalog changes cannot alter historical results.
  • Quality execution is bounded to 5,000 assets per run, 100 violation samples per rule, and 1,000 asset scores per response page. Counts remain exact even when samples are truncated.
  • Violation samples contain platform UIDs, field names, safe messages, and bounded redacted evidence only. Credentials, connection details, personal contact data, and raw operating measurements are rejected.
  • Overall score is the sum of each enabled rule's weight × pass_rate; rules with zero applicable records score their full weight and report not_applicable.
  • Per-asset score uses only rules applicable to that asset. An asset with no applicable enabled rule receives 100 and not_applicable.
  • Fault rules operate on alarm.attributes.fault_code, cause_code, and action_code; maintenance closure operates on maintenance_record.attributes.device_source_code, fault_source_code, status, completed_at, and action_code. Field names are explicit in the versioned policy.
  • source_code format consistency uses a server-owned allowlisted format identifier, not caller-supplied regular expressions.
  • Schema drift remains a partial platform capability; WP-07 validates the canonical device contract and code fields but does not build a general source-schema diff engine.
  • Do not create WP-08 remediation issues, AI root-cause conclusions, automatic repairs, predictive maintenance, or time-series storage.
  • Validation follows the user-approved rule: run only WP-07 domain, persistence, API, permission, frontend, migration, contract, release-copy, and local browser checks; do not run the full repository regression.
  • Continue on codex/dataops-phase1-equipment-governance; do not push or deploy remotely.

Task 1: Closed Device-Quality Policy and Deterministic Evaluation

Files:

  • Create: app/core/data_research/device_quality.py
  • Modify: app/core/data_research/errors.py
  • Create: tests/data_research/test_device_quality.py

Interfaces:

  • Produce DeviceQualityPolicyVersionRecord, DeviceQualityRunRecord, DeviceQualityRuleResultRecord, DeviceQualityViolationRecord, and DeviceQualityAssetScoreRecord.
  • Produce validate_device_quality_rules, DeviceQualityService.bootstrap, revise, publish, profile, versions, run, runs, get_run, violations, and asset_scores.

  • Repository boundary supplies policy versions, active assets with mappings, published semantic codes, immutable run/result/sample persistence, and bounded searches.

  • [x] Step 1: Write failing policy and evaluation tests

Cover the seven stable rule codes, exact enabled-weight total, unsupported keys and parameters, secret rejection, draft version immutability, accountable-manager publication, one active published version, exact score arithmetic, zero-applicable behavior, every ledger/fault/maintenance rule, source and mapping evidence, 5,000-asset boundary, 100-sample truncation, and no source mutation.

  • Step 2: Verify RED

Run:

PYTHONPATH=. .venv/bin/pytest -q \
  tests/data_research/test_device_quality.py

Expected: collection fails because device_quality does not exist.

  • Step 3: Implement the minimal closed policy and evaluator

Normalize only server-allowlisted rule fields and format identifiers. Evaluate immutable asset snapshots and published semantic-code sets. Persist exact counts separately from bounded samples. Reject stale profile revisions and invalid publication/run transitions with 409.

  • Step 4: Verify GREEN

Run the Task 1 command and expect all tests to pass.

Task 2: PostgreSQL Quality Policy, Run, Result, Sample, and Score Ledger

Files:

  • Modify: app/models/data_research.py
  • Create: app/core/data_research/device_quality_repository.py
  • Create: migrations/versions/20260729_320_device_quality.py
  • Create: migrations/versions/20260729_330_device_quality_responsibility_type.py
  • Modify: tests/test_database_migrations.py
  • Create: tests/integration/test_device_quality_postgres.py

Interfaces:

  • Add device_quality_profiles, device_quality_profile_versions, device_quality_runs, device_quality_rule_results, device_quality_violation_samples, and device_quality_asset_scores.
  • Use UUIDv7 identities, JSONB policy/evidence snapshots, profile-version and run-result uniqueness, FOR UPDATE publication locks, and data-preserving downgrade.
  • Active policy is the newest published version not superseded by another published version.

  • Extend the existing responsibility-scope database allowlist with device_quality; preserve assignments during application rollback.

  • [x] Step 1: Write failing migration and real-PostgreSQL tests

Cover schema constraints, idempotent bootstrap, immutable versions, publication serialization, exact run/profile binding, exact counts with truncated samples, asset/source/mapping evidence, per-asset scores, bounded filters, and cleanup limited to test-owned rows.

  • Step 2: Verify RED

Run:

TEST_DATABASE_URL=postgresql+psycopg2://dataops:dataops-test-password@127.0.0.1:15432/dataops \
PYTHONPATH=. .venv/bin/pytest -q \
  tests/test_database_migrations.py::test_device_quality_migration_is_non_destructive_and_reversible \
  tests/integration/test_device_quality_postgres.py

Expected: failure because migration 20260729_320 and the repository do not exist.

  • Step 3: Implement migration, models, and repository

Keep historical policy/run evidence on downgrade. Use database constraints for allowed statuses, severity, score ranges, nonnegative counts, one rule result per run/rule, one asset score per run/asset, and one violation sample per run/rule/asset/field identity.

  • Step 4: Upgrade local PostgreSQL and verify GREEN

Upgrade the isolated local database to 20260729_320, then rerun the Task 2 command with TEST_DATABASE_URL.

Task 3: Permission-Controlled Device-Quality API

Files:

  • Modify: app/api/data_development/routes.py
  • Modify: app/core/system/permissions.py
  • Modify: app/core/governance/responsibilities.py
  • Create: tests/data_research/test_device_quality_api.py
  • Modify: tests/test_permission_matrix.py
  • Modify: tests/core/governance/test_responsibilities.py

Interfaces:

  • Produce:

    • GET /api/development/v1/device-quality/profile
    • POST /api/development/v1/device-quality/bootstrap
    • POST /api/development/v1/device-quality/profile/versions
    • GET /api/development/v1/device-quality/profile/versions
    • POST /api/development/v1/device-quality/profile/versions/{version_uid}/publish
    • POST /api/development/v1/device-quality/runs
    • GET /api/development/v1/device-quality/runs
    • GET /api/development/v1/device-quality/runs/{run_uid}
    • GET /api/development/v1/device-quality/runs/{run_uid}/violations
    • GET /api/development/v1/device-quality/runs/{run_uid}/asset-scores

  • [x] Step 1: Write failing API, permission, and responsibility tests

Cover viewer reads and write denial, editor bootstrap/revise/execute, editor publication denial, admin platform permission plus accountable-manager runtime denial, safe pagination/filters, closed error envelopes, and device_quality responsibility validation.

  • Step 2: Verify RED

Run:

PYTHONPATH=. .venv/bin/pytest -q \
  tests/data_research/test_device_quality_api.py \
  tests/test_permission_matrix.py \
  tests/core/governance/test_responsibilities.py

Expected: failure because the routes, permissions, and responsibility type do not exist.

  • Step 3: Implement API and authorization

Add device-quality:edit and device-quality:execute to editor/admin and device-quality:publish to admin. Reads remain on governance:read; the service repeats the unique accountable-manager check for publication.

  • Step 4: Verify GREEN

Run the Task 3 command and expect all tests to pass.

Task 4: Device-Quality Workbench and Delivery Evidence

Files:

  • Modify: frontend/src/api/dataDevelopment.js
  • Modify: frontend/src/router/routes.js
  • Modify: frontend/src/views/dataGovernance/development/index.vue
  • Create: frontend/src/views/dataGovernance/development/deviceQuality.vue
  • Create: frontend/src/views/dataGovernance/development/deviceQualityModel.js
  • Create: frontend/tests/device-quality-model.test.mjs
  • Modify: docs/architecture/OPENAPI.yaml
  • Modify: docs/architecture/DATA_MODEL.md
  • Modify: docs/FUNCTION_MODULE_CENSUS_20260726.md
  • Modify: docs/DATAOPS_PHASE1_3_MONTH_WORK_PLAN_20260729.md
  • Modify: deployment/app/ for the WP-07 backend subset.

Interfaces:

  • Produce /data-governance/development/device-quality with policy/version status, seven rule definitions, last-run score, rule pass rates, violation samples, asset-score drill-down, source evidence, permission-aware bootstrap/revise/publish/run controls, and a clear boundary that remediation belongs to WP-08.

  • [x] Step 1: Write failing frontend model tests

Cover policy/rule/status labels, score and pass-rate formatting, not-applicable handling, severity labels, permission-aware mutations, and evidence summaries.

  • Step 2: Verify RED

Run:

cd frontend
node --test tests/device-quality-model.test.mjs

Expected: failure because the frontend model module does not exist.

  • Step 3: Implement the workbench

Add the development-center entry and responsive workbench. Keep historical policy/run evidence readable to viewers; hide unavailable mutations; show exact/truncated sample counts and the WP-08 boundary.

  • Step 4: Regenerate contracts and update ledgers

Run:

.venv/bin/python scripts/generate_openapi.py \
  --output docs/architecture/OPENAPI.yaml

Record OBS-07 and OBS-08 as engineering complete pending enterprise data acceptance. Record DQA-02 and DQA-04 as partially built because WP-07 supplies device-domain completeness/uniqueness profiles and asset/domain scores but not a general profiling platform. Keep DQA-07 partial because general schema drift remains outside WP-07.

  • Step 5: Run targeted verification

Run only the WP-07 domain, PostgreSQL, API, permission, responsibility, migration, OpenAPI, frontend model, targeted lint, production build, release-copy parity, and local browser workflow. In the browser bootstrap a draft, publish it as the accountable asset manager, run it against local device/alarm/maintenance data, inspect score and violation evidence, and confirm zero console errors. Run git diff --check.

  • Step 6: Commit

Create one independently reversible WP-07 engineering commit. Do not push.