PIOS Capability Library work status

October 8, 2026 continuation notice

The mobile interoperability candidate record adds three candidates for bounded disposition, not three CRDs. Existing inventory entries and retained evidence are unchanged. The checkpoint below records the earlier extraction/publication work, not the publication state of this new clarification. Read the current project-plan addition before continuing.

Updated: September 17, 2026 Current phase: Phase 4 documentation milestone approved; website contribution in progress Branch: docs/capability-library-pilot Live-site impact: none

Completed

• Established docs/capabilities/ as the canonical project location.
• Verified the preserved twelve-file clarification snapshot, then excluded its unpublished working-tree text from public milestone evidence.
• Preserved all pre-existing framework changes outside this contribution's staged scope.
• Bound the public historical source at 4f1498ce5c390555abfad877d8284736f94d200b.
• Bound the CRD method at 8f24ab01b2bf30409b364df5fd6b77b7bf89c29d.
• Completed the bounded pilot source reading and restricted implementation trace.
• Classified seven pilot Capability MLEs and one communication-only element.
• Corrected the rule boundary during CRD validation: rule establishment and rule application are separate, producing eight pilot Capability MLEs.
• Verified the website's current source mechanism and recorded a separate publication plan; no route or live page was claimed.

In progress

• Record independent review clearance in the PIOS contribution.
• Begin the separate peecos-web capability-library projection through the existing site workflow.

Phase 2 progress

• Tranche A1 completed: public historical and current PIOS glossary, naming, assisted-label, and context-tag material classified.
• Six additional draft Capability MLEs registered, bringing the inventory to fourteen.
• Restricted source assessment remains separately recorded; no private excerpts or implementation details entered the public branch.
• Tranche A2 statement and boundary pass completed for deliberate notes, owner-authored profile knowledge, evidence-backed profile assertions, and dispute resolution.
• Four additional draft Capability MLEs registered, bringing the inventory to eighteen.
• Restricted application documentation coverage is now 16 of 26 documents at bounded substantive depth.
• A2 static follow-up found a basic owner-profile update path and planned profile-assertion surfaces, but not the richer owner-authored knowledge, evidence, confirmation, dispute, or resolution contracts.
• Tranche B1 statement and boundary pass completed for action intent, governed invocation, background operations, and execution policy.
• Four additional draft Capability MLEs registered, bringing the inventory to twenty-two.
• Tranche B2a statement and boundary pass completed for plans, activation, projects, routines and routine runs, tasks, task collections, and reminders.
• Eight additional draft Capability MLEs registered, bringing the inventory to thirty.
• B2a static follow-up found objective, plan, plan-activation, project, routine, task, task-list and reminder paths. No separate routine-run lifecycle was identified.
• Tranche B2b statement and boundary pass completed for Work Starters, contextual work ordering, workflow packages, installed workflows, workflow runs, and results.
• Six additional draft Capability MLEs registered, bringing the inventory to thirty-six.
• The actions-and-execution tranche now has bounded static evidence for action-label vocabulary/assignment, plans, projects, routines, tasks, reminders, workflow installation/runs and workflow outputs. Generic action-registry, background-operation, execution-policy, Work Starter and contextual-ordering realizations remain unconfirmed.
• Tranche C1 statement and boundary pass completed for canonical events, owner attention, completed-work publication, daily History, higher-period aggregation, and time-indexed navigation.
• Six additional draft Capability MLEs registered, bringing the inventory to forty-two.
• Static Updates follow-up found creation, read, pin, dismiss and response paths plus reminder-generated updates. Daily and higher-period summary producers also exist, but they do not establish the complete current PIOS event-spine, completed-work publication, History-manifest or source-provenance contracts.
• Tranche C2a statement and boundary pass completed for source registration, import sessions, source promotion, three separate ingestion gates, event-type governance, and operational-run inspection.
• Eight additional draft Capability MLEs registered, bringing the inventory to fifty.
• Static follow-up found no implemented source-registration/import-session surface: import status is explicitly a future placeholder. A read-only run-log panel projects retrieval and storage-job rows, but not the complete authority, output, retry, evidence, or import-run contract.
• Tranche C2b1 statement and boundary pass completed for Core-export composition, source-composed portability packages, package validation, Core-state restore, destination parity, and recoverable backups.
• Six additional draft Capability MLEs registered, bringing the inventory to fifty-six.
• Static follow-up found an authenticated client-side export path that composes selected JSON-LD, JSONL, Markdown, file-manifest and checksum content. It does not establish a complete or independently validated migration bundle: inaccessible tables and files can be skipped, binary collection is bounded, and no validation or restore path was identified.
• Tranche C2b2 statement and boundary pass completed for governed cutover, rollback, source decommissioning, erasure request/execution, and destination connector reauthorization.
• Six additional draft Capability MLEs registered, bringing the inventory to sixty-two.
• No restricted realization was identified for restore, destination parity, recoverable backup, cutover, rollback, source decommissioning, governed erasure, or destination connector reauthorization. The events, operations, and portability tranche is complete at requirements and bounded static-evidence level; no tested, deployed, or production behavior is claimed.
• Tranche D1a statement and boundary pass completed for governed content capture and pending-capture reconciliation.
• Two additional draft Capability MLEs registered, bringing the inventory to sixty-four.
• A browser extension remains an application-specific realization and audience surface rather than a generic capability; capture-time action intent and processing instructions retain their separate governance boundaries.
• Restricted capture and onboarding requirements have been substantively assessed, bringing restricted document coverage to 18 of 26. Static review found an authenticated browser-capture path that creates linked storage and note records, attaches action labels and may create an instruction update; pending-capture reconciliation and all tested/deployed behavior remain unconfirmed.
• Tranche D1b1 statement and boundary pass completed for guided onboarding, personal-AI identity, interaction preferences, contact-channel verification, initial-environment preparation, and first-entry authorization.
• Six additional draft Capability MLEs registered, bringing the inventory to seventy.
• Restricted documentation coverage is now 20 of 26 after substantive welcome/orientation and interface-standard assessment.
• Static code review found a bounded post-auth first-use orientation and selected AI-profile controls, but did not confirm the documented end-to-end onboarding journey, reply verification, prepared environment, or first-entry invitation. No app execution, tests, deployment, or production behavior are claimed.
• Tranche D1b2 statement and boundary pass completed for owner Role definitions, operating Modes, active personal context, Role outward intent, and Role-scoped outward representations.
• Five additional draft Capability MLEs registered, bringing the inventory to seventy-five.
• Restricted documentation coverage is now 21 of 26 after substantive extended-Role assessment.
• Static code review supports bounded Role/Mode CRUD and active-filter behavior; complete Core-backed context lifecycle, outward access enforcement, tests, deployment, and production availability remain unconfirmed.
• The capture, onboarding, roles, and experience tranche is complete at requirements level; remaining UI layout and navigation concepts were classified as audience or realization patterns.
• Corrected the stale restricted-document count by auditing the evidence record document by document.
• Completed bounded substantive assessment and disposition for all 26 restricted documents; added a publication-safe anonymous disposition matrix and retained the exact filename mapping privately.
• Completed full bounded reading of the restricted application-wide master and companion rationale. Their schema and developer checklist remain requirement/realization-pattern evidence, not current PIOS authority or passing-test evidence.
• Tranche E1 statement and boundary pass completed for observed-pattern detection and lifecycle evaluation.
• Two additional draft Capability MLEs registered, bringing the inventory to seventy-seven.
• Static review found declared structures and disabled/planned pattern surfaces but did not establish a reachable active detection or refresh job.
• Tranche E2 statement and boundary pass completed for outcome goals, directional objectives, success targets, measurement definitions, and metric observations.
• Five additional draft Capability MLEs registered, bringing the inventory to eighty-two.
• The earlier goal/objective/target boundary question is resolved: all three pass independently, and the commonly shown hierarchy remains conceptual rather than mandatory.
• Static review supports bounded goal, objective, target, and metric-definition persistence and finds a declared metric-observation structure. It does not establish target-achievement evaluation, a reachable metric-observation writer, passing tests, deployment, or production behavior.
• Tranche E3 statement and boundary pass completed for controlled sharing, public publication, outward-access policy, request-time access evaluation, discoverability, and usage rights.
• Six additional draft Capability MLEs registered, bringing the inventory to eighty-eight.
• Visibility, access control, discovery, and rights remain independent axes; controlled sharing and public presence also remain distinct outcomes.
• A bounded restricted-source search did not identify the named public-asset or exposure-model realization. No implementation, test, deployment, or production availability is claimed.
• Tranche E4 statement and boundary pass completed for structured reviews and reflective assessments.
• Two additional draft Capability MLEs registered, bringing the inventory to ninety.
• Daily, weekly, monthly, yearly, and event-triggered reviews are profiles of one review capability; neutral summaries and interpretive reflections remain distinct.
• Static review found a manually dispatched weekly-review workflow that creates a review note and workflow output, but did not establish its documented schedule, complete structured-review state, passing tests, deployment, or production behavior.
• Tranche E5 statement and boundary pass completed for human contact profiles, contact points, contact-point control verification, and personal relationship context.
• Four additional draft Capability MLEs registered, bringing the inventory to ninety-four.
• Person identity, contact profile, contact point, verification result, relationship context, and time-scoped with-whom context remain distinct objects and outcomes.
• Static review supports bounded contact-profile and contact-point management. Verification, primary-point selection, and richer relationship-origin, trust, consent, and shared-history behavior remain incomplete or unconfirmed.
• Tranche E6 statement and boundary pass completed for canonical agent definitions, definition-to-runtime synchronization, runtime-role assignment, outward identity selection, and owner-representative conversation.
• Five additional draft Capability MLEs registered, bringing the inventory to ninety-nine.
• Agent definition, runtime, memory, activity, personal-AI identity, runtime role, and outward identity remain distinct. Historical Director/Manager/Worker labels are retained as an implementation vocabulary rather than mandatory PIOS roles.
• AI Twin is classified as a composed product realization over several reusable capabilities rather than one indivisible CRD. No complete restricted application realization was identified.
• Tranche E7 statement and boundary pass completed for collaboration channels, work-linked discussion threads, attributed collaboration messages, and task-scoped execution workspaces.
• Four additional draft Capability MLEs registered, bringing the inventory to 103.
• Channel, thread, message, work object, attention item, and execution workspace remain distinct. Circle is classified as a replaceable composed harness rather than one indivisible capability.
• Static review supports bounded channel-like filters and an owner-to-assistant message flow. It does not establish the richer linked-thread lifecycle, multi-agent attribution, execution-workspace model, passing tests, deployment, or production behavior.
• Tranche F1 statement and boundary pass completed for personal conversation history and owner access paths.
• Two additional draft Capability MLEs registered, bringing the inventory to 105.
• Persistent personal memory remains a cross-capability architecture outcome. Ally/PIOS/Home panels, app navigation and execution tracking remain audience projections over existing capabilities.
• Static review supports a bounded owner-linked conversation history, filter-linked views, session markers, recent-context assembly and read-only inspection. Complete provenance, imported-history governance, access-path lifecycle, passing tests, deployment, and production behavior remain unconfirmed.
• Tranche F2 statement and boundary pass completed for authorized device-local caching, selected offline content, and personal reading queues.
• Three additional draft Capability MLEs registered, bringing the inventory to 108.
• Automatic cache lifecycle, deliberate offline retention and pending work remain separate draft outcomes. Reader, feed, archive, typography, topic views and PDF export are projections or compositions over reusable capabilities.
• Static review supports a bounded Reader path but exposes material differences from the historical design: admission is not confirmed through the declared reading-intent label, read completion is inferred from another state, saved state is browser-local, and durable topic membership is not established. No complete device-cache or offline realization was confirmed.
• Tranche F3 statement and boundary pass completed for operation resource-cost estimation, resource-budget reservation, and resource-usage reconciliation.
• Three additional draft Capability MLEs registered, bringing the inventory to 111.
• Cost approval, standing preferences, usage measurement and partial completion reuse existing proposal, policy, rule, metric and execution capabilities; credits remain a shared unit rather than a capability.
• Restricted evidence contains retrieval token-budget requirements but no confirmed generic estimate, reservation, spend-accounting or reconciliation realization. No tests, deployment, production behavior, billing or commercial capability is claimed.
• Tranche F4 statement and boundary pass completed for candidate source discovery, owner implementation documentation, and knowledge-layer integrity assessment.
• Three additional draft Capability MLEs registered, bringing the inventory to 114.
• Discovery remains candidate-only and separate from review, permission, registration, backfill, and recurring collection. Knowledge repair remains separate from integrity assessment.
• Knowledge Environment is classified as an architecture composition; vault layouts, sync tools, aliases and Dataview queries remain realization patterns. No complete restricted realization of the three new capabilities was identified.
• Tranche F5 statement and boundary pass completed for personal Meaning, evidence-linked Learning, and derived-representation lifecycle governance.
• Three additional draft Capability MLEs registered, bringing the inventory to 117.
• Meaning, Learning, reflection, profile assertions, standing rules and behavior adaptation retain separate evidence and authority lifecycles. Representation production remains separate from retained registry and replacement/deletion governance.
• Static review found an early note-embedding schema and type shape that a later migration removed, with no reachable writer or representation-registry lifecycle confirmed. No Cognitive Memory Meaning/Learning object realization, passing tests, deployment, or production behavior was identified.
• Tranche F6 closed the selected historical Markdown corpus and added canonical artifact promotion as the one remaining Capability MLE from the final gap pass.
• One additional draft Capability MLE registered, bringing the inventory to 118.
• All 90 Markdown files at the selected historical revision now have an explicit public-safe disposition. Architecture summaries, area indexes, application/session state, dedicated-machine descriptions, UI/terminology standards, market material, roadmaps, logs, and inconsistency records were classified without inflating them into capabilities.
• Agent capability/performance tracking was resolved as a composition of agent definitions, activity events, measurements, reviews, and policy at the current evidence depth. No named restricted artifact-promotion realization was identified.
• Phase 4 structural and duplicate-boundary review started. Inventory IDs, CRD files, names, architecture-alignment rows, required CRD fields, source-context links, provenance IDs, decision IDs, unresolved IDs, realization IDs, and local Markdown links were checked.
• Consolidated the onboarding-specific contact-channel verification draft into the reusable contact-point-control CRD. Onboarding remains a profile of that capability, reducing the deduplicated inventory from 118 to 117 after review-remediation additions.
• Added the missing library-index link to the import/operations/portability source context. No restricted identifiers or local paths were found in public capability files.
• Revisited the oldest realization-evidence gaps through authenticated reads of pinned source blobs. Updated profile, action-label, execution, workflow, Updates, History-summary and capture dispositions; no app execution, tests, deployment, or production service calls were performed.
• Completed the remaining source/import/operations/portability static catch-up. Preserved the difference between a client-side export archive, independent package validation, restore, parity, backup, and cutover rather than treating the export UI as migration proof.
• Completed Phase 4 self-review: inventory/CRD/alignment parity, required CRD structure, source-context links, historical disposition coverage, identifier uniqueness, local links, publication-safety tokens, and repository documentation tests pass.
• The first independent review returned REQUEST CHANGES: the proposed head was not self-contained against its committed PIOS baseline; source-composed portability was missing; outward sharing, access-policy maintenance, and request evaluation overlapped; backup absorbed restore testing; and several provenance semantic classes or source hedges were incorrect.
• Corrective drafting added source-composed package composition and request-time access evaluation as separate Capability MLEs, narrowed sharing and backup boundaries, restricted public provenance to committed sources, normalized provenance classes, and revised unsupported cache/offline detail into explicit draft profiles or unresolved questions.
• The independent re-review cleared those original findings and retained REQUEST CHANGES only for two source-fidelity issues: completed-work and daily-History recommendations were still stated too strongly, and access evaluation included unsupported challenge and indeterminate outcomes.
• The final corrective pass restored both History statements to recommended defaults and limited the sourced access-decision result to attributable allow or deny.
• Final independent re-review of commit fda4a68c65dfb72f08e8ea459809b4a35eb14783 returned APPROVE with no blocking or major findings.
• A post-review consistency pass found the completed-work recommendation still phrased as a mandatory full projection set in the inventory, alignment, and boundary log; those projections were narrowed to match the approved CRD and require a final narrow confirmation.
• Narrow independent review of commit 8fe83c6693b5fe4f38e10403fd9d48f84a497294 returned APPROVE; 117/117/117 projection parity remained intact.

Publication state

• GitHub branch: docs/capability-library-pilot, pushed.
• Initial documentation commit: 7409865.
• Current milestone revision: the latest head of PR #1; GitHub is the authoritative revision record.
• Pull request/review: PR #1 ↗ is open. The separate CRD-method review and narrow projection follow-up are approved; native repository review/merge state remains pending.
• Website mechanism: verified at inspected source revision 08fd000; publication plan recorded.
• Website route: proposed /pios/capabilities; not yet created.
• Live publication: not started.

Next action

Create and verify the corresponding peecos-web capability index/detail contribution against the independently approved PIOS revision.