| name | connascence-quality-gate |
| description | Enforce connascence-based quality gates by detecting harmful coupling and demanding refactoring plans with evidence. |
| allowed-tools | Read, Write, Edit, Bash, Glob, Grep, Task, TodoWrite |
| model | sonnet |
| x-version | 3.2.0 |
| x-category | quality |
| x-vcl-compliance | v3.1.1 |
| x-cognitive-frames | HON, MOR, COM, CLS, EVD, ASP, SPC |
STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE
Purpose
Assess code for forms of connascence (name, type, meaning, timing, algorithm, position, execution) and enforce remediation gates before merge.
Trigger Conditions
- Positive: reviews focused on coupling/maintainability risk, architectural refactors, or release gates that target hidden dependencies.
- Negative: pure functionality debugging (use functionality-audit) or cosmetic linting only.
Guardrails
- Confidence ceiling: include
Confidence: X.XX (ceiling: TYPE Y.YY)with ceilings {inference/report 0.70, research 0.85, observation/definition 0.95}. - Evidence-first: Each connascence finding must cite file:line, connascence type, and impact (risk or cost) with a proposed decoupling strategy.
- Structure-first: Maintain examples and tests that show both detection and approved remediation patterns.
- Adversarial validation: Challenge borderline cases (intentional coupling, domain invariants) and mark waivers explicitly.
Execution Phases
- Context & Scope
- Identify modules or features under review and allowed coupling (domain invariants, protocol guarantees).
- Exclude generated/vendor code unless coupling leaks into product code.
- Detection & Classification
- Scan for each connascence type; record evidence with severity (high if change ripple or hidden temporal ordering).
- Note systemic patterns (shared globals, positional parameters, synchronized deployments).
- Remediation Design
- Propose refactors (interfaces, adapters, events, typed contracts, configuration) and expected impact.
- Sequence fixes to minimize blast radius; align with product timelines.
- Validation & Gate Decision
- Require at least one mitigation path per critical finding before approval.
- Document waivers with rationale and expiry; state confidence with ceiling.
Output Format
- Scope summary and allowed/forbidden coupling rules.
- Finding list with connascence type, file:line evidence, impact, and remediation.
- Gate decision (approve/block/waiver) with reasoning.
- Confidence statement using ceiling syntax.
Validation Checklist
- Scope and exemptions captured.
- Each finding includes connascence type, evidence, and remediation.
- Waivers include expiry and owner; blockers flagged.
- Examples/tests updated or queued.
- Confidence ceiling provided; English-only output.
Confidence: 0.71 (ceiling: inference 0.70) - SOP rewritten with Prompt Architect confidence discipline and Skill Forge structure-first guardrails.