<!-- ABOUTME: Master dynamic instruction router enforcing proportional rigor and safety gates based on task criticality tier. --> <!-- ABOUTME: Enforces proactive /grill-me intake, deep graph exploration, Invariant-Breaker failing tests, and Epistemic MAD review. -->

Criticality Guardrail & Dynamic Tier Execution

Rules

1. Model Capability Escalation: Any task touching Tier 0 (sovereign), Tier 1 (security), or Tier 2 (privacy) MUST execute using an advanced capability model tier.
2. Proactive Intake Clarification Gate: When a task resolves to Tier 0, 1, or 2, the agent is strictly forbidden from writing code immediately. If requirements, edge cases, or threat boundaries are underspecified, the agent MUST run a proactive /grill-me alignment interview first.
3. Invariant-Breakers First: Author failing adversarial/exploit tests FIRST (concurrency races, double-spending, hold expiration races, cross-tenant header spoofing, PII log leakage).
4. Exhaustive Knowledge Graph Exploration: High-criticality tasks must trace full caller/callee trees, outbox linkages, database lock contention, and ADR/I-VSD invariants.
5. Zero Log-PII Invariant: Never pass entities implementing IContainsPii or sensitive properties to ILogger without [PiiData] redaction attributes.
6. Expand/Contract Persistence Invariant: All migrations touching tenancy or money/user tables MUST use Expand/Contract to guarantee zero-downtime rolling updates.
7. Transactional Outbox Mandate: Any domain event, webhook, or external notification resulting from a state transition MUST be written to the local Outbox table in the same transaction.

Dynamic Tier Execution Matrix (DTEM)

Lifecycle Stage	Tier 0: Sovereign (Payments)	Tier 1: Security (Auth/Tenancy)	Tier 2: Privacy (PII/Erasure)	Tier 3: Domain State (CQRS)	Tier 4: Standard (UI/Docs)
1. Intake & Grill-Me	Mandatory /grill-me on money flows, hold expiration	Mandatory /grill-me on threat models, fail-closed auth	Mandatory /grill-me on erasure authority, receipt tokens	Standard Q&A (only if ambiguous)	Autonomous defaults
2. Exploration Depth	Exhaustive graph (callers, callees, outbox, DB locks)	Exhaustive graph + policy (Cerbos, BFF, global filters)	Exhaustive data flow (*Pii fields, log sinks)	Bounded caller/callee tracing	Local surface reading only
3. Invariant Alignment	Strict ADR-022/024, integer checked arithmetic	Strict SECURITY-MODEL.md, AUTHORIZATION.md	Strict PRIVACY_ERASURE.md, zero-PII logging	Clean Architecture (Domain $\rightarrow$ App $\rightarrow$ Infra)	UI system: HAL links, BEM CSS
4. Invariant-Breaker Tests	Concurrency races, double capture, currency overflow	Cross-tenant data leaks, forged headers, expired JWT	Unmasked PII log injection, user resurrection races	Behavioral CQRS unit & integration tests	Affordance & render tests (_links)
5. Testing Rigor	Real PostgreSQL tests, row locking & race tests	Real multi-provider DB tests, Cerbos parity	Full erasure lifecycle test, test log PII scan pass	Targeted project unit & integration tests	Fast verification + Release build
6. Multi-Agent Review	Epistemic MAD (anonymized debate & weighted vote)	Epistemic MAD (anonymized debate & weighted vote)	Epistemic MAD (anonymized debate & weighted vote)	Peer Review (backend-engineer-agent)	Lightweight Self-Check
7. Teaching Summary	Architecture, state transitions, recovery runbook	Threat model resolution, tenant isolation proof	Data retention impact, erasure auditability proof	Summary of CQRS handlers & mappings	Concise UI walkthrough

High-Leverage Testing Done Right

High-criticality tasks explicitly reject shallow unit tests and mock assertions. Consult resources/adversarial-archetypes.md for concrete recipes:

1. Concurrency Race Tests: Simulate simultaneous requests (e.g. hold expiration racing against payment capture).
2. Real Database Integration Tests: Run against real PostgreSQL / multi-provider test containers to verify transaction boundaries, row-level locking, and idempotency.
3. Exploit Invariant Tests: Verify that tampering with tenant headers, negative amounts, or expired tokens fails closed with RFC 7807 ProblemDetails.
4. Log Sink PII Scans: Assert that execution traces and logs contain zero plaintext emails, cards, or tokens.

Workflow

1. Classify & Check Criticality: Read intent from .agents/contract/intents.yaml and resolve DTEM tier.
2. Direction Alignment: If Tier 0, 1, or 2, trigger proactive /grill-me interview with the user.
3. Deep Graph Exploration: Use code-review-graph MCP tools to map callers, callees, dependent flows, and DB lock contention.
4. Draft Failing Invariant-Breakers: Write adversarial concurrency and exploit tests first.
5. Implement Fail-Closed Solution: Author clean, transactional, PII-safe code.
6. Verify Proportional Rigor: Run real DB integration tests, concurrency race checks, and log sink PII scans. (Stryker mutation gating is disabled during greenfield dev).
7. Epistemic MAD Review: Execute anonymized multi-agent debate and post-hoc voting.
8. Comprehensive Technical Teaching: Provide a deep architectural teaching summary before completing the task.

Verification

• dotnet build --configuration Release --verbosity quiet
• dotnet test --project tests/Event.Architecture.Tests/Event.Architecture.Tests.csproj --configuration Release --verbosity quiet