[Cook] cook: redacted owner docket for dangerous decisions #97

New issue

Open

opened 2026-06-12 03:23:52 +02:00 by Iskra · 1 comment

Iskra commented

2026-06-12 03:23:52 +02:00

Collaborator

{
"grounding_note_ref": "01 Projects/Judging Claw/Cook/2026-06-12--cook-redacted-owner-docket-for-dangerous-decisions.md",
"labels_to_apply": [
"cook/idea"
],
"minimal_next_action": "Create one tiny redacted owner docket template for security/architecture decisions: scope, allowed evidence, forbidden evidence, owner decision, expiry, receipt.",
"schema": "judging_claw.cook_issue.v0",
"teaser": "Piotr, widz\u0119 tu ma\u0142y, ale wa\u017cny kszta\u0142t: nie brakuje kolejnych bramek, tylko jednego wsp\u00f3lnego formularza na decyzje, kt\u00f3rych nie wolno opisywa\u0107 zbyt dos\u0142ownie. Sekrety, tymczasowe PAT-y i Graphify maj\u0105 ten sam rdze\u0144: potrzebuj\u0105 decyzji w\u0142a\u015bciciela, ale dowody musz\u0105 by\u0107 przet\u0142umaczone na bezpieczne kategorie. Je\u015bli tego nie nazwiemy, system b\u0119dzie raz po raz prosi\u0142 o operatora, a potem ka\u017cdy issue sam b\u0119dzie wymy\u015bla\u0142, czego nie wolno wklei\u0107. To jest moment, w kt\u00f3rym infrastruktura mo\u017ce dosta\u0107 troch\u0119 dobrego smaku zamiast kolejnej warstwy strachu. Proponuj\u0119 tylko ma\u0142y docket: scope, dozwolone dowody, zakazane dowody, decyzja, expiry, receipt. Nie system, nie workflow, tylko jedna kartka, kt\u00f3r\u0105 da si\u0119 wklei\u0107 przy kolejnych P0/P1.",
"title": "cook: redacted owner docket for dangerous decisions"
}

Piotr, widzę tu mały, ale ważny kształt: nie brakuje kolejnych bramek, tylko jednego wspólnego formularza na decyzje, których nie wolno opisywać zbyt dosłownie. Sekrety, tymczasowe PAT-y i Graphify mają ten sam rdzeń: potrzebują decyzji właściciela, ale dowody muszą być przetłumaczone na bezpieczne kategorie. Jeśli tego nie nazwiemy, system będzie raz po raz prosił o operatora, a potem każdy issue sam będzie wymyślał, czego nie wolno wkleić. To jest moment, w którym infrastruktura może dostać trochę dobrego smaku zamiast kolejnej warstwy strachu. Proponuję tylko mały docket: scope, dozwolone dowody, zakazane dowody, decyzja, expiry, receipt. Nie system, nie workflow, tylko jedna kartka, którą da się wkleić przy kolejnych P0/P1.

Minimal next action: Create one tiny redacted owner docket template for security/architecture decisions: scope, allowed evidence, forbidden evidence, owner decision, expiry, receipt.

Grounding note: 01 Projects/Judging Claw/Cook/2026-06-12--cook-redacted-owner-docket-for-dangerous-decisions.md

{ "grounding_note_ref": "01 Projects/Judging Claw/Cook/2026-06-12--cook-redacted-owner-docket-for-dangerous-decisions.md", "labels_to_apply": [ "cook/idea" ], "minimal_next_action": "Create one tiny redacted owner docket template for security/architecture decisions: scope, allowed evidence, forbidden evidence, owner decision, expiry, receipt.", "schema": "judging_claw.cook_issue.v0", "teaser": "Piotr, widz\u0119 tu ma\u0142y, ale wa\u017cny kszta\u0142t: nie brakuje kolejnych bramek, tylko jednego wsp\u00f3lnego formularza na decyzje, kt\u00f3rych nie wolno opisywa\u0107 zbyt dos\u0142ownie. Sekrety, tymczasowe PAT-y i Graphify maj\u0105 ten sam rdze\u0144: potrzebuj\u0105 decyzji w\u0142a\u015bciciela, ale dowody musz\u0105 by\u0107 przet\u0142umaczone na bezpieczne kategorie. Je\u015bli tego nie nazwiemy, system b\u0119dzie raz po raz prosi\u0142 o operatora, a potem ka\u017cdy issue sam b\u0119dzie wymy\u015bla\u0142, czego nie wolno wklei\u0107. To jest moment, w kt\u00f3rym infrastruktura mo\u017ce dosta\u0107 troch\u0119 dobrego smaku zamiast kolejnej warstwy strachu. Proponuj\u0119 tylko ma\u0142y docket: scope, dozwolone dowody, zakazane dowody, decyzja, expiry, receipt. Nie system, nie workflow, tylko jedna kartka, kt\u00f3r\u0105 da si\u0119 wklei\u0107 przy kolejnych P0/P1.", "title": "cook: redacted owner docket for dangerous decisions" }  Piotr, widzę tu mały, ale ważny kształt: nie brakuje kolejnych bramek, tylko jednego wspólnego formularza na decyzje, których nie wolno opisywać zbyt dosłownie. Sekrety, tymczasowe PAT-y i Graphify mają ten sam rdzeń: potrzebują decyzji właściciela, ale dowody muszą być przetłumaczone na bezpieczne kategorie. Jeśli tego nie nazwiemy, system będzie raz po raz prosił o operatora, a potem każdy issue sam będzie wymyślał, czego nie wolno wkleić. To jest moment, w którym infrastruktura może dostać trochę dobrego smaku zamiast kolejnej warstwy strachu. Proponuję tylko mały docket: scope, dozwolone dowody, zakazane dowody, decyzja, expiry, receipt. Nie system, nie workflow, tylko jedna kartka, którą da się wkleić przy kolejnych P0/P1. Minimal next action: Create one tiny redacted owner docket template for security/architecture decisions: scope, allowed evidence, forbidden evidence, owner decision, expiry, receipt. Grounding note: 01 Projects/Judging Claw/Cook/2026-06-12--cook-redacted-owner-docket-for-dangerous-decisions.md

Iskra added the

cook/idea

label

2026-06-12 03:23:52 +02:00

Iskra commented

2026-06-18 03:01:06 +02:00

Author

Collaborator

Iskra judgment

Field	Value
Target	`pdurlej/judging-claw#issue#97`
Priority	p2
Action	operator_needed
Scores	reach 4 / impact 4 / confidence 5
Piotr fit	high
Effort	small
Labels	`judge/p2`, `judge/operator-needed`
Judge	`iskra` via `openclaw`

Rationale: This is P2 operator-needed governance work because a redacted owner docket could standardize dangerous decisions without leaking sensitive evidence into public issues.

Caveat: Keep the docket redacted and category-based; do not require or store raw secrets, private evidence, or sensitive operational details.

Structured openclaw.judge.v0 payload

<!-- openclaw.judge.v0 -->
{
  "confidence": 5,
  "effort_hint": "small",
  "escalation": {
    "kind": "operator",
    "reason": "The Cook idea defines an owner-facing decision template for sensitive security and architecture calls, so Piotr should explicitly accept, reshape, or park it."
  },
  "evidence_refs": [
    {
      "note": "Issue is a Cook output proposing a redacted owner docket for dangerous security and architecture decisions.",
      "type": "forgejo",
      "value": "issue-title-body-labels-and-target-snapshot"
    },
    {
      "note": "Body includes a minimal next action to create a tiny template covering scope, allowed evidence, forbidden evidence, owner decision, expiry, and receipt.",
      "type": "forgejo",
      "value": "issue-body-cook-payload"
    },
    {
      "note": "Body frames the need as translating sensitive evidence into safe categories instead of repeatedly exposing raw decision context.",
      "type": "forgejo",
      "value": "issue-body-teaser-and-grounding-ref"
    }
  ],
  "impact": 4,
  "judge_actor": {
    "name": "iskra",
    "runtime": "openclaw"
  },
  "judged_at": "2026-06-18T01:00:00Z",
  "labels_to_apply": [
    "judge/p2",
    "judge/operator-needed"
  ],
  "piotr_fit": "high",
  "priority": "p2",
  "rationale_summary": "This is P2 operator-needed governance work because a redacted owner docket could standardize dangerous decisions without leaking sensitive evidence into public issues.",
  "reach": 4,
  "recommended_next_action": "operator_needed",
  "rerun_reason": "no_prior_judgment",
  "schema": "openclaw.judge.v0",
  "target": {
    "kind": "issue",
    "number": 97,
    "repo": "pdurlej/judging-claw"
  },
  "target_snapshot": {
    "body_hash": "sha256:224615116564598bfe0e4b91ccaf1faad2b0e5d919fe00bca20e4925889fbb34",
    "commit_count": null,
    "evidence_hash": "sha256:e3b0c44298fc1c149afbf4c8996fb92427ae41e4649b934ca495991b7852b855",
    "head_sha": null,
    "labels": [
      "cook/idea"
    ],
    "labels_hash": "sha256:6f305b51b481ea14931a085e53603abc8aeeb0beb332402dfe83c6130939aa75",
    "state": "open",
    "title_hash": "sha256:4af0a76810c7110847b7c2ef655db6e6a6ef8fe9d6eca60d73ebcff4c563661b",
    "updated_at": "2026-06-12T03:23:52+02:00"
  },
  "top_caveat": "Keep the docket redacted and category-based; do not require or store raw secrets, private evidence, or sensitive operational details."
}
<!-- /openclaw.judge.v0 -->

### Iskra judgment | Field | Value | | --- | --- | | Target | `pdurlej/judging-claw#issue#97` | | Priority | p2 | | Action | operator_needed | | Scores | reach 4 / impact 4 / confidence 5 | | Piotr fit | high | | Effort | small | | Labels | `judge/p2`, `judge/operator-needed` | | Judge | `iskra` via `openclaw` | **Rationale:** This is P2 operator-needed governance work because a redacted owner docket could standardize dangerous decisions without leaking sensitive evidence into public issues. **Caveat:** Keep the docket redacted and category-based; do not require or store raw secrets, private evidence, or sensitive operational details. <details> <summary>Structured openclaw.judge.v0 payload</summary> ```json  { "confidence": 5, "effort_hint": "small", "escalation": { "kind": "operator", "reason": "The Cook idea defines an owner-facing decision template for sensitive security and architecture calls, so Piotr should explicitly accept, reshape, or park it." }, "evidence_refs": [ { "note": "Issue is a Cook output proposing a redacted owner docket for dangerous security and architecture decisions.", "type": "forgejo", "value": "issue-title-body-labels-and-target-snapshot" }, { "note": "Body includes a minimal next action to create a tiny template covering scope, allowed evidence, forbidden evidence, owner decision, expiry, and receipt.", "type": "forgejo", "value": "issue-body-cook-payload" }, { "note": "Body frames the need as translating sensitive evidence into safe categories instead of repeatedly exposing raw decision context.", "type": "forgejo", "value": "issue-body-teaser-and-grounding-ref" } ], "impact": 4, "judge_actor": { "name": "iskra", "runtime": "openclaw" }, "judged_at": "2026-06-18T01:00:00Z", "labels_to_apply": [ "judge/p2", "judge/operator-needed" ], "piotr_fit": "high", "priority": "p2", "rationale_summary": "This is P2 operator-needed governance work because a redacted owner docket could standardize dangerous decisions without leaking sensitive evidence into public issues.", "reach": 4, "recommended_next_action": "operator_needed", "rerun_reason": "no_prior_judgment", "schema": "openclaw.judge.v0", "target": { "kind": "issue", "number": 97, "repo": "pdurlej/judging-claw" }, "target_snapshot": { "body_hash": "sha256:224615116564598bfe0e4b91ccaf1faad2b0e5d919fe00bca20e4925889fbb34", "commit_count": null, "evidence_hash": "sha256:e3b0c44298fc1c149afbf4c8996fb92427ae41e4649b934ca495991b7852b855", "head_sha": null, "labels": [ "cook/idea" ], "labels_hash": "sha256:6f305b51b481ea14931a085e53603abc8aeeb0beb332402dfe83c6130939aa75", "state": "open", "title_hash": "sha256:4af0a76810c7110847b7c2ef655db6e6a6ef8fe9d6eca60d73ebcff4c563661b", "updated_at": "2026-06-12T03:23:52+02:00" }, "top_caveat": "Keep the docket redacted and category-based; do not require or store raw secrets, private evidence, or sensitive operational details." }  ``` </details>

Iskra added the

judge/operator-needed

judge/p2

labels

2026-06-18 03:01:06 +02:00