OOF® Origin Open Foundation®

Independent Methodological Authority

Architecture: SLGA™ — Software Lifecycle Governance Architecture
Parent Standard: Software Creation Standard (SCS)
Category: Governance & Enforcement
Subcategory: Software Lifecycle Governance
Type: Core Module
Governed Space: Code & Software Artifact Integrity Governance
Module ID: SLGA-SCS-CRIM-002
Origin ID: OOF.CM.SLGA.02.02.01
Version: 1.0
Status: Canonical · Open Standard
Effective Date: 2026-10-11
Compatibility: OOF® Methodology OS™ · Modular OOF® Architecture Ecosystem
GIE-Compatible: Yes
AI-Readable: Yes
Authority: OOF® — OriginOpen® Foundation
Protection: MIP® — Methodological Intellectual Property
Canonical Language: English (UCL™)

Canonical Definition

The Code & Artifact Integrity Module (CRIM) governs how software code and

CRIM establishes the methodological conditions under which the identity,

It distinguishes the existence of a software artifact from its integrity,

CRIM applies to source code, generated code, scripts, executable artifacts,

Governed Code & Artifact Integrity State

Operational Role

CRIM establishes integrity governance over the artifacts produced during

It supports the Software Creation Standard (SCS) by preserving the evidence

• What software artifact was created
• Which artifact version is being evaluated
• Where the artifact originated
• Which material inputs contributed to its formation
• How its contents changed
• Which actors or mechanisms performed material transformations
• Whether the current artifact corresponds to its claimed origin
  and
• Which integrity conditions remain unresolved

Position in the SCS Internal Governance Flow

Development Method Selection → Code & Artifact Integrity → Autonomous

Code & Artifact Integrity

Governed Development Method Selection State

DMSM — Development Method Selection Module

It also consumes applicable requirements, creation-object references, and

Governed Code & Artifact Integrity State

ASCCM — Autonomous Software Creation Control Module

SACM — Software Artifact Composition Module

DTM — Development Traceability Module

Central Operational Question

Code & Artifact Integrity Governance Object

Every CRIM assessment shall identify the Code & Artifact Integrity

The object represents a defined software artifact, artifact version, or

Actor References: Relevant creators, modifiers, or transformation

Integrity Evidence: Evidence supporting artifact identity and content

Applicable Context: The relevant creation, version, and assessment

The integrity object shall remain distinguishable from the software

Software Artifact Classification

• Human-authored source code
• AI-generated source code
• Automatically transformed source code
• Scripts
• Generated configuration artifacts
• Intermediate representation artifacts
• Compiled binaries
• Executable packages
• Machine-readable interface definitions
• Code-generation templates
• Generated application components
• Software assembly outputs
• Material build artifacts

Classification shall support the integrity assessment without imposing a

Artifact Identity Governance

CRIM shall establish sufficiently stable references for material software

• Unique artifact identifiers
• Repository object references
• Version references
• Content-derived identifiers
• Build or generation identifiers
• Controlled artifact records
• Other suitable identification mechanisms

Artifact identity shall not depend exclusively on a filename, directory

Artifact Content Identity

Artifact Identity → Artifact Version → Artifact Content State

Artifact Origin Governance

• Human-authored creation
• AI-generated creation
• Automated code generation
• Transformation of existing software
• Reuse of internal components
• Incorporation of external software
• Software synthesis
• Compilation or packaging
• Multi-agent creation activities

Origin records shall distinguish an asserted origin from an evidentially

Artifact Provenance

Source Artifact → Creation or Transformation Mechanism → Resulting

• Source references
• Creation actor
• Generation mechanism
• Material inputs
• Transformation method
• Tool references
• Relevant execution context
• Artifact versions
• Supporting evidence

Artifact Creation Event

• Initial source-code creation
• AI code generation
• Compilation
• Software synthesis
• Transformation from another artifact
• Extraction of a software component
• Creation of a new artifact through assembly

Artifact Transformation Governance

• Editing
• Refactoring
• Regeneration
• Compilation
• Formatting
• Optimization
• Translation between programming languages
• Code synthesis
• Automated rewriting
• Extraction or splitting
• Merging
• Packaging

Source Artifact State → Transformation Event → Resulting Artifact State

Transformation Identity and Attribution

• Transformation event
• Source artifact state
• Resulting artifact state
• Transformation mechanism
• Relevant actor
• Applicable execution context
• Supporting evidence

Artifact Version Integrity

• Previous content state
• Current content state
• Material changes
• Transformation basis
• Relevant actor or mechanism
• Supporting evidence
• Supersession relationships

Artifact Continuity

• Development actors
• Repositories
• Tools
• AI models
• Generation mechanisms
• File locations
• Build environments
• Organizational control
• Artifact formats

Artifact Integrity Dimensions

Content Integrity: Whether its contents correspond to the claimed content

Provenance Integrity: Whether material source and derivation

Continuity Integrity: Whether material artifact relationships remain

Content Integrity Evidence

• Cryptographic hashes
• Digital signatures
• Repository object identifiers
• Controlled snapshots
• Build records
• Artifact manifests
• Content comparison records
• Other suitable integrity mechanisms

Artifact Authenticity

Content integrity concerns whether contents correspond to an identified

Artifact Integrity and Creation Authority

• Stable identity
• Verified content
• Complete transformation history
• Strong provenance evidence

CRIM shall preserve relevant creation authority references without

The competent SCS and authority-governance processes determine the

Artifact Integrity and Requirements Alignment

CRIM shall preserve relevant relationships between software artifacts and

AI-Generated Artifact Integrity

• Generated artifact identity
• Relevant model or generation mechanism
• Material input references
• Generation context
• Output version
• Subsequent human or machine modifications
• Evidence of transformation
• Relevant uncertainty

A generated artifact shall not be treated as origin-verified merely because

Autonomous Artifact Modification

CRIM shall preserve material modification events and their resulting

• Autonomous actor reference
• Source artifact
• Modification objective
• Transformation event
• Resulting artifact
• Relevant execution evidence
• Applicable authority reference
• Integrity assessment

ASCCM — Autonomous Software Creation Control Module

Multi-Agent Artifact Integrity

Generation Agent → Refactoring Agent → Integration Agent → Review Agent

CRIM shall preserve material artifact states and transformation

Human–AI Artifact Transformation

CRIM shall preserve material source and transformation relationships

Governance conclusions shall depend on the applicable evidence and

External and Reused Artifact Integrity

• Source identity
• Artifact version
• Content reference
• Origin evidence
• Relevant transformation history
• Integrity assessment conditions

Detailed software dependency governance and applicable rights assessments

Generated and Intermediate Artifacts

• Generated source files
• Intermediate representations
• Transpiled code
• Generated interface definitions
• Compiler-generated objects
• Transformation outputs
• Model-generated implementation plans used as executable inputs

The necessary level of integrity governance depends on materiality and

Artifact Integrity Across Build Processes

Source Artifact State → Build or Transformation Process → Resulting

• Relevant source versions
• Build mechanism
• Material build inputs
• Resulting artifact identity
• Supporting integrity evidence

Reproducibility and Integrity

• Legitimate source origin
• Creation authorization
• Requirements correctness
• Security
• Software quality
• Operational suitability

CRIM shall preserve the actual evidentiary contribution of reproducibility

Artifact Composition Boundary

CRIM governs the identity and integrity of the constituent artifacts and

SACM — Software Artifact Composition Module

CRIM supplies relevant constituent integrity states for competent

Artifact Integrity and Software Dependencies

CRIM shall preserve integrity-relevant references to material dependency

The Software Dependency Standard governs the broader dependency

Artifact Integrity and Configuration

The Software Configuration Standard governs the relevant configuration

Artifact Integrity and Software Quality

Those determinations belong to the Software Quality Standard and other

CRIM establishes what artifact exists and whether its material integrity

Artifact Integrity and Software Security

The Software Security Standard governs security-specific assessment

Artifact Integrity Evidence

CRIM shall preserve evidence sufficient to support material artifact

• Artifact identifiers
• Content references
• Source references
• Creation-event records
• Transformation-event records
• Version histories
• Repository records
• Hashes
• Signatures
• Build records
• Generation records
• Actor references
• Integrity assessments
• Exception records

Evidence requirements shall reflect the artifact's materiality and intended

Evidence Source Competence

Artifact Integrity Uncertainty

• Origin records are incomplete
• Transformation history is missing
• Actor identity is disputed
• Content references are inconsistent
• Generated artifacts cannot be reliably attributed
• Build inputs are unavailable
• Evidence sources conflict
• Historical records have been lost
• Automated reconstruction remains inferential

CRIM shall preserve material uncertainty rather than convert incomplete

Artifact Integrity Conflict

• Two records claim different origins
• Content identifiers disagree
• Repository history contradicts build records
• Artifact versions are mislabeled
• Multiple actors claim the same creation event
• A generated artifact differs from its recorded output
• Transformation records are incomplete or contradictory

Artifact Integrity Gaps

• An artifact with no reliable version reference
• Generated code with unknown source inputs
• A binary without sufficient source-to-build linkage
• A modification with no reconstructable transformation event
• An artifact whose claimed hash does not match its contents
• A software component with materially disputed origin

Critical Artifact Integrity Gap

- A safety-critical executable whose contents cannot be matched to the

Unauthorized or Unrecognized Transformation

• Unexplained source changes
• Unauthorized code injection
• Unrecorded automated rewriting
• Artifact substitution
• Modification outside recognized creation conditions
• Replacement of generated outputs
• Alteration of build inputs

Unrecognized Transformation

Confirmed Unauthorized Transformation

Artifact Substitution and Misidentification

• Incorrect version references
• Build output replacement
• Repository synchronization errors
• Deliberate content substitution
• Misleading artifact labels
• Incorrect deployment package association

CRIM shall preserve the distinction between artifact identity claims and

Artifact Integrity Drift

• Unrecorded modification
• Tool-generated rewriting
• Regeneration
• Changed source inputs
• Build process changes
• Artifact relocation without preserved references
• Repository history rewriting
• Loss of provenance evidence

Artifact Integrity Governance States

CRIM shall support identifiable governance states for material artifact

Integrity-Supported: The relevant integrity claims have sufficient

Conditionally Supported: Integrity recognition depends on explicit

Partially Supported: Some material integrity dimensions remain

Transformation-Unresolved: Material transformation history remains

Integrity-Failed: A material integrity condition has been determined not

Superseded: A later governed artifact state has replaced the previous

A single overall state shall not conceal material failures or unresolved

Artifact Integrity Recognition

• Artifact identity
• Content identity
• Origin evidence
• Transformation history
• Version integrity
• Provenance
• Evidence competence
• Material uncertainty
• Relevant conflicts
• Applicable continuity conditions

Recognition shall remain limited to the integrity dimensions actually

Artifact Integrity Reassessment

• Artifact modification
• Regeneration
• New provenance evidence
• Conflicting integrity records
• Build changes
• Toolchain changes
• Actor changes
• Discovery of unrecognized transformations
• New content identifiers
• Evidence-integrity concerns
• Changes in the relevant governance context

Artifact Integrity Continuity and Preservation

CRIM shall preserve material integrity relationships across relevant

• Artifact identifiers
• Version references
• Content references
• Provenance records
• Transformation history
• Integrity evidence
• Historical integrity states
• Supersession relationships

It requires sufficient preserved information to reconstruct material

Governed Code & Artifact Integrity State

Integrity Governance Object: The artifact or artifact state being

Authority References: Applicable creation and transformation authority

Critical Integrity Gaps: Material integrity failures or insufficiencies

Development Traceability Handoff: Information required for creation

The state shall not independently imply software correctness, security,

Minimum Implementation Framework

• Artifact Identity and Content State Governance

Capability to identify material software artifacts, classify them,

• Artifact Origin, Provenance, and Transformation Governance

Capability to identify material creation events, source inputs, generation

• Artifact Integrity Evidence and Recognition Governance

Capability to evaluate content integrity, origin integrity, transformation

• Artifact Integrity Gap, Conflict, and Uncertainty Governance

Capability to identify missing provenance, conflicting content references,

• Artifact Integrity Change, Drift, and Continuity Governance

Capability to preserve artifact history, detect material integrity drift,

• Governed Artifact Integrity State and Creation Handoff
  Governance

Capability to produce a Governed Code & Artifact Integrity State

GIE™ Compatibility

• Artifact identity discovery
• Artifact classification
• Content-state comparison
• Origin and provenance mapping
• Transformation history reconstruction
• Artifact version analysis
• Integrity evidence association
• Cryptographic evidence interpretation
• AI-generated artifact identification
• Autonomous modification analysis
• Multi-agent artifact lineage mapping
• Build artifact relationship analysis
• Integrity gap detection
• Critical integrity gap identification
• Artifact substitution detection
• Integrity conflict analysis
• Integrity drift monitoring
• Historical artifact reconstruction
• Integrity governance state representation
• Composition and traceability handoff

Such inferences shall remain distinguishable from sufficiently established

OOF® logic adapts to the governed reality. The engine adapts to OOF®

Governance Logic

Receive Governed Development Method Selection State

Receive Applicable Software Creation References

Identify Code & Artifact Integrity Governance Object

Classify Software Artifact

Establish Artifact Identity

Establish Artifact Version and Content Identity

Identify Artifact Origin

Identify Creation Event

Identify Material Source Inputs

Identify Generation or Transformation Mechanism

Identify Relevant Creation and Modification Actors

Reconstruct Material Transformation Relationships

Assess Content Integrity

Assess Origin Integrity

Assess Transformation Integrity

Assess Version Integrity

Assess Provenance and Evidence Integrity

Identify Relevant Authority References

Identify Integrity Gaps and Critical Integrity Gaps

Identify Evidence Conflicts and Uncertainty

Assess Artifact Substitution and Integrity Drift

Determine Artifact Integrity Governance States

Establish Governed Code & Artifact Integrity State

Preserve Artifact History and Continuity

Handoff to Autonomous Creation Control, Artifact Composition, and

Governed Code & Artifact Integrity State

Governance Outputs

Code & Artifact Integrity Governance Object

Software Artifact Classification Record

Artifact Identity Record

Artifact Content Identity Record

Artifact Origin Record

Artifact Provenance Record

Artifact Creation Event Record

Artifact Transformation Record

Transformation Attribution Record

Artifact Version Integrity Record

Artifact Continuity Record

Artifact Integrity Dimension Assessment

Content Integrity Evidence Record

Artifact Authenticity Assessment

Artifact Authority Reference

Requirements-to-Artifact Reference

AI-Generated Artifact Integrity Record

Autonomous Artifact Modification Record

Multi-Agent Artifact Lineage Record

Human–AI Transformation Record

External Artifact Integrity Record

Intermediate Artifact Integrity Record

Build Artifact Integrity Record

Reproducibility Evidence Record

Constituent Artifact Integrity Reference

Dependency Artifact Integrity Reference

Configuration Context Reference

Artifact Integrity Evidence Record

Evidence Source Competence Assessment

Artifact Integrity Uncertainty State

Artifact Integrity Conflict Record

Artifact Integrity Gap Record

Critical Artifact Integrity Gap

Unrecognized Transformation Record

Artifact Substitution Assessment

Artifact Integrity Drift Record

Artifact Integrity Governance State

Artifact Integrity Recognition Record

Artifact Integrity Reassessment Record

Artifact Integrity Continuity Record

Artifact Composition Handoff Record

Development Traceability Handoff Record

Governed Code & Artifact Integrity State

Critical Distinctions

Artifact Existence ≠ Governed Artifact Integrity

Artifact Identity ≠ Creation Activity Identity

Artifact Classification ≠ Artifact Integrity Determination

Artifact Name ≠ Artifact Identity

Artifact Location ≠ Artifact Identity

Identical Content ≠ Identical Artifact Governance State

Recorded Author ≠ Established Artifact Origin

Provenance Record ≠ Provenance Verification

Artifact Creation Event ≠ Authorized Artifact Creation

Successful Transformation ≠ Preserved Artifact Integrity

Artifact Contributor ≠ Automatically Authorized Transformer

Version Label ≠ Version Integrity

Naming Continuity ≠ Artifact Continuity

Content Integrity ≠ Complete Artifact Integrity

Hash Match ≠ Creation Legitimacy

Content Integrity ≠ Artifact Authenticity

Valid Signature ≠ Universal Governance Validity

Integrity-Preserved Artifact ≠ Authorized Artifact

Unchanged Artifact ≠ Current Requirements Conformance

AI-Generated Explanation ≠ Verified Creation Provenance

Autonomous Modification Capability ≠ Modification Authority

Successful Agent Handoff ≠ Verified Artifact History

Human Modification ≠ Automatic Integrity Validation

AI Modification ≠ Automatic Integrity Failure

Verified External Content ≠ Authorized External Reuse

Intermediate Artifact ≠ Governance-Irrelevant Artifact

Build Success ≠ Build Artifact Integrity

Reproducibility ≠ Complete Integrity Governance

Component Integrity ≠ Composite Artifact Integrity

Dependency Content Integrity ≠ Dependency Governance Validity

Artifact Content Integrity ≠ Configuration Integrity

Artifact Integrity ≠ Software Correctness

Artifact Integrity ≠ Software Quality

Verified Artifact Integrity ≠ Software Security

Evidence Volume ≠ Integrity Evidence Sufficiency

Evidence Availability ≠ Evidence Competence

Uncertain Provenance ≠ Verified Provenance

Conflicting Evidence ≠ Permission to Select the Convenient Record

Integrity Gap ≠ Universal Artifact Invalidity by default

Critical Integrity Gap Identification ≠ Operational Decision Authority

Unexplained Modification ≠ Proven Unauthorized Modification

Artifact Label ≠ Artifact Content Proof

Previously Verified Integrity ≠ Permanently Verified Integrity

Recognized Artifact Integrity ≠ Universal Artifact Acceptance

Repository Continuity ≠ Artifact Integrity Continuity

Cross-Architecture Boundary

DMSM — Development Method Selection Module governs the suitability and

CRIM — Code & Artifact Integrity Module governs artifact identity,

ASCCM — Autonomous Software Creation Control Module governs autonomous

SACM — Software Artifact Composition Module governs the assembly and

DTM — Development Traceability Module governs reconstructable

Software Change Management Standard (SCMS) governs broader lifecycle

Software Lifecycle Control Standard (SLCS) governs cross-cutting

GOA™ — Governance Architecture: General authority and delegation

AGA™ — Accountability Governance Architecture: Responsibility and

ASGA™ — Autonomous Systems Governance Architecture: Autonomous execution

AGI™ — Agent Governance Infrastructure: Agent identity, permission,

OBIDENITY® — Origin-Bound Identity Governance Architecture: Applicable

ORA™ — Operational Reality Architecture: Competent operational reality

Canonical Boundary

• Code and artifact integrity objects
• Software artifact classification
• Artifact identity
• Content identity
• Artifact origin
• Artifact provenance
• Creation events
• Artifact transformations
• Transformation attribution
• Version integrity
• Artifact continuity
• Integrity dimensions
• Content integrity evidence
• Artifact authenticity evidence
• Integrity-related authority references
• Requirements-to-artifact references
• AI-generated artifacts
• Autonomous artifact modifications
• Multi-agent artifact transformations
• Human–AI artifact transformations
• External and reused artifacts
• Intermediate artifacts
• Build artifact integrity
• Reproducibility evidence
• Constituent artifact integrity
• Dependency-related artifact integrity
• Configuration-related integrity references
• Integrity evidence
• Evidence source competence
• Integrity uncertainty
• Integrity conflicts
• Integrity gaps
• Critical integrity gaps
• Unrecognized transformations
• Artifact substitution
• Integrity drift
• Integrity governance states
• Integrity recognition
• Integrity reassessment
• Artifact history and continuity

• General creation authority
• Development method suitability
• Requirements legitimacy
• Complete autonomous execution authorization
• Software artifact composition validity
• Complete development traceability
• Intellectual property ownership or licensing rights
• Software functional correctness
• Software quality conformance
• Software security conformance
• Release readiness
• Deployment authorization

Governed Code & Artifact Integrity State

with sufficient artifact identity, content references, provenance,

Use Case 1 — An AI Coding Agent Silently Replaces a Verified Software

A software component has previously been reviewed and associated with a

During execution, it regenerates the component and replaces the existing

• The previous artifact content state
• The transformation event
• The generation inputs
• The relationship between the original and regenerated component
• The applicable authority for the modification
• The integrity evidence supporting the new artifact version

Previous Artifact State → Autonomous Transformation → Resulting Artifact

Transformation-Unresolved

Evidence-Limited

CRIM prevents successful code generation from concealing a break in

Use Case 2 — A Verified Software Package Has an Unknown Origin

The signature verification also succeeds under the applicable technical

• Which source code produced the package
• Which material build inputs were used
• Whether external code was incorporated
• Which transformation process generated the executable
• Whether the package corresponds to the claimed software creation
  state

Content Correspondence

A Relevant Signing Relationship

Verified Source Origin

Complete Transformation Provenance

Partially Supported

Origin-Unresolved

CRIM prevents strong evidence in one integrity dimension from being

Canonical Closing Statement

CRIM establishes the methodological conditions under which software

It requires material artifact integrity claims to remain supported by

CRIM transforms software artifacts from technical outputs into

Modu 3

ASCCM — Autonomous Software Creation Control Module

Canonical Definition

The Autonomous Software Creation Control Module (ASCCM) governs the

ASCCM establishes the methodological conditions required to recognize

It governs the relationship between a legitimate software creation

ASCCM distinguishes authorization of an overall software creation objective

It applies to autonomous coding agents, AI-assisted development systems

Governed Autonomous Software Creation Control State

Autonomous Software Creation Capability ≠ Autonomous Software Creation

Operational Role

ASCCM provides the creation-specific control layer for autonomous

It governs how autonomous execution remains connected to the authority

Position in the SCS Internal Governance Flow

Development Method Selection → Code & Artifact Integrity → Autonomous

Autonomous Software Creation Control

Governed Software Requirements Baseline

Governed Development Method Selection State

Governed Code & Artifact Integrity State

Governed Autonomous Software Creation Control State

SACM — Software Artifact Composition Module

DTM — Development Traceability Module

ASCCM operates throughout autonomous execution, including planning, action

The internal SCS flow represents governance relationships rather than a

Central Operational Question

Autonomous Software Creation Control Governance Object

Every ASCCM assessment shall identify the Autonomous Software Creation

The object represents a defined autonomous software creation activity or

Autonomous Actor: The agent, system, or automated mechanism performing

Delegating Authority: The competent source of delegated execution

Intervention Conditions: The circumstances and mechanisms for control or

The governance object shall remain distinguishable from the autonomous

Autonomous Creation Actor Identification

ASCCM shall identify the autonomous actor or mechanism performing material

• Autonomous coding agents
• Multi-agent development systems
• AI-based code-generation services
• Automated software transformation systems
• Repository modification agents
• Autonomous test-and-repair agents
• Software synthesis systems
• Automated development orchestration mechanisms

Actor identification shall support attribution of material actions to the

Creation Objective Governance

ASCCM shall preserve the relationship between autonomous execution and the

• The intended software outcome
• Applicable requirements
• Relevant scope
• Material constraints
• Permitted execution purpose
• Applicable completion conditions

An autonomous system shall not infer unlimited authority from a broadly

Delegated Execution Authority

• Delegating actor or authority
• Delegation scope
• Permitted execution activities
• Applicable restrictions
• Duration or validity conditions
• Revocation conditions
• Relevant oversight responsibilities
• Evidence of delegation

An agent shall not obtain greater legitimate authority merely by receiving

Task Authority and Constituent Action Authority

ASCCM shall distinguish authorization of the overall task from

• Reading source files
• Modifying code
• Executing commands
• Installing dependencies
• Accessing databases
• Invoking external services
• Creating credentials
• Deploying test environments
• Coordinating other agents

ASCCM shall preserve the applicable permission basis for material

Autonomous Planning Governance

• Task decomposition
• Tool selection
• Artifact selection
• Execution sequencing
• Dependency identification
• Agent coordination
• Testing strategy
• Proposed implementation alternatives

Autonomous Execution Scope

• Repositories
• Projects
• Software components
• Files
• Development environments
• Approved branches
• Test systems
• Data sources
• Tool categories
• Permitted external services

Scope shall be defined sufficiently to distinguish authorized execution

A general instruction to develop software shall not be treated as

Tool Selection and Tool-Path Governance

Tool Availability

Tool Permission

Authorized Tool Execution

Agent Objective → Repository Tool → External Integration → Database Query

Data and Memory Access Boundaries

ASCCM shall preserve the distinction between access capability and

• Source-code access
• Customer data
• Internal documents
• Development secrets
• Credentials
• Agent memory
• Retrieved external information
• Shared multi-agent context
• Historical execution records

Software Artifact Modification Boundaries

• Read-only access
• Proposed modification
• Authorized modification
• Restricted modification
• Prohibited modification
• Modification requiring additional approval

Material artifact modifications shall remain connected to the applicable

Autonomous Code Generation

ASCCM shall govern autonomous execution conditions surrounding code

• Authorized generation objective
• Permitted source context
• Applicable requirements
• Generation method
• Tool and model restrictions
• Resulting artifact identity
• Material generation evidence
• Required review or intervention conditions

Autonomous Code Transformation

ASCCM shall preserve the authority and execution conditions applicable to

• Source artifact scope
• Permitted transformation type
• Intended change objective
• Applicable requirements
• Transformation limits
• Relevant tool permissions
• Evidence preservation
• Intervention conditions

Autonomous Dependency Actions

• Installing packages
• Updating libraries
• Adding external services
• Downloading code
• Invoking external APIs
• Changing dependency versions

Autonomous Configuration Actions

• Changing environment variables
• Editing configuration files
• Modifying build settings
• Altering tool permissions
• Adjusting test environments
• Changing deployment-related settings

Autonomous Testing and Repair

Generate → Test → Diagnose → Modify → Retest

• Permitted test environments
• Authorized modification scope
• Execution limits
• Tool restrictions
• Evidence preservation
• Escalation conditions

Autonomous Iteration Boundaries

• Maximum execution duration
• Resource limits
• Permitted modification scope
• Retry conditions
• Escalation thresholds
• Repeated failure conditions
• Prohibited action categories
• Relevant human intervention triggers

Autonomous Decision Boundaries

• Selecting implementation alternatives
• Refactoring code
• Adding dependencies
• Modifying interfaces
• Changing software architecture
• Expanding repository scope
• Accessing external information
• Invoking additional agents
• Altering execution controls

Multi-Agent Coordination Governance

• Agent roles
• Task allocation
• Delegation boundaries
• Shared tool permissions
• Artifact handoffs
• Execution dependencies
• Coordination decisions
• Conflict resolution
• Evidence continuity

Each material actor and action remains subject to the applicable governance

Agent-to-Agent Delegation

• Original authority basis
• Permission to delegate
• Delegated task scope
• Recipient agent identity
• Constituent action permissions
• Applicable restrictions
• Evidence of delegation
• Responsibility continuity

An agent shall not treat delegation as a means to bypass its own

Shared Context and Coordination Integrity

• Requirements interpretations
• Source-code context
• Execution plans
• Tool results
• Generated artifacts
• Intermediate decisions
• Memory records

Shared information shall not automatically acquire authority merely because

Autonomous Execution Evidence

ASCCM shall preserve evidence sufficient to reconstruct material autonomous

• Execution objective
• Actor identity
• Delegation reference
• Selected actions
• Tool invocations
• Data-access references
• Artifact modifications
• Material decisions
• Agent handoffs
• Exceptions
• Intervention events
• Execution outcomes

Tool-Path Traceability

ASCCM shall preserve material relationships between autonomous objectives

Objective → Authority → Permission → Tool Selection → Tool Execution →

Autonomous Execution Observability

• Current execution state
• Active actor identity
• Tool invocation status
• Artifact modification activity
• Permission violations
• Exception conditions
• Escalation triggers
• Intervention readiness

It requires sufficient visibility into material actions and conditions

Human Oversight

• Human presence
• Human review
• Human approval
• Human intervention capability
• Effective human control

Human oversight shall be evaluated against the actual operational

Human Intervention Capability

ASCCM shall identify the conditions under which a competent human or other

• Pausing execution
• Revoking tool permissions
• Blocking material actions
• Restricting repository access
• Terminating an agent session
• Isolating an execution environment
• Requiring additional approval
• Initiating competent reassessment

An intervention mechanism shall not be considered effective solely because

Its availability and effectiveness depend on the relevant operational

Autonomous Override and Emergency Control

ASCCM shall preserve competent override conditions for materially

• Authority boundaries are exceeded
• Prohibited tools are invoked
• Sensitive data is accessed outside scope
• Critical artifacts are modified unexpectedly
• Material evidence continuity is lost
• Autonomous coordination becomes uncontrolled
• A critical execution risk is identified

Override conditions shall remain connected to competent authority and

Execution Boundary Violation

• Unauthorized repository modification
• Prohibited data access
• Unapproved external tool invocation
• Execution outside the permitted environment
• Unauthorized dependency installation
• Modification of restricted software components
• Delegation beyond permitted scope

ASCCM shall distinguish confirmed violations from suspected or

Autonomous Execution Deviation

Autonomous Goal Drift

• Expanding functionality beyond the governed scope
• Optimizing unrelated software components
• Modifying infrastructure not required by the authorized task
• Pursuing additional development goals without authorization
• Reinterpreting success conditions beyond permitted boundaries

ASCCM shall identify material goal drift and preserve its relationship to

Autonomous Tool-Path Drift

• Switching to an unapproved integration
• Accessing a new data source
• Invoking additional external services
• Changing tool permissions
• Delegating execution to an unapproved agent
• Using an alternative environment with different authority
  conditions

ASCCM shall identify material tool-path changes and determine whether

Autonomous Permission Escalation

• Requesting elevated repository access
• Obtaining broader credentials
• Changing tool execution settings
• Invoking privileged commands
• Accessing restricted infrastructure
• Delegating actions to a more privileged agent

ASCCM shall preserve the distinction between a permission request and

Autonomous Execution Conflict

• Agent instructions
• Applicable requirements
• Delegated authority
• Tool permissions
• Human intervention
• Multi-agent coordination decisions
• Software artifact restrictions
• Execution evidence

ASCCM shall identify material conflicts and preserve the applicable

A later instruction shall not automatically override a higher or otherwise

Autonomous Execution Uncertainty

• Actor identity
• Delegation validity
• Tool permissions
• Data access
• Actual artifact modifications
• Execution history
• Agent handoffs
• Intervention effectiveness
• Completion conditions

ASCCM shall preserve material uncertainty rather than treating a successful

Autonomous Execution Readiness

Before materially consequential autonomous execution, ASCCM shall assess

• Recognized objective
• Applicable requirements
• Actor identity
• Delegation
• Execution scope
• Tool permissions
• Data-access boundaries
• Artifact modification boundaries
• Intervention capability
• Evidence preservation
• Escalation conditions

Autonomous Execution Governance States

Completed: The defined execution activity has reached its completion

Autonomous Execution Authorization

ASCCM shall preserve the applicable authorization conditions for autonomous

• Authorized objective
• Autonomous actor
• Delegated scope
• Permitted actions
• Tool boundaries
• Data boundaries
• Artifact boundaries
• Relevant duration
• Applicable restrictions
• Revocation conditions
• Evidence obligations

Authorization shall remain specific enough to support evaluation of

Autonomous Execution Monitoring

ASCCM shall support monitoring of material autonomous execution conditions

• Scope compliance
• Tool-path activity
• Permission use
• Artifact modification
• Agent delegation
• Goal drift
• Execution deviations
• Evidence continuity
• Intervention readiness
• Material risk conditions

Autonomous Execution Suspension

• Confirmed material boundary violations
• Critical evidence gaps
• Loss of intervention capability
• Unresolved authority conflicts
• Unauthorized permission escalation
• Material goal drift
• Uncontrolled tool-path changes
• Critical artifact modification concerns

Autonomous Execution Resumption

• Resolution of authority conflicts
• Restoration of permitted execution boundaries
• Reassessment of tool permissions
• Recovery of intervention capability
• Evaluation of affected artifacts
• Preservation of material evidence
• Competent authorization to resume

Resumption shall not automatically inherit every previous execution

Autonomous Execution Completion

• Generated code
• Passing tests
• Completed tasks
• Produced artifacts
• Finished agent execution

Governance completion requires assessment of whether material execution

• Objective alignment
• Authority compliance
• Constituent action boundaries
• Tool-path governance
• Artifact modification conditions
• Material deviations
• Evidence sufficiency
• Unresolved conflicts

Autonomous Execution Evidence Preservation

ASCCM shall preserve material execution evidence after completion,

• The authorized objective
• The executing actor
• Delegated authority
• Material actions
• Tool paths
• Data-access events
• Artifact modifications
• Agent handoffs
• Interventions
• Deviations
• Execution outcomes

Evidence preservation shall reflect the applicable materiality, retention,

Autonomous Execution Continuity

• Agent sessions
• Model changes
• Tool changes
• Repository versions
• Human operators
• Execution environments
• Multi-agent handoffs

ASCCM shall preserve the relationship between the original authority basis

Continuity shall not be inferred merely because the same task label or

Autonomous Execution Reassessment

• New requirements
• Changed software scope
• New autonomous capabilities
• Tool additions
• Permission changes
• Agent replacement
• Model changes affecting execution behavior
• New data sources
• Modified intervention mechanisms
• Evidence gaps
• Execution drift
• Material security concerns

Governed Autonomous Software Creation Control State

Execution Governance Object: The autonomous creation activity under

Override Conditions: Competent emergency or exceptional control

Completion Assessment: The relationship between technical completion and

Creation Handoff: Relevant information for artifact composition and

The state shall not independently establish software quality, artifact

Minimum Implementation Framework

• Autonomous Actor, Objective, and Delegation Governance

Capability to identify autonomous actors, recognized software creation

• Constituent Action, Tool-Path, and Access Boundary Governance

Capability to identify material constituent actions, tool permissions, tool

• Autonomous Planning, Execution, and Coordination Governance

Capability to govern material autonomous planning, action selection,

• Oversight, Intervention, and Exception Governance

Capability to establish competent oversight, intervention, suspension,

• Execution Evidence, Drift, and Governance State Assessment

Capability to preserve material execution evidence, identify goal drift,

• Governed Autonomous Creation State and Lifecycle Handoff
  Governance

Capability to produce a Governed Autonomous Software Creation Control State

GIE™ Compatibility

• Autonomous actor identification
• Creation objective analysis
• Delegation boundary assessment
• Constituent action classification
• Tool permission mapping
• Tool-path reconstruction
• Data-access boundary assessment
• Artifact modification boundary assessment
• Autonomous planning analysis
• Multi-agent coordination mapping
• Agent-to-agent delegation analysis
• Execution observability assessment
• Intervention readiness assessment
• Goal drift detection
• Tool-path drift detection
• Permission escalation detection
• Boundary violation identification
• Execution evidence analysis
• Execution governance state representation
• Suspension and escalation support
• Autonomous execution continuity assessment

Such analytical outputs shall remain distinguishable from competent

OOF® logic adapts to the governed reality. The engine adapts to OOF®

Governance Logic

Receive Governed Software Requirements Baseline

Receive Governed Development Method Selection State

Identify Autonomous Software Creation Control Governance Object

Identify Autonomous Actor and Execution Role

Identify Authorized Software Creation Objective

Identify Delegating Authority

Establish Delegated Execution Scope

Identify Permitted Constituent Actions

Establish Tool Permissions and Tool-Path Boundaries

Establish Data and Memory Access Boundaries

Establish Artifact Modification Boundaries

Assess Autonomous Planning Conditions

Assess Multi-Agent Coordination and Delegation Conditions

Establish Oversight and Intervention Conditions

Assess Autonomous Execution Readiness

Determine Applicable Execution Authorization State

Initiate Governed Autonomous Execution

Observe Material Execution Actions

Preserve Tool-Path and Artifact Modification Evidence

Identify Deviations, Goal Drift, and Tool-Path Drift

Identify Permission Escalation and Boundary Violations

Assess Conflicts, Uncertainty, and Evidence Sufficiency

Assess Technical Completion and Governance Completion Separately

Determine Autonomous Execution Governance State

Establish Governed Autonomous Software Creation Control State

Preserve Execution Continuity

Handoff to Software Artifact Composition and Development Traceability

Governed Autonomous Software Creation Control State

Governance Outputs

Autonomous Software Creation Control Governance Object

Autonomous Actor Identity Record

Autonomous Creation Objective Record

Delegated Execution Authority Reference

Delegated Execution Scope Record

Constituent Action Permission Record

Autonomous Execution Plan Assessment

Tool Selection and Tool-Path Governance Record

Data and Memory Access Boundary Record

Artifact Modification Boundary Record

Autonomous Code Generation Control Record

Autonomous Code Transformation Control Record

Autonomous Dependency Action Record

Autonomous Configuration Action Record

Autonomous Testing and Repair Control Record

Autonomous Iteration Boundary Record

Autonomous Decision Boundary Record

Multi-Agent Coordination Record

Agent-to-Agent Delegation Record

Shared Context Governance Record

Autonomous Execution Evidence Record

Tool-Path Traceability Reference

Execution Observability Assessment

Human Oversight Assessment

Human Intervention Capability Assessment

Override and Emergency Control Record

Execution Boundary Violation Record

Autonomous Execution Deviation Record

Autonomous Goal Drift Record

Autonomous Tool-Path Drift Record

Permission Escalation Record

Autonomous Execution Conflict Record

Autonomous Execution Uncertainty State

Autonomous Execution Readiness Assessment

Autonomous Execution Governance State

Autonomous Execution Authorization Reference

Execution Monitoring Record

Execution Suspension Record

Execution Resumption Record

Execution Completion Assessment

Execution Evidence Preservation Record

Autonomous Execution Continuity Record

Autonomous Execution Reassessment Record

Artifact Composition Handoff Record

Development Traceability Handoff Record

Governed Autonomous Software Creation Control State

Critical Distinctions

Autonomous Software Creation Capability ≠ Autonomous Software Creation

Agent Identity ≠ Execution Governance Object Identity

Model Identity ≠ Agent Instance Identity

Agent Identity ≠ Authorized Agent Role

Authorized Objective ≠ Unlimited Means of Execution

Delegated Authority Cannot Exceed the Applicable Authority Basis

Task Authority ≠ Constituent Action Authority

Valid Execution Plan ≠ Authorized Execution Plan

Accessible Software Object ≠ Authorized Software Object

Tool Availability ≠ Tool Permission

Authorized Objective ≠ Authorized Tool Path

Data Accessibility ≠ Data-Use Authority

Repository Write Access ≠ Unlimited Artifact Modification Authority

Code Generation Success ≠ Governed Creation Success

Transformation Capability ≠ Transformation Authority

Implementation Authority ≠ Unrestricted Dependency Authority

Configuration Access ≠ Configuration Change Authority

Test Success ≠ Authorized Repair Execution

Repeated Execution ≠ Expanded Authority

Autonomous Decision Capability ≠ Autonomous Decision Authority

Multi-Agent Coordination ≠ Collective Authority

Agent Delegation ≠ Authority Expansion

Shared Agent Context ≠ Shared Governance Authority

Execution Logging ≠ Execution Governance Evidence Sufficiency

Tool Invocation Record ≠ Governed Tool-Path Traceability

System Observability ≠ Effective System Control

Human Participation ≠ Effective Human Control

Intervention Mechanism Existence ≠ Effective Intervention Capability

Emergency Control Capability ≠ Unrestricted Override Authority

Suspected Boundary Violation ≠ Established Boundary Violation

Execution Deviation ≠ Unauthorized Execution by default

Agent-Generated Objective ≠ Authorized Creation Objective

Permitted Tool Path ≠ Permission for Every Alternative Tool Path

Permission Request ≠ Permission Grant

Technical Privilege Acquisition ≠ Legitimate Authority Acquisition

Instruction Recency ≠ Instruction Authority

Execution Outcome Certainty ≠ Execution Governance Certainty

Technical Readiness ≠ Autonomous Governance Readiness

Completed Execution ≠ Governed Execution Acceptance

Broad Task Instruction ≠ Unlimited Autonomous Authorization

Monitoring Activity ≠ Effective Governance Monitoring

Execution Suspension ≠ Proven System Failure

Previous Authorization ≠ Automatic Resumption Authorization

Task Completion ≠ Governed Execution Completion

Task Identity Continuity ≠ Authority Continuity

Previously Governed Execution ≠ Permanently Governed Execution

Cross-Architecture Boundary

DMSM — Development Method Selection Module governs the selection and

CRIM — Code & Artifact Integrity Module governs artifact identity,

ASCCM — Autonomous Software Creation Control Module governs autonomous

SACM — Software Artifact Composition Module governs software artifact

DTM — Development Traceability Module governs reconstructable creation

Software Requirements Standard (SRS) governs the applicable requirements

Software Dependency Standard (SDS) governs dependencies introduced or

Software Change Management Standard (SCMS) governs broader lifecycle

Software Lifecycle Control Standard (SLCS) governs cross-cutting

GOA™ — Governance Architecture: General authority, delegation, and

AGA™ — Accountability Governance Architecture: Responsibility and

ASGA™ — Autonomous Systems Governance Architecture: General autonomous

AGI™ — Agent Governance Infrastructure: Agent identity, permission,

OBIDENITY® — Origin-Bound Identity Governance Architecture: Applicable

MGIA™ — Memory Governance Architecture: Relevant memory access,

ORA™ — Operational Reality Architecture: Competent operational reality

ASCCM applies these relationships specifically to software creation without

Canonical Boundary

• Autonomous software creation control objects
• Autonomous actor identification
• Creation objectives
• Delegated execution authority
• Task and constituent action boundaries
• Autonomous planning
• Execution scope
• Tool selection and tool paths
• Data and memory access
• Artifact modification boundaries
• Autonomous code generation
• Autonomous code transformation
• Dependency-related execution actions
• Configuration-related execution actions
• Autonomous testing and repair
• Autonomous iteration
• Autonomous decisions
• Multi-agent coordination
• Agent-to-agent delegation
• Shared context governance
• Execution evidence
• Tool-path traceability references
• Execution observability
• Human oversight
• Intervention capability
• Override and emergency control
• Execution boundary violations
• Execution deviations
• Goal drift
• Tool-path drift
• Permission escalation
• Execution conflicts
• Execution uncertainty
• Execution readiness
• Execution governance states
• Execution authorization references
• Monitoring
• Suspension
• Resumption
• Completion assessment
• Evidence preservation
• Execution continuity
• Reassessment

• General legal or organizational authority
• Software requirements legitimacy
• Development method suitability
• Complete artifact integrity
• Software composition validity
• Complete development traceability
• Software functional correctness
• Software security conformance
• Release readiness
• Deployment authorization

Governed Autonomous Software Creation Control State

with sufficient authority, permission, execution, tool-path,

Use Case 1 — An Autonomous Coding Agent Uses an Unauthorized Database

An organization authorizes an autonomous coding agent to build an internal

The agent queries the database and incorporates the retrieved information

Authorized Objective → Delegated Authority → Tool Selection → Data Access

ASCCM prevents autonomous task completion from concealing material

Use Case 2 — A Multi-Agent Development System Expands Its Own

The additional agent modifies configuration outside the approved

However, the delegation and infrastructure modification exceeded the

Original Delegation → Agent Coordination → Subtask Delegation → Tool

ASCCM requires the system to preserve authority boundaries across agent

Canonical Closing Statement

The distance between the original instruction and the final software

Autonomous Software Creation Capability ≠ Autonomous Software Creation

ASCCM establishes the methodological conditions under which autonomous

ASCCM transforms autonomous software creation from delegated technical