The originating repository's SVGs were drawn by hand and every one of them
put a title, a subtitle and an explanation band inside the canvas. This
repository forbids both, so they could not be carried over — the whole set
was rebuilt through the skill's pipeline instead.
Each diagram went through prepare, references, prompt, a VizSpec 1.1 citing
document line ranges, lint, and render. All 28 pass lint and produce the
same eight formats the existing keycloak project has. Sentences moved out of
the canvas into <desc> and the paragraph beside each figure; the drawings
carry names only.
Two lint rules did real work rather than formatting work:
edge-through-node caught arrows crossing an unrelated
node and implying an adjacency that
does not exist — four diagrams had to
be restructured, not just relaid out
evidence-outside-prepared-context caught a diagram citing another
section; its anchor moved from B-0 to
B-1 so all three sections it draws on
are inside the prepared context
lab-topology also had to change profile: its context offers a different
candidate set, and query-fanout with shard roles is what the section
actually shows — one entry point spreading to two Keycloak nodes.
The document now carries all 28 inline, one per claim that needed one, and
the section recording what was still missing is updated: the diagram gap is
closed, Studio records remain.
verify-pipeline.py passes. audit-records.py reports no issues.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
The keycloak project ended with four open questions that design could not
settle. A two-VM lab was built to answer them by measurement, and this is
that material: 26 experiments, 125 raw command outputs, 22 browser captures.
Follows the import procedure in README.md.
source/ the originating repository verbatim — 78 documents, 28 SVGs,
8 manifests, plus .source-revision recording the commit
final/ the SSOT
document.md 729 lines written from the 29 experiment documents, not
concatenated: what was predicted, what was measured, and
where the measurement itself was wrong
evidence/raw 125 outputs, flattened to <experiment>__<file> because
the originals collided (01-baseline.txt appeared three
times) and the audit only globs the top level
evidence/meta one per raw file; command and exitCode are null and the
README says why rather than inventing them
evidence/browser 22 captures
assets/ three diagrams through techviz
.techviz/ their VizSpecs
A separate project rather than an addition to keycloak: the B-layer answers
that project's four questions, but the A, C and D layers are about cluster
failure, SSO and operations, and one document.md should hold one subject.
The four question records there can point here through 관계.
Recorded rather than papered over: only three of the 28 diagrams were
remade. The repository forbids hand-drawn SVG and forbids titles inside the
canvas; all 28 originals carry both, so converting them is redrawing, not
reformatting. They stay in source/ and the gap is written into the document.
verify-pipeline.py passes. audit-records.py reports no issues.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
.run/의 세 런을 조사한 결과 claridoc run 파이프라인이 한 번도 완주하지
않았다. quality-gate.json 0건, stages/ 및 rounds/ 부재. 실사용 범위는
validate/collect/outline까지였고 글쓰기와 검수는 스킬이 담당했다.
파이썬 패키지, CLI, 스키마, 테스트, 예제, 조사 자료, 빌드·배포 산출물,
하네스 규약 문서를 제거한다. 남는 것은 Agent Skill 세 개, .run/의 문서
세 편, CLAUDE.md, README.md, LICENSE, 제거 결정 문서다.
examples/golden의 구버전 초안 두 편(n+1liner.md 1416줄,
claridoc-rewrite/document.md 1626줄)과 루트 document.md(.run 판과 md5
동일한 사본)도 함께 지운다. .run/에 더 진행된 판이 있다.
복구: git checkout pre-harness-removal -- <경로>
근거: docs/decisions/2026-08-07-remove-claridoc-harness.md
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
.run/의 세 런을 조사한 결과 claridoc run 파이프라인이 한 번도 완주하지
않았음을 확인했다. quality-gate.json 0건, stages/ 및 rounds/ 부재.
실사용 범위는 validate/collect/outline까지였고 글쓰기와 검수는 스킬이
담당했다.
하네스를 제거하고 korean-technical-blog-skills-bundle-v1의 스킬 세 개와
.run/의 문서 세 편만 남기기로 한 결정과, 보존/삭제 인벤토리, 안전장치,
검증 절차를 기록한다.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
