FPF Reference

Route Catalog

What this page is

Routes are generated FPF working paths through pattern IDs. They are not website routes, app routes, or navigation implementation details.

Methodology

Use a route when the work shape is known but the exact patterns are not. Follow ordered steps first, use optional and landing points only when the task needs them, then open individual pattern pages for exact wording or audit evidence.

Generated pages: 23

why

  • Route ID: route:why
  • Steps: 2

For the why: inspect E.1-E.2.

writing or reviewing patterns

  • Route ID: route:writing-or-reviewing-patterns
  • Steps: 2

For writing or reviewing patterns: inspect E.8 and E.19.

project alignment

  • Route ID: route:project-alignment
  • Steps: 5
  • First Honest Burden: "We keep mixing responsibilities, working method, plans, and what actually happened."

For project alignment - contexts, roles, method, plan, run, and a first shared work or vocabulary stabilizer: inspect A.1.1, A.15, A.15.2, A.15.3, and B.5.1. Consider F.11 when method vocabulary and work vocabulary must be aligned across contexts, F.9 when bridge discipline matters, and F.17 when term stabilization is the live question. F.11 when method vocabulary or work vocabulary is itself unstable; F.9 when bridge discipline is live; F.17 as a typical vocabulary-stabilizing output

partly-said cue and language-state discovery

  • Route ID: route:partly-said-cue-and-language-state-discovery
  • Steps: 9
  • First Honest Burden: "Something important is there, but it is too early to publish as a settled claim, requirement, or work record."

When the real situation is partly-said cue and language-state discovery: inspect C.2.2a, C.2.LS, and C.2.4-C.2.7, A.16, A.16.1, A.16.2, B.4.1, and B.5.2.0. Consider endpoint patterns such as C.16.Q, A.6.A, or C.25 only when the live question is actually endpoint-owned. endpoint claim, action, or quality patterns become first patterns to inspect only after the cue is mature enough

boundary unpacking

  • Route ID: route:boundary-unpacking
  • Steps: 7

For boundary unpacking - API, contract, protocol, SLO/SLA, acceptance clause, compliance text, or interface language: inspect A.6, A.6.B, and A.6.C. If the first question is only "what description is this?", inspect A.6.RSIG before L/A/D/E-classified claim structure. Add A.6.P, C.16.Q, or A.6.A only when relation, quality, or action wording is the live question.

admissible comparison, pool, selection, or selected-set publication

  • Route ID: route:admissible-comparison-pool-selection-or-selected-set-publication
  • Steps: 8

For admissible comparison, pool, selection, or selected-set publication: inspect A.19:0, A.17-A.19, A.19.CN, G.0, C.18, C.19, and G.5. Consider C.11 only when the live question has narrowed to one local decision doctrine, and C.24 only when the next live object is a CallPlan or CheckpointReturn.

reusable generator, SoTA, or portfolio kit

  • Route ID: route:reusable-generator-sota-or-portfolio-kit
  • Steps: 5

When the work is to publish a reusable generator, SoTA, or portfolio kit: inspect A.0, G.0, G.1, G.2, and G.5. Consider B.5.2.1 and C.17-C.19 when creative search, novelty, or explore/exploit policy is already central. Consider G.10 or G.11 when shipping or refresh is live.

same-entity rewrite, explanation, representation change, repair, or bounded comparative reading

  • Route ID: route:same-entity-rewrite-explanation-representation-change-repair-or-bounded-comparative-reading
  • Steps: 4

For same-entity rewrite, explanation, representation change, repair, or bounded comparative reading without minting a new described entity: inspect A.6.3.CR, A.6.3.RT, E.17.EFP, and E.17.ID.CR. Consider E.17.AUD.LHR for pressured-head local repair and E.17.AUD.OOTD for PublicationUnit stability.

Wording-use precision restoration

  • Route ID: route:wording-use-precision-restoration
  • Steps: 0
  • First Honest Burden: "The wording is doing real FPF work, but the head kind, relation, source posture, architecture object, characteristic, quality sense, function sense, or exact receiving pattern is hidden."

C.2.P for source/publication/interpretation-transfer wording; A.6.P for relation force; C.30.P for architecture/structure wording; C.16.P for characteristic/scale wording; C.16.Q for quality/evaluative-characterization wording; A.6.F for function-like wording; F.18 when naming or mint/reuse is live

Boundary unpacking and claim decomposition

  • Route ID: route:boundary-unpacking-and-claim-decomposition
  • Steps: 0
  • First Honest Burden: "An agreement, API, protocol, SLA, acceptance, or compliance sentence mixes law, gate, duty, evidence, quality wording, or action."

A.6.RSIG if first-contact recognition of the boundary description is still live; A.6.P, C.16.Q, A.6.A when relation, quality/evaluative-characterization, or action wording is live

Architecture vs diagram/module/model

  • Route ID: route:architecture-vs-diagram-module-model
  • Steps: 0
  • First Honest Burden: "We have an architecture, module diagram, ports, functional architecture, TGA graph, LCA control description, modularity score, reusable structure, or bespoke residue, but we are not sure what object the description is about."

C.30.ASV when a structural view is live; C.30.TGA-FLOW-REL and E.18 when flow graph relation is live; C.30.LCA when control structure is live; A.6.F when function wording is live; C.30.ILC when cross-scope residual is live

Admissible comparison, candidate-pool policy, selection, and selected-set publication

  • Route ID: route:admissible-comparison-candidate-pool-policy-selection-and-selected-set-publication
  • Steps: 0
  • First Honest Burden: "We need comparison, a shortlist, a live pool, a call-planning distinction, or a selected set without forcing one winner too early."

C.11 when the entry question narrows to one local decision doctrine; C.24 when the next honest C.24 object is CallPlan or CheckpointReturn; A.19.CPM and A.19.SelectorMechanism when comparator/selector structure is live

Generator, SoTA, or portfolio scaffold

  • Route ID: route:generator-sota-or-portfolio-scaffold
  • Steps: 0
  • First Honest Burden: "The work is to publish a reusable search, harvest, generator, selector, or portfolio scaffold, not one recommendation."

B.5.2.1 and C.17-C.19 when creative search, novelty, or explore/exploit policy is already central; G.10 or G.11 when shipping or refresh is live

Same-entity rewrite, explanation, and comparative interpretation

  • Route ID: route:same-entity-rewrite-explanation-and-comparative-interpretation
  • Steps: 0
  • First Honest Burden: "We need to restate, explain, render, repair, or compare the same claim-bearing PublicationUnit without quietly changing what it is about."

E.17.AUD.LHR and E.17.AUD.OOTD when pressured-head repair or PublicationUnit stability is live

Temporal claim adequacy under effort, window, and resistance

  • Route ID: route:temporal-claim-adequacy-under-effort-window-and-resistance
  • Steps: 0
  • First Honest Burden: "This should speed up, slow down, recover sooner, stabilize, keep cadence, or improve throughput under a changed effort, tool-use, rollout, or policy."

B.1.4, B.1.6, C.18.1, C.19, C.22.1, C.24, C.25, C.26, C.26.3, or G.9 as the other question requires

Causal-use and counterfactual-support repair

  • Route ID: route:causal-use-and-counterfactual-support-repair
  • Steps: 0
  • First Honest Burden: "We want to say this caused that, this intervention would work, this policy would have prevented harm, this fairness result is causal, or this method is better on a counterfactual benchmark."

C.16 when only a measurement result, score, or interpretation is live; C.27 when only state, rate, or intervention-sensitive temporal adequacy is live; C.26 when the phrase is only a residual quantum-like modeling cue; A.15 or A.3.2 when the question is only method, work-plan, or work-occurrence structure; A.6 when a mixed causal/deontic boundary sentence is split

Quality-read question framing before review or improvement

  • Route ID: route:quality-read-question-framing-before-review-or-improvement
  • Steps: 0
  • First Honest Burden: "Are we asking for blockers to floor, exceptional improvements, trade-off check, missing questions, or absorption impact?"

C.16/A.17-A.19 when characteristic or scale legality is live; E.10/A.6.P/C.2.P/F.18 when wording or names carry FPF force; A.10, B.3, A.21, or A.15 when a quality result is overread as project evidence, assurance, gate, or work authority

Object-under-improvement evaluation setup before improvement

  • Route ID: route:object-under-improvement-evaluation-setup-before-improvement
  • Steps: 0
  • First Honest Burden: "We want to improve something, but we cannot yet say better for whom, by what values, against what cases, or when to stop."

exact object-under-improvement evaluations such as E.21, E.9.DA, E.2.DA, F.18, or C.25 when they already exist; A.17, A.18, and C.16 when characteristic, scale, coordinate, or measurement legality is live; C.18, C.19, G.5, G.9, or G.11 when OEE/NQD semantics are live

Repeated quality-improvement loop

  • Route ID: route:repeated-quality-improvement-loop
  • Steps: 0
  • First Honest Burden: "The object has an evaluation and candidate repairs; now we need repeated read, change, re-read, and stop without treating activity as improvement."

A.19.ECS when the evaluation is missing or inadequate; C.19/G.5 when proposal or candidate-pool selection is live; A.10, B.3, A.20, A.21, or A.15 when the loop result is overread as evidence, assurance, decision, gate, or work

Evaluation CharacteristicSpace FPF pattern publication form

  • Route ID: route:evaluation-characteristicspace-fpf-pattern-publication-form
  • Steps: 0
  • First Honest Burden: "We already have or are constructing a reusable evaluation characteristic space, and the question is how to publish it as an FPF pattern without losing usability."

E.22 and E.23 when the published evaluation is used for quality reads or improvement loops; F.18, E.9.DA, E.2.DA, and C.25 as examples of object-kind-specific evaluations; exact neighbour patterns when evidence, assurance, gate, work, decision, naming, measurement, OEE/NQD, or mathematical-lens claims are live

FPF-level Pillar adequacy and whole-FPF improvement

  • Route ID: route:fpf-level-pillar-adequacy-and-whole-fpf-improvement
  • Steps: 0
  • First Honest Burden: "We are improving FPF as a corpus, release candidate, pattern cluster, or language ecology, not only one pattern or one DRR."

E.21 when the object under improvement is one pattern version; E.9.DA when it is one DRR decision-adequacy claim; F.18 when lexical quality is live; J.4 when discoverability is the active entry question

Pattern-quality stop, repair, and non-scalar improvement

  • Route ID: route:pattern-quality-stop-repair-and-non-scalar-improvement
  • Steps: 0
  • First Honest Burden: "We have a pattern draft or update, but we are arguing whether it is good enough, what still blocks use, or whether improvement can stop without turning quality into one score."

C.16/A.17-A.19 when measurement or characteristic legality is live; F.18 when durable naming is live; C.2.P when epistemic precision repair changes recognition or action guidance; E.17.AUD when publication/projection stability is live; project-side evidence, assurance, gate, work, or release patterns when pattern quality is being overread as project approval

DRR decision adequacy before authoring

  • Route ID: route:drr-decision-adequacy-before-authoring
  • Steps: 0
  • First Honest Burden: "Can I draft from this DRR without inventing missing FPF decisions, receiving-locus requirements, source-use payload, or accepted-decision carry-through?"

E.21 when the object version under quality read is an authored FPF pattern version; E.19 when the live question is admission or refresh review; A.10, B.3, A.21, or A.15 when the claim is project evidence, assurance, gate, or work; C.16/A.17-A.19 when measurement or scale legality is live

Last Updated: 2026-05-31 — upstream FPF commit 16cd3138 (github.com/ailev/FPF)