fix: correct fabricated contract/workflow JSON shapes on concepts page - #45
Merged
Conversation
The contract.json anatomy example used a flat "wasm32-wasi"/function-
name entrypoint and top-level inputs/outputs instead of the real
CapabilityContract shape (nested inputs.schema/outputs.schema, an
entrypoint object, top-level emits/consumes), and omitted precondi-
tions/postconditions entirely despite the surrounding prose naming
them as the core concept.
The workflow definition excerpt was worse: a graph.capabilities +
terminal_conditions shape that doesn't exist anywhere in the real
runtime. The actual schema is nodes/edges/start_node/terminal_nodes,
verified against workflows/examples/expedition/plan-expedition/
workflow.json in traverse-framework/traverse. This fabricated shape
was traced back as the likely source of an AI agent independently
inventing the same wrong schema when asked to build a Traverse
workflow without more accurate reference material.
Also fixes a stale placement-targets claim ("only local is fully
implemented") that predates the browser embedder SDK shipping.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary
docs/concepts.astro's two illustrative JSON examples didn't match the real runtime schema:"binary_format": "wasm32-wasi"/"entrypoint": "function_name"and top-levelinputs/outputs, instead of the realCapabilityContractshape ("wasm"binary format, anentrypointobject,inputs.schema/outputs.schemanesting, top-levelemits/consumes). It also never showedpreconditions/postconditionsat all, despite the surrounding prose naming them as the whole point of a contract.graph.capabilities+terminal_conditionsshape that doesn't exist anywhere in the real runtime. The actual schema isnodes/edges/start_node/terminal_nodes, verified against the realworkflows/examples/expedition/plan-expedition/workflow.jsonintraverse-framework/traverse. This fabricated shape is the likely source of an AI agent independently inventing the identical wrong schema when asked to build a Traverse workflow with only this page as reference.Also fixes a stale placement-targets claim ("only
localis fully implemented") that predates the browser embedder SDK shipping — see/platforms.html.Test plan
npm run build— 86 pages, no errors"kind": "workflow_definition","start_node"present) and the new/platforms.htmllink resolves correctlywasm32-wasistring in the file