Stability review

You are running the quarterly stability review for the design-ai knowledge corpus.

Step 1 — Generate the report¶

Run:

python3 tools/audit/stability-review.py --output docs/STABILITY-REVIEW.md

This produces docs/STABILITY-REVIEW.md with: - Summary by stability level (stable / beta / experimental / deprecated). - Promotion candidates (experimental → stable after 6mo; beta → stable after 3mo). - Stable files due for re-review (≥ 12 months old). - Deprecated files awaiting removal in next major. - Files missing the stability metadata.

Step 2 — Read the report and summarize for the user¶

Read the generated docs/STABILITY-REVIEW.md and summarize:

Stability review summary:
- N files at stable, M at beta, K at experimental, J at deprecated.
- Promotion candidates: X experimental → stable, Y beta → stable.
- Re-review needed: Z stable files > 12 months old.
- Action items: ...

Step 3 — Suggest the next bulk operation (don't run it without confirmation)¶

If there are promotion candidates, offer to run:

python3 tools/migrations/promote-stability.py --from <level> --to stable <files...>

If there are stale stable files, offer to run:

python3 tools/migrations/bump-last-updated.py <files...>

Both tools support --dry-run. Always dry-run first; ask the user to confirm before applying.

Step 4 — Document the outcome¶

After the user confirms changes, suggest a CHANGELOG entry:

### Stability review (Q<N> <YYYY>)
- Promoted to stable: <list>
- Reviewed + bumped: N files

Reference¶

Full ritual documentation: docs/CONTRIBUTING.md "Quarterly stability review"
Tools:
tools/audit/stability-review.py
tools/migrations/promote-stability.py
tools/migrations/bump-last-updated.py

Verification phase (run before declaring done)¶

Did I run stability-review.py and read the output?
Did I summarize the report for the user (counts + action items)?
Did I dry-run any bulk operation before applying?
Did I get user confirmation before running mutation commands?
Did I propose a CHANGELOG entry for the changes?