.specify/memory/constitution.md

@@ -0,0 +1,57 @@
+<!--
+SYNC IMPACT REPORT
+Version: 1.0.0 (Initial Ratification)
+Changes:
+- Established Core Principles based on Semantic Code Generation Protocol.
+- Defined Causal Validity, Immutability, Format Compliance, DbC, and Belief State Logging.
+- Added Section: File Structure Standards.
+- Added Section: Generation Workflow.
+Templates Status:
+- .specify/templates/plan-template.md: ✅ Aligned (Constitution Check section refers to constitution).
+- .specify/templates/spec-template.md: ✅ Aligned (Requirements section allows for functional constraints).
+- .specify/templates/tasks-template.md: ✅ Aligned (Supports contract/test-first workflow).
+-->
+# Semantic Code Generation Constitution
+
+## Core Principles
+
+### I. Causal Validity (Contracts First)
+Semantic definitions (Contracts) must ALWAYS precede implementation code. Logic is downstream of definition. We define the structure and constraints (`[DEF]`, `@PRE`, `@POST`) before writing the executable logic. This ensures that the "what" and "why" govern the "how".
+
+### II. Immutability of Architecture
+Once defined, architectural decisions in the Module Header (`@LAYER`, `@INVARIANT`, `@CONSTRAINT`) are treated as immutable constraints for that module. Changes to these require an explicit refactoring step, not ad-hoc modification during implementation.
+
+### III. Semantic Format Compliance
+All output must strictly follow the `[DEF]` / `[/DEF]` anchor syntax with specific Metadata Tags (`@KEY`) and Graph Relations (`@RELATION`). This structure is non-negotiable as it ensures the codebase remains machine-readable, fractal-structured, and optimized for Sparse Attention navigation by AI agents.
+
+### IV. Design by Contract (DbC)
+Contracts are the Source of Truth. Functions and Classes must define their purpose, specifications, and constraints (`@PRE`, `@POST`, `@THROW`) in the metadata block before implementation. Implementation must strictly satisfy these contracts.
+
+### V. Belief State Logging
+Logs must define the agent's internal state for debugging and coherence checks. We use a strict format: `logger.level(f"[{ANCHOR_ID}][{STATE}] {MESSAGE} context={...}")` to track transitions between `Entry`, `Validation`, `Action`, and `Coherence` states.
+
+## File Structure Standards
+Every `.py` file must start with a Module definition header (`[DEF:module_name:Module]`) containing:
+- `@SEMANTICS`: Keywords for vector search.
+- `@PURPOSE`: Primary responsibility of the module.
+- `@LAYER`: Architecture layer (Domain/Infra/UI).
+- `@RELATION`: Dependencies.
+- `@INVARIANT` & `@CONSTRAINT`: Immutable rules.
+- `@PUBLIC_API`: Exported symbols.
+
+## Generation Workflow
+The development process follows a strict sequence:
+1. **Analyze Request**: Identify target module and graph position.
+2. **Define Structure**: Generate `[DEF]` anchors and Contracts FIRST.
+3. **Implement Logic**: Write code satisfying Contracts.
+4. **Validate**: If logic conflicts with Contract -> Stop -> Report Error.
+
+## Governance
+This Constitution establishes the "Semantic Code Generation Protocol" as the supreme law of this repository.
+
+- **Automated Enforcement**: All code generation tools and agents must parse and validate adherence to the `[DEF]` syntax and Contract requirements.
+- **Amendments**: Changes to the syntax or core principles require a formal amendment to this Constitution and a corresponding update to the constitution
+- **Review**: Code reviews must verify that implementation matches the preceding contracts and that no "naked code" exists outside of semantic anchors.
+- **Compliance**: Failure to adhere to the `[DEF]` / `[/DEF]` structure constitutes a build failure.
+
+**Version**: 1.0.0 | **Ratified**: 2025-12-19 | **Last Amended**: 2025-12-19

.specify/templates/plan-template.md

@@ -0,0 +1,107 @@
+# Implementation Plan: [FEATURE]
+
+**Branch**: `[###-feature-name]` | **Date**: [DATE] | **Spec**: [link]
+**Input**: Feature specification from `/specs/[###-feature-name]/spec.md`
+
+**Note**: This template is filled in by the `/speckit.plan` command. See `.specify/templates/commands/plan.md` for the execution workflow.
+
+## Summary
+
+[Extract from feature spec: primary requirement + technical approach from research]
+
+## Technical Context
+
+<!--
+  ACTION REQUIRED: Replace the content in this section with the technical details
+  for the project. The structure here is presented in advisory capacity to guide
+  the iteration process.
+-->
+
+**Language/Version**: [e.g., Python 3.11, Swift 5.9, Rust 1.75 or NEEDS CLARIFICATION]  
+**Primary Dependencies**: [e.g., FastAPI, UIKit, LLVM or NEEDS CLARIFICATION]  
+**Storage**: [if applicable, e.g., PostgreSQL, CoreData, files or N/A]  
+**Testing**: [e.g., pytest, XCTest, cargo test or NEEDS CLARIFICATION]  
+**Target Platform**: [e.g., Linux server, iOS 15+, WASM or NEEDS CLARIFICATION]
+**Project Type**: [single/web/mobile - determines source structure]  
+**Performance Goals**: [domain-specific, e.g., 1000 req/s, 10k lines/sec, 60 fps or NEEDS CLARIFICATION]  
+**Constraints**: [domain-specific, e.g., <200ms p95, <100MB memory, offline-capable or NEEDS CLARIFICATION]  
+**Scale/Scope**: [domain-specific, e.g., 10k users, 1M LOC, 50 screens or NEEDS CLARIFICATION]
+
+## Constitution Check
+
+*GATE: Must pass before Phase 0 research. Re-check after Phase 1 design.*
+
+- [ ] **Causal Validity**: Do all planned modules have defined Contracts (inputs/outputs/invariants) before implementation logic?
+- [ ] **Immutability**: Are architectural layers and constraints defined in Module Headers?
+- [ ] **Format Compliance**: Does the plan ensure all code will be wrapped in `[DEF]` anchors?
+- [ ] **Belief State**: Is logging planned to follow the `Entry` -> `Validation` -> `Action` -> `Coherence` state transition model?
+
+## Project Structure
+
+### Documentation (this feature)
+
+```text
+specs/[###-feature]/
+├── plan.md              # This file (/speckit.plan command output)
+├── research.md          # Phase 0 output (/speckit.plan command)
+├── data-model.md        # Phase 1 output (/speckit.plan command)
+├── quickstart.md        # Phase 1 output (/speckit.plan command)
+├── contracts/           # Phase 1 output (/speckit.plan command)
+└── tasks.md             # Phase 2 output (/speckit.tasks command - NOT created by /speckit.plan)
+```
+
+### Source Code (repository root)
+<!--
+  ACTION REQUIRED: Replace the placeholder tree below with the concrete layout
+  for this feature. Delete unused options and expand the chosen structure with
+  real paths (e.g., apps/admin, packages/something). The delivered plan must
+  not include Option labels.
+-->
+
+```text
+# [REMOVE IF UNUSED] Option 1: Single project (DEFAULT)
+src/
+├── models/
+├── services/
+├── cli/
+└── lib/
+
+tests/
+├── contract/
+├── integration/
+└── unit/
+
+# [REMOVE IF UNUSED] Option 2: Web application (when "frontend" + "backend" detected)
+backend/
+├── src/
+│   ├── models/
+│   ├── services/
+│   └── api/
+└── tests/
+
+frontend/
+├── src/
+│   ├── components/
+│   ├── pages/
+│   └── services/
+└── tests/
+
+# [REMOVE IF UNUSED] Option 3: Mobile + API (when "iOS/Android" detected)
+api/
+└── [same as backend above]
+
+ios/ or android/
+└── [platform-specific structure: feature modules, UI flows, platform tests]
+```
+
+**Structure Decision**: [Document the selected structure and reference the real
+directories captured above]
+
+## Complexity Tracking
+
+> **Fill ONLY if Constitution Check has violations that must be justified**
+
+| Violation | Why Needed | Simpler Alternative Rejected Because |
+|-----------|------------|-------------------------------------|
+| [e.g., 4th project] | [current need] | [why 3 projects insufficient] |
+| [e.g., Repository pattern] | [specific problem] | [why direct DB access insufficient] |

.specify/templates/spec-template.md

@@ -0,0 +1,121 @@
+# Feature Specification: [FEATURE NAME]
+
+**Feature Branch**: `[###-feature-name]`  
+**Created**: [DATE]  
+**Status**: Draft  
+**Input**: User description: "$ARGUMENTS"
+
+## User Scenarios & Testing *(mandatory)*
+
+<!--
+  IMPORTANT: User stories should be PRIORITIZED as user journeys ordered by importance.
+  Each user story/journey must be INDEPENDENTLY TESTABLE - meaning if you implement just ONE of them,
+  you should still have a viable MVP (Minimum Viable Product) that delivers value.
+  
+  Assign priorities (P1, P2, P3, etc.) to each story, where P1 is the most critical.
+  Think of each story as a standalone slice of functionality that can be:
+  - Developed independently
+  - Tested independently
+  - Deployed independently
+  - Demonstrated to users independently
+-->
+
+### User Story 1 - [Brief Title] (Priority: P1)
+
+[Describe this user journey in plain language]
+
+**Why this priority**: [Explain the value and why it has this priority level]
+
+**Independent Test**: [Describe how this can be tested independently - e.g., "Can be fully tested by [specific action] and delivers [specific value]"]
+
+**Acceptance Scenarios**:
+
+1. **Given** [initial state], **When** [action], **Then** [expected outcome]
+2. **Given** [initial state], **When** [action], **Then** [expected outcome]
+
+---
+
+### User Story 2 - [Brief Title] (Priority: P2)
+
+[Describe this user journey in plain language]
+
+**Why this priority**: [Explain the value and why it has this priority level]
+
+**Independent Test**: [Describe how this can be tested independently]
+
+**Acceptance Scenarios**:
+
+1. **Given** [initial state], **When** [action], **Then** [expected outcome]
+
+---
+
+### User Story 3 - [Brief Title] (Priority: P3)
+
+[Describe this user journey in plain language]
+
+**Why this priority**: [Explain the value and why it has this priority level]
+
+**Independent Test**: [Describe how this can be tested independently]
+
+**Acceptance Scenarios**:
+
+1. **Given** [initial state], **When** [action], **Then** [expected outcome]
+
+---
+
+[Add more user stories as needed, each with an assigned priority]
+
+### Edge Cases
+
+<!--
+  ACTION REQUIRED: The content in this section represents placeholders.
+  Fill them out with the right edge cases.
+-->
+
+- What happens when [boundary condition]?
+- How does system handle [error scenario]?
+
+## Requirements *(mandatory)*
+
+<!--
+  ACTION REQUIRED: The content in this section represents placeholders.
+  Fill them out with the right functional requirements.
+-->
+
+### Functional Requirements
+
+- **FR-001**: System MUST [specific capability, e.g., "allow users to create accounts"]
+- **FR-002**: System MUST [specific capability, e.g., "validate email addresses"]  
+- **FR-003**: Users MUST be able to [key interaction, e.g., "reset their password"]
+- **FR-004**: System MUST [data requirement, e.g., "persist user preferences"]
+- **FR-005**: System MUST [behavior, e.g., "log all security events"]
+
+*Example of marking unclear requirements:*
+
+- **FR-006**: System MUST authenticate users via [NEEDS CLARIFICATION: auth method not specified - email/password, SSO, OAuth?]
+- **FR-007**: System MUST retain user data for [NEEDS CLARIFICATION: retention period not specified]
+
+### System Invariants (Constitution Check)
+*Define immutable constraints that will become `@INVARIANT` or `@CONSTRAINT` tags in Module Headers.*
+
+- **INV-001**: [e.g., "No direct database access from UI layer"]
+- **INV-002**: [e.g., "All financial calculations must use Decimal type"]
+
+### Key Entities *(include if feature involves data)*
+
+- **[Entity 1]**: [What it represents, key attributes without implementation]
+- **[Entity 2]**: [What it represents, relationships to other entities]
+
+## Success Criteria *(mandatory)*
+
+<!--
+  ACTION REQUIRED: Define measurable success criteria.
+  These must be technology-agnostic and measurable.
+-->
+
+### Measurable Outcomes
+
+- **SC-001**: [Measurable metric, e.g., "Users can complete account creation in under 2 minutes"]
+- **SC-002**: [Measurable metric, e.g., "System handles 1000 concurrent users without degradation"]
+- **SC-003**: [User satisfaction metric, e.g., "90% of users successfully complete primary task on first attempt"]
+- **SC-004**: [Business metric, e.g., "Reduce support tickets related to [X] by 50%"]

.specify/templates/tasks-template.md

@@ -0,0 +1,251 @@
+---
+
+description: "Task list template for feature implementation"
+---
+
+# Tasks: [FEATURE NAME]
+
+**Input**: Design documents from `/specs/[###-feature-name]/`
+**Prerequisites**: plan.md (required), spec.md (required for user stories), research.md, data-model.md, contracts/
+
+**Tests**: The examples below include test tasks. Tests are OPTIONAL - only include them if explicitly requested in the feature specification.
+
+**Organization**: Tasks are grouped by user story to enable independent implementation and testing of each story.
+
+## Format: `[ID] [P?] [Story] Description`
+
+- **[P]**: Can run in parallel (different files, no dependencies)
+- **[Story]**: Which user story this task belongs to (e.g., US1, US2, US3)
+- Include exact file paths in descriptions
+
+## Path Conventions
+
+- **Single project**: `src/`, `tests/` at repository root
+- **Web app**: `backend/src/`, `frontend/src/`
+- **Mobile**: `api/src/`, `ios/src/` or `android/src/`
+- Paths shown below assume single project - adjust based on plan.md structure
+
+<!-- 
+  ============================================================================
+  IMPORTANT: The tasks below are SAMPLE TASKS for illustration purposes only.
+  
+  The /speckit.tasks command MUST replace these with actual tasks based on:
+  - User stories from spec.md (with their priorities P1, P2, P3...)
+  - Feature requirements from plan.md
+  - Entities from data-model.md
+  - Endpoints from contracts/
+  
+  Tasks MUST be organized by user story so each story can be:
+  - Implemented independently
+  - Tested independently
+  - Delivered as an MVP increment
+  
+  DO NOT keep these sample tasks in the generated tasks.md file.
+  ============================================================================
+-->
+
+## Phase 1: Setup (Shared Infrastructure)
+
+**Purpose**: Project initialization and basic structure
+
+- [ ] T001 Create project structure per implementation plan
+- [ ] T002 Initialize [language] project with [framework] dependencies
+- [ ] T003 [P] Configure linting and formatting tools
+
+---
+
+## Phase 2: Foundational (Blocking Prerequisites)
+
+**Purpose**: Core infrastructure that MUST be complete before ANY user story can be implemented
+
+**⚠️ CRITICAL**: No user story work can begin until this phase is complete
+
+Examples of foundational tasks (adjust based on your project):
+
+- [ ] T004 Setup database schema and migrations framework
+- [ ] T005 [P] Implement authentication/authorization framework
+- [ ] T006 [P] Setup API routing and middleware structure
+- [ ] T007 Create base models/entities that all stories depend on
+- [ ] T008 Configure error handling and logging infrastructure
+- [ ] T009 Setup environment configuration management
+
+**Checkpoint**: Foundation ready - user story implementation can now begin in parallel
+
+---
+
+## Phase 3: User Story 1 - [Title] (Priority: P1) 🎯 MVP
+
+**Goal**: [Brief description of what this story delivers]
+
+**Independent Test**: [How to verify this story works on its own]
+
+### Tests for User Story 1 (OPTIONAL - only if tests requested) ⚠️
+
+> **NOTE: Write these tests FIRST, ensure they FAIL before implementation**
+
+- [ ] T010 [P] [US1] Contract test for [endpoint] in tests/contract/test_[name].py
+- [ ] T011 [P] [US1] Integration test for [user journey] in tests/integration/test_[name].py
+
+### Implementation for User Story 1
+
+- [ ] T012 [P] [US1] Define [Entity1] Module Header & Contracts in src/models/[entity1].py
+- [ ] T013 [P] [US1] Implement [Entity1] logic satisfying contracts
+- [ ] T014 [P] [US1] Define [Service] Module Header & Contracts in src/services/[service].py
+- [ ] T015 [US1] Implement [Service] logic satisfying contracts (depends on T012)
+- [ ] T016 [US1] Define [endpoint] Contracts & Logic in src/[location]/[file].py
+- [ ] T017 [US1] Verify `[DEF]` syntax and Belief State logging compliance
+
+**Checkpoint**: At this point, User Story 1 should be fully functional and testable independently
+
+---
+
+## Phase 4: User Story 2 - [Title] (Priority: P2)
+
+**Goal**: [Brief description of what this story delivers]
+
+**Independent Test**: [How to verify this story works on its own]
+
+### Tests for User Story 2 (OPTIONAL - only if tests requested) ⚠️
+
+- [ ] T018 [P] [US2] Contract test for [endpoint] in tests/contract/test_[name].py
+- [ ] T019 [P] [US2] Integration test for [user journey] in tests/integration/test_[name].py
+
+### Implementation for User Story 2
+
+- [ ] T020 [P] [US2] Define [Entity] Module Header & Contracts in src/models/[entity].py
+- [ ] T021 [P] [US2] Implement [Entity] logic satisfying contracts
+- [ ] T022 [US2] Define [Service] Module Header & Contracts in src/services/[service].py
+- [ ] T023 [US2] Implement [Service] logic satisfying contracts
+
+**Checkpoint**: At this point, User Stories 1 AND 2 should both work independently
+
+---
+
+## Phase 5: User Story 3 - [Title] (Priority: P3)
+
+**Goal**: [Brief description of what this story delivers]
+
+**Independent Test**: [How to verify this story works on its own]
+
+### Tests for User Story 3 (OPTIONAL - only if tests requested) ⚠️
+
+- [ ] T024 [P] [US3] Contract test for [endpoint] in tests/contract/test_[name].py
+- [ ] T025 [P] [US3] Integration test for [user journey] in tests/integration/test_[name].py
+
+### Implementation for User Story 3
+
+- [ ] T026 [P] [US3] Define [Entity] Module Header & Contracts in src/models/[entity].py
+- [ ] T027 [US3] Define [Service] Module Header & Contracts in src/services/[service].py
+- [ ] T028 [US3] Implement logic for [Entity] and [Service] satisfying contracts
+
+**Checkpoint**: All user stories should now be independently functional
+
+---
+
+[Add more user story phases as needed, following the same pattern]
+
+---
+
+## Phase N: Polish & Cross-Cutting Concerns
+
+**Purpose**: Improvements that affect multiple user stories
+
+- [ ] TXXX [P] Documentation updates in docs/
+- [ ] TXXX Code cleanup and refactoring
+- [ ] TXXX Performance optimization across all stories
+- [ ] TXXX [P] Additional unit tests (if requested) in tests/unit/
+- [ ] TXXX Security hardening
+- [ ] TXXX Run quickstart.md validation
+
+---
+
+## Dependencies & Execution Order
+
+### Phase Dependencies
+
+- **Setup (Phase 1)**: No dependencies - can start immediately
+- **Foundational (Phase 2)**: Depends on Setup completion - BLOCKS all user stories
+- **User Stories (Phase 3+)**: All depend on Foundational phase completion
+  - User stories can then proceed in parallel (if staffed)
+  - Or sequentially in priority order (P1 → P2 → P3)
+- **Polish (Final Phase)**: Depends on all desired user stories being complete
+
+### User Story Dependencies
+
+- **User Story 1 (P1)**: Can start after Foundational (Phase 2) - No dependencies on other stories
+- **User Story 2 (P2)**: Can start after Foundational (Phase 2) - May integrate with US1 but should be independently testable
+- **User Story 3 (P3)**: Can start after Foundational (Phase 2) - May integrate with US1/US2 but should be independently testable
+
+### Within Each User Story
+
+- Tests (if included) MUST be written and FAIL before implementation
+- Module Headers & Contracts BEFORE Implementation (Causal Validity)
+- Models before services
+- Services before endpoints
+- Story complete before moving to next priority
+
+### Parallel Opportunities
+
+- All Setup tasks marked [P] can run in parallel
+- All Foundational tasks marked [P] can run in parallel (within Phase 2)
+- Once Foundational phase completes, all user stories can start in parallel (if team capacity allows)
+- All tests for a user story marked [P] can run in parallel
+- Models within a story marked [P] can run in parallel
+- Different user stories can be worked on in parallel by different team members
+
+---
+
+## Parallel Example: User Story 1
+
+```bash
+# Launch all tests for User Story 1 together (if tests requested):
+Task: "Contract test for [endpoint] in tests/contract/test_[name].py"
+Task: "Integration test for [user journey] in tests/integration/test_[name].py"
+
+# Launch all contract definitions for User Story 1 together:
+Task: "Define [Entity1] Module Header & Contracts in src/models/[entity1].py"
+Task: "Define [Entity2] Module Header & Contracts in src/models/[entity2].py"
+```
+
+---
+
+## Implementation Strategy
+
+### MVP First (User Story 1 Only)
+
+1. Complete Phase 1: Setup
+2. Complete Phase 2: Foundational (CRITICAL - blocks all stories)
+3. Complete Phase 3: User Story 1
+4. **STOP and VALIDATE**: Test User Story 1 independently
+5. Deploy/demo if ready
+
+### Incremental Delivery
+
+1. Complete Setup + Foundational → Foundation ready
+2. Add User Story 1 → Test independently → Deploy/Demo (MVP!)
+3. Add User Story 2 → Test independently → Deploy/Demo
+4. Add User Story 3 → Test independently → Deploy/Demo
+5. Each story adds value without breaking previous stories
+
+### Parallel Team Strategy
+
+With multiple developers:
+
+1. Team completes Setup + Foundational together
+2. Once Foundational is done:
+   - Developer A: User Story 1
+   - Developer B: User Story 2
+   - Developer C: User Story 3
+3. Stories complete and integrate independently
+
+---
+
+## Notes
+
+- [P] tasks = different files, no dependencies
+- [Story] label maps task to specific user story for traceability
+- Each user story should be independently completable and testable
+- Verify tests fail before implementing
+- Commit after each task or logical group
+- Stop at any checkpoint to validate story independently
+- Avoid: vague tasks, same file conflicts, cross-story dependencies that break independence

README.md

@@ -97,7 +97,10 @@ python run_mapper.py --source=excel --dataset-id=286 --excel-path=H:\dev\ss-tool
 Логи пишутся в файл в директории `Logs` (например, `P:\Superset\010 Бекапы\Logs` для резервных копий) и выводятся в консоль. Уровень логирования по умолчанию — `INFO`.
 
 ## Разработка и вклад
-- Следуйте архитектурным паттернам (`[MODULE]`, `[CONTRACT]`, `[SECTION]`, `[ANCHOR]`) и правилам логирования.
+- Следуйте **Semantic Code Generation Protocol** (см. `semantic_protocol.md`):
-- Весь новый код должен соответствовать принципам "LLM-friendly" генерации.
+    - Все определения обернуты в `[DEF]...[/DEF]`.
+    - Контракты (`@PRE`, `@POST`) определяются ДО реализации.
+    - Строгая типизация и иммутабельность архитектурных решений.
+- Соблюдайте Конституцию проекта (`.specify/memory/constitution.md`).
 - Используйте `Pydantic`-модели для валидации данных.
 - Реализуйте всестороннюю обработку ошибок с помощью пользовательских исключений.