Nw Shared Artifact Tracking

Shared Artifact Tracking

Purpose

Shared artifacts are data values appearing in multiple places across a journey. Every ${variable} must have a single source of truth and documented consumers. Untracked artifacts are the primary cause of horizontal integration failures.

Artifact Registry Schema

shared_artifacts:
  {artifact_name}:
    source_of_truth: "{canonical file path}"
    consumers: ["{list of places this value appears}"]
    owner: "{responsible feature/component}"
    integration_risk: "HIGH|MEDIUM|LOW - {explanation}"
    validation: "{How to verify consistency}"

Common Artifact Patterns

Version

Source: pyproject.toml | Consumers: CLI --version, about command, README, install output

Risk: HIGH -- version mismatch breaks user trust

Install Path

Source: config/paths.yaml or constants.py | Consumers: install script, uninstall script, documentation

Risk: HIGH -- path mismatch breaks installation

Repository URL

Source: pyproject.toml or config | Consumers: README, error messages, install docs

Risk: MEDIUM -- URL mismatch breaks external links

Configuration Values

Source: config file or environment variable | Consumers: runtime behavior, documentation, defaults display

Risk: MEDIUM -- inconsistency causes confusion

Command Names

Source: CLI argument parser definition | Consumers: help text, documentation, error messages, tutorials

Risk: HIGH -- name mismatch makes features undiscoverable

Integration Validation

Consistency Check Process

• List all shared artifacts from journey schema
• For each artifact, verify source of truth exists
• For each consumer, verify it references correct source
• Flag any artifact without documented source
• Flag any consumer that hardcodes instead of referencing source

Validation Questions

• "Does every ${variable} in TUI mockups have a documented source?"
• "If the version changes, would all consumers automatically update?"
• "Are there hardcoded values that should reference a shared artifact?"
• "Do any two steps display the same data from different sources?"

Quality Gates

Journey completeness: all steps have clear goals | CLI commands/actions | emotional annotations | shared artifacts tracked | integration checkpoints defined

Emotional coherence: emotional arc defined (start/middle/end) | no jarring transitions | confidence builds progressively | error states guide to resolution

Horizontal integration: all shared artifacts have single source of truth | all consumers documented | integration checkpoints validate consistency | CLI vocabulary consistent

CLI UX compliance: command structure follows chosen pattern | help available on all commands | progressive disclosure implemented | error messages actionable

Handoff Specifications

To Requirements Crafting (internal handoff within Luna)

Artifacts: docs/feature/{feature-id}/discuss/journey-{name}.yaml (complete journey with emotional arc) | docs/feature/{feature-id}/discuss/shared-artifacts-registry.md (tracked artifacts with sources)

Validation: journey complete with all steps | emotional arc defined | shared artifacts documented | CLI vocabulary consistent

To Acceptance Designer (Quinn)

Deliverables: docs/feature/{feature-id}/discuss/journey-{name}.yaml (journey schema) | docs/feature/{feature-id}/discuss/journey-{name}.feature (Gherkin scenarios) | docs/feature/{feature-id}/discuss/shared-artifacts-registry.md (integration validation points)

Validation: all product-owner checks passed | Gherkin scenarios generated | integration checkpoints testable | peer review approved