experiment: separate current principles from architectural aspirations

docs/design-evolution-log.md

@@ -1891,3 +1891,64 @@ Fixture data is defined in `tests/e2e/fixtures/investigation-scenarios.js`. The
 ### Status
 
 Pending Rob's review. Both new documents contain all original content. Branch `feature/user-workspace-ux-v0.7` is clean after commit. Engine and UI experiments remain paused.
+
+## Experiment 32 — Separate Current Principles From Aspirational Architecture
+
+**Branch:** `feature/user-workspace-ux-v0.7`
+
+### Hypothesis
+
+A short current-principles document can guide normal work while the original architectural-principles document remains available as the fuller historical and aspirational source. This should reduce ambiguity without deleting or rewriting the original reasoning.
+
+### Source Documents Used
+
+- `docs/current-project-state.md` — What the Confidence Engine Is; Current Engine Capabilities; Context Loading Guide
+- `.claude/architecture-guardrails.md` — entire file (77 lines)
+- `docs/document-role-review.md` — Architectural Principles Review (§2) and Recommended Actions (§4)
+- `docs/architectural-principles.md` — headings and the 14 principles only
+- `docs/03_Confidence_Engine_Language_Guide.md` — guiding principles only
+- `docs/current-implementation-verification.md` — Active Capabilities; Passive or Isolated Capabilities
+- Experiment 31 entry in `docs/design-evolution-log.md` (lines 1811–1893)
+
+### Principles Included
+
+**User Experience (5):** System carries complexity; steps are small enough to understand or investigate; engine guides without pretending certainty; first input is the hardest step; users may know answer/who to ask/where to look/how to test.
+
+**Reasoning (5):** Resolved question ≠ established condition; evidence supports/contradicts/informs; present evidence does not settle future feasibility; uncertainty stated honestly; deterministic contracts separate from language interpretation.
+
+**Building the System (6):** Build smallest thing that can be wrong; use evidence before architecture; every layer has one responsibility where applicable; presentation does not invent facts; current and aspirational labelled separately; load only needed context.
+
+Total: 16 current principles, organized into three sections.
+
+### Aspirational Material Deliberately Excluded
+
+From `docs/architectural-principles.md`: P2 (Information Flows Downward — unresolved), P5 (Behaviour Never Reasons — aspirational), P7 (Assessment Never Generates Evidence — mixed), P9 (Assessment Describes Never Prescribes — mixed), P10 (Convergence Over Single Signals — aspirational), P11 (Assessment Is Stateful Across Turns — mixed/aspirational), P12 (Uncertainty About Assessment Is Itself Assessable — aspirational), P13 (Investigation Progress Is Qualitative Not Quantitative — mixed/aspirational). These remain in the original document for broader architectural review.
+
+### Practical Principles-Test Result
+
+**Task:** A developer proposes making every resolved question automatically increase confidence and close its related condition. Explain whether this fits current principles and why.
+
+**Response from reduced context (current-project-state + current-working-principles + architecture-guardrails):**
+
+1. **Resolving a question does not establish a condition.** current-working-principles §2 states: "A resolved question is not an established condition." Answer evidence must be inspected before any conclusion follows.
+2. **Answer evidence must be inspected.** current-working-principles §2 states direction alone (support/contradict/inform) is insufficient without checking subject, timeframe, and claim type alignment.
+3. **Confidence should not be manufactured.** architecture-guardrails invariants state "Confidence must not outrun evidence or completeness" and "Duplicate evidence must not increase confidence." current-project-state section 4 confirms: resolving a question does not automatically establish the condition.
+4. **Passive experimental logic is not automatically active behaviour.** current-project-state section 3 classifies passive classifiers (including decision-condition status evaluation) as diagnostic_only or isolated — they do not yet control the user-facing investigation.
+
+**Was the three-document context sufficient?** Yes. All four points were answerable from `docs/current-working-principles.md` (principles §2), `.claude/architecture-guardrails.md` (reasoning invariants), and `docs/current-project-state.md` (section 3 passive classifier classification, section 4 what experiments established). No experiment history or source code was required.
+
+### Unresolved Ambiguities
+
+- The boundary between "current" and "aspirational" for P7 and P9 is inherently subjective; future sessions may interpret differently without the original document's reasoning context.
+- Some principles overlap with `.claude/architecture-guardrails.md` (e.g., "every layer has one responsibility" overlaps with guardrails' exhaustive prohibition list). No duplication was introduced deliberately, but a cross-reference could reduce redundancy in a future iteration.
+- The aspirational note points readers to the original document but does not provide a quick reference for which of the 14 principles are current versus aspirational. A summary table might be useful when architecture work resumes.
+
+### Status
+
+Pending Rob's review. No source code or tests changed. Engine and UI experiments remain paused. No files moved or deleted. Only documentation files were created or updated.
+
+### Return-to-Work Note (80–150 words)
+
+Current principles now live in `docs/current-working-principles.md`. This short document contains only guidance supported by verified implementation, current project direction, and established product philosophy — organised into three sections: user experience, reasoning, and building the system. Broader and aspirational architecture remains in `docs/architectural-principles.md` as a task-specific reference; it has not been rewritten or deleted. Future sessions should use `docs/current-working-principles.md` by default for product and reasoning work. Engine and UI experiments remain paused after Experiment 25B. Branch: `feature/user-workspace-ux-v0.7`. First file to inspect when resuming: `docs/current-project-state.md`, then `docs/current-working-principles.md` for current guidance.
+
+---