docs: expand .cards — vision, comparisons, business rationale, open questions
CI / check (pull_request) Successful in 2m21s
CI / check (pull_request) Successful in 2m21s
26 cards covering: - Project philosophy (session isolation, process discipline, dissipative structure) - Comparisons (vs skill, vs dynamic workflow) - Business rationale (FTE vs vendor, OPC, switching cost) - Learning model (memory + skill + workflow) - Self-improvement (reflective workflow, eval) - Open questions (workflow granularity, human-in-the-loop)
This commit is contained in:
@@ -0,0 +1,23 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
title: "Trust Chain — Auditable → Evaluable → Reusable → Improvable"
|
||||
created: "2026-06-07"
|
||||
source: "openclaw-xiaomo"
|
||||
tags: [architecture, pattern, decision]
|
||||
category: "architecture"
|
||||
links:
|
||||
- workflow-as-improvable-system
|
||||
- uwf-vs-dynamic-workflow
|
||||
- process-discipline-from-software-engineering
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
可审查、可评估、可复用不是并列的好处,而是一条因果链:
|
||||
|
||||
**可审查 → 可评估 → 可复用 → 可迭代**
|
||||
|
||||
不能审查的东西不敢复用——不知道它为什么 work,换个场景可能就 break。不能评估的东西不知道该不该复用——也许它其实没用,只是恰好那次任务简单。
|
||||
|
||||
这是一条信任链,每一环是下一环的前提。uwf 选择声明式 YAML 而不是 JS/TS 定义 workflow,不是技术限制,是有意降低审查门槛,让这条链的摩擦力最低。
|
||||
|
||||
dw 不是不能做这些,而是它的默认路径不鼓励这条链——即兴生成的脚本,审查成本高、评估缺乏对照、复用需要额外抽象。差异在摩擦力,不在能力边界。
|
||||
|
||||
这也是耗散结构的递归应用——不只是用流程对 agent 做负反馈(提升执行质量),还在对流程本身做负反馈(提升流程质量)。Workflow 和代码一样,需要 review、测试、度量、迭代。
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user