Sustainable operating model

Problem

The context catalog currently operates on ad-hoc processes — no defined support model, no triage cadence for metadata quality issues, and no release process that coordinates changes across the profiling pipeline, MCP tools, and consumer surfaces. As the system scales to more users and contributors, this lack of operational structure will lead to uncoordinated releases that break consumers, unresolved support requests, and no clear ownership of ongoing quality. A sustainable v1.0 product requires documented, repeatable operations — not heroics.

Context

• A launch can succeed briefly even with fuzzy ownership, but context schema/catalog contracts and Nimble enrichment flows across product surfaces will drift quickly without a clear model for maintenance, triage, and decision-making.
• This task is about defining who owns backlog hygiene, review standards, incidents, documentation, and the cadence for future improvements.
• Expected touchpoints include dataface/ai/, context-contract docs, eval wiring, and inspect-derived artifacts, runbooks, planning docs, and team processes that currently rely too heavily on shared memory.

Possible Solutions

• A - Let the current contributors coordinate informally: low overhead, but it becomes brittle as scope and contributors grow.
• B - Recommended: define a lightweight operating model with named owners and cadences: make maintenance, incident response, prioritization, and release decisions explicit.
• C - Centralize all ownership in one person or team indefinitely: clearer in the short term, but usually unsustainable and a bottleneck.

Plan

1. Map the recurring operational decisions around context schema/catalog contracts and Nimble enrichment flows across product surfaces and identify where ownership, handoff, or cadence is currently unclear.
2. Document the operating model: owners, review loops, incident or support handling, documentation upkeep, and backlog-management expectations.
3. Align the model with the actual command/docs/test surfaces that people use day to day so it is operational rather than aspirational.
4. Publish the model in the relevant planning/runbook surfaces and refine it after one real cycle of use.

Implementation Progress

Review Feedback

• [ ] Review cleared