ProposalSAFE
The Agent Harness for AI-Human Collaboration, inspired by the AI-DLC (AI-Driven Development Lifecycle)
Overview
The Agent Harness for AI-Human Collaboration, inspired by the AI-DLC (AI-Driven Development Lifecycle)
3bb5b08404b5OBSERVED · 2026-10-12Host compatibility
What the documentation claims. We have not run a compatibility test.
| Host | Status | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| claude-code | mentioned | |
| openclaw | mentioned |
What it tells the agent
The instruction file, verbatim from the audited commit — this is the text the model reads, and the surface the audit's instruction layer examines. Quoted here so you can judge it without cloning anything.
---
name: proposal
description: Chorus Proposal workflow — create proposals with document and task drafts, manage dependency DAG, validate and submit for review.
license: AGPL-3.0
metadata:
author: chorus
version: "0.22.1"
category: project-management
mcp_server: chorus
---
# Proposal Skill
This skill covers the **Planning** stage of the AI-DLC workflow: creating Proposals that contain document drafts (PRD, tech design) and task drafts with dependency DAGs, then submitting them for Admin review.
> **Tool namespace:** Chorus tools are exposed by the connected MCP server under a `chorus__` prefix on OpenClaw (e.g. `chorus__chorus_pm_create_proposal`). Bare names are used below for readability — prepend `chorus__` when invoking. See `/chorus` for the full rule.
---
## Overview
After an Idea's elaboration is resolved (see `/idea`), the PM Agent creates a Proposal — a container that holds document drafts and task drafts. On Admin approval, these drafts materialize into real Documents and Tasks.
```
Elaboration resolved --> Create Proposal --> Add drafts --> Validate --> Submit --> Reviewer --> Admin /review
```
---
## Tools
**Proposal Management:**
| Tool | Purpose |
|------|---------|
| `chorus_pm_create_proposal` | Create empty proposal container |
| `chorus_pm_validate_proposal` | Validate proposal completeness (returns errors, warnings, info) |
| `chorus_pm_submit_proposal` | Submit proposal for Admin approval (draft -> pending) |
**Document Drafts:**
| Tool | Purpose |
|------|---------|
| `chorus_pm_add_document_draft` | Add document draft to proposal |
| `chorus_pm_update_document_draft` | Update document draft content |
| `chorus_pm_remove_document_draft` | Remove document draft from proposal |
**Task Drafts:**
| Tool | Purpose |
|------|---------|
| `chorus_pm_add_task_draft` | Add task draft (returns draftUuid for dependency chaining) |
| `chorus_pm_update_task_draft` | Update task draft |
| `chorus_pm_remove_task_draft` | Remove task draft from proposal |
**Post-Approval (tasks exist):**
| Tool | Purpose |
|------|---------|
| `chorus_create_tasks` | Batch create tasks (supports intra-batch dependencies via draftUuid) |
| `chorus_pm_assign_task` | Assign a task to a Developer Agent |
| `chorus_pm_create_document` | Create standalone document |
| `chorus_pm_update_document` | Update document content (increments version) |
| `chorus_update_task` (with `addDependsOn` / `removeDependsOn`) | Add or remove task dependencies (with cycle detection) |
**Shared tools** (checkin, query, comment, search, notifications): see `/chorus`
---
## Workflow
### Step 0: Reuse Evidence and Check New Factual Gaps
Read the confirmed input Idea(s) or Documents, current specifications, References and recent context before drafting. Reuse existing findings first; invoke `/research` ([shared rules](../research/SKILL.md)) only for a new factual design gap or explicit user request, subject to explicit skip. Supply the Proposal stage, focused question, existing evidence and budget. Do not automatically repeat Idea research, including on a resumed planning wake; this route also applies to form/MCP-created inputs without a research flag.
If the Proposal does not exist yet, retain candidate source URLs/titles/types in the current context, then include them in `references[]` on the Step 1 `chorus__pm_create_proposal` call when possible. Read `chorus__get_proposal` afterward to obtain actual `references[].uuid`; inline creation returns the container UUID, not individual evidence UUIDs. If it already exists, reuse its evidence or attach new sources via `chorus__add_reference` and take the returned reference `uuid`. Only then write citations such as `[1](ref:<actual-reference-uuid>)` beside supported statements in the design/specifications. Never invent UUIDs or substitute the Proposal UUID.
In OpenSpec/spec-lite modes, resolve the existing spec mode and locator as below, update authoritative local files with findings and real citations, then mirror file bytes using `chorus mcp call ... --arg-file content=<file>` (or the port's existing file-reading wrapper). No hand-typed MCP document `content`; spec-lite's durable `spec.md` remains local-only. Free-form mode keeps its normal draft-saving path. Empty/partial results preserve unknowns and continue preparation. Research does not submit, approve, or bypass revision restrictions; pending/approved proposals retain their existing revision gates. A Tracker research-only instruction returns through the Idea route instead of entering this drafting workflow.
### Step 1: Create an Empty Proposal
**Resolve the spec mode (Step 1.5) BEFORE this create.** In OpenSpec and spec-lite modes the container's `description` MUST carry a locator line (`OpenSpec change slug: <slug>` or `Spec-lite: .chorus/specs/<slug>/<YYYY-MM-DD>-<change-slug>/`), and `description` can only be set at creation — decide the mode + slug/dated-path first and include that line in this single call. Do NOT create a bare container and then realize you needed it. Free-form mode omits any locator line. (OpenClaw has no SessionStart hook — you resolve the mode inline here; see Step 1.5.)
**Recommended approach:** Create the proposal container first (with the mode's locator line in `description` when applicable), then incrementally add document and task drafts one by one.
```
chorus_pm_create_proposal({
projectUuid: "<project-uuid>",
title: "Implement <feature name>",
description: "Analysis and implementation plan for Idea #xxx",
inputType: "idea",
inputUuids: ["<idea-uuid>"]
})
```
**Multiple Ideas:** You can combine multiple ideas into one proposal by passing multiple UUIDs in `inputUuids`.
> **A theme cannot be a proposal input** — `chorus_pm_create_proposal` rejects any input idea with `isContainer = true`. Derive a child idea from the theme and write the proposal on the child instead. (See the theme-ideas section of the `/idea` skill.)
### Step 1.5: Select spec mode
Trust audit
SAFEgrade B · trust 89/100 Nothing in the source contradicts what it says it does. Grade A is reserved for packages that have also passed the behavioural sandbox.
| Layer | What it checks | Result |
|---|---|---|
| L0 | Provenance & inventory | WARN |
| L1 | Static analysis of the code | NA |
| L2 | Instruction surface (what it tells the agent) | PASS |
| L3 | Class-specific surface | PASS |
| L4 | Behavioural (sandbox) | SKIPPED |
What the source does
- Filesystem
- none-observed
- Network
- none-observed
- Shell
- none-observed
- Dependencies
- pinned
- Secrets in source
- none-found
Findings (1)
.agents/skills
Gates applied: no_behavioural_pass.
3bb5b08404b5full audit observations/trust-audit/skill/chorus-aidlc__proposal.json · Report an issue / request a re-scanAudit history
Every audit this skill has had.
| Date | Source | Verdict | Grade | Score | Change |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-10-12 | 3bb5b08404b5 | SAFE | B | 89 | first audit |
Questions
What does the Proposal skill do?
The Agent Harness for AI-Human Collaboration, inspired by the AI-DLC (AI-Driven Development Lifecycle)
Is Proposal safe to install?
The audit found nothing in the source that contradicts what it says it does, and graded it B (89/100). Grade A is held back for packages that have also passed a sandboxed behavioural run, which is why a clean skill reads B.
What can Proposal access on my machine?
The audit observed no filesystem, network or shell use at all in its source.
Which assistants does Proposal work with?
Its documentation mentions claude-code and openclaw. That is what the text claims, not a compatibility test we ran.
How current is this page?
The grade is for one exact copy of the source (3bb5b08404b5), read on 2026-10-12. The repository is watched, and a new audit runs when it changes — this is the first audit.