The /ai-context folder structure you proposed is a really practical starting point — reminds me of how CLAUDE.md files work for giving Claude Code project-specific context before it touches any code. The pattern is almost the same: structured semantic memory that the agent reads before planning, not during. One question: how do you handle drift? Business logic evolves but the business-model.yml might stay stale — do you see version-controlling that layer as part of the dev workflow, or something the agent actively keeps in sync?
That’s a great comparison. I see CLAUDE.md as more project/code-context-centric, while the direction I’m exploring is more business-semantic-centric.
The goal is to make the agent understand:
why the system exists,
business intent,
operational priorities,
domain semantics,
before implementation planning starts — not just repository structure or coding rules.
Regarding drift, I think the Business Blueprint itself should become part of the SDLC lifecycle and version-controlled alongside the repository.
So whenever a new feature, workflow, or business rule is introduced, the blueprint gets updated as part of the implementation flow itself.
Something like:
Jira Ticket / User Request
↓
Business Blueprint Understanding
↓
Domain Semantic Interpretation
↓
Technical Architecture Understanding
↓
Planning Agent
↓
Execution Agents
↓
Validation Agents
↓
Implementation
↓
Update Business Blueprint with the latest changes
This way, the blueprint evolves with the product instead of becoming static documentation.
Long term, I also think agents themselves could help maintain synchronisation by detecting architectural or business-rule drift between implementation and blueprint context.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
The /ai-context folder structure you proposed is a really practical starting point — reminds me of how CLAUDE.md files work for giving Claude Code project-specific context before it touches any code. The pattern is almost the same: structured semantic memory that the agent reads before planning, not during. One question: how do you handle drift? Business logic evolves but the business-model.yml might stay stale — do you see version-controlling that layer as part of the dev workflow, or something the agent actively keeps in sync?
That’s a great comparison. I see CLAUDE.md as more project/code-context-centric, while the direction I’m exploring is more business-semantic-centric.
The goal is to make the agent understand:
Regarding drift, I think the Business Blueprint itself should become part of the SDLC lifecycle and version-controlled alongside the repository.
So whenever a new feature, workflow, or business rule is introduced, the blueprint gets updated as part of the implementation flow itself.
Something like:
This way, the blueprint evolves with the product instead of becoming static documentation.
Long term, I also think agents themselves could help maintain synchronisation by detecting architectural or business-rule drift between implementation and blueprint context.