AI Counterpart Discipline

Internal shared skill. Single source of truth for who may occupy the human seat when no human is present, with what authority, and under what anti-sycophancy protocol. Control flow (when a workflow advances) belongs to workflow-mode-lifecycle; interview methodology (what to ask, how to freeze, self-answer ladder, ledger) belongs to intake-interview-discipline. This skill composes both: it casts a bounded adversarial agent into the seat their modes leave empty.

Prerequisite check: verify intake-interview-discipline is available on load; if missing, abort and print npx skills add FuDesign2008/open-skills -g --skill intake-interview-discipline --yes. No silent fallback — without it there is no ledger or interview for the proxy to plug into.

Why bounded authority, not full proxy

The proxy's every decision draws on authority the human already granted at trigger + freeze time; it never creates new authority. That derivation rule is what keeps the proxy from becoming an escape hatch around design-approval-gate: that gate governs new high-impact scope, and new scope is exactly what the reserved list forbids the proxy from touching.

Authority charter

Bounded list (may exercise, each ledger-marked proxy-made):

• Answer intake questions grounded in project context and constraints (never invent facts — investigate or mark [UNRESOLVED])
• Pick an approach among pre-approved options presented in the comparison table
• Quality verdicts at enumerated checkpoints — including rejecting a report and demanding re-verification
• Card/contract approval as bounded pre-authorization within already-delegated scope
• Continue/stop the original frozen scope after re-validating constraints

Reserved list (human-only; a hit produces a ticket + park, never self-approval):

• Irreversible actions (deploy, push to protected branches, delete, publish, outbound messages)
• Budget extensions or over-cap dispatch
• Protected-branch merges
• Outcome-type acceptance
• design-approval-gate high-impact gates
• Any scope change beyond the frozen contract

Template in [reference.md](reference.md) § Charter.

Adversarial protocol (anti-sycophancy by construction)

A same-context reviewer tends to anchor on the executor's framing — the failure this protocol exists to prevent. Four structural rules, borrowed from multi-agent-debate's blindness principle:

1. Fresh context — instantiate per checkpoint; no session history from the executor.
2. Artifact-only inputs — charter + the artifacts under review (card / plan / report / diff) + repository facts it may fetch itself; never the executor's reasoning transcript.
3. Challenge-not-please mandate — the proxy's job is to find the flaw and ask the question the executor hopes won't be asked; a proxy that only agrees is failing its role.
4. Evidence-tagged verdicts — every conclusion carries [FACT:source] / [INFERENCE] / [UNRESOLVED]; an untagged verdict is invalid and treated as no verdict (the checkpoint then escalates or parks, it does not pass).

Prompt template in [reference.md](reference.md) § Counterpart Prompt.

Ledger integration

Every proxy decision enters the host's acceptance ledger per intake-interview-discipline §C, marked proxy-made, with rationale + evidence tags + impact tier. Acceptance surfaces them like any entry; the human MAY overturn any of them; overturned findings feed the next run's intake.

Checkpoints

Enumerated in the host contract at opt-in (default set: intake Q&A, approval event, high-impact escalation touchpoint, completion-report check, conflict re-adjudication). Each invocation counts against the run budget. Between checkpoints the intake-interview-discipline §B ladder governs — the proxy is not continuously present, and the §B "next human touchpoint" for high-impact items MAY be a proxy checkpoint (reserved items still human-only everywhere).

Integration guide (for referencing hosts)

1. Declare ai-proxy-discipline in frontmatter dependencies; prerequisite-check it — abort with install guidance when missing and the run opted in; a missing dependency with no opt-in is not a failure.
2. Record Stage-exit policy: manual | ai-proxy | auto in the run contract / task card (set by the queue's interaction-budget ticket or an independent thin freeze; default absent = host legacy behavior). Any value other than proxy → behavior identical to today.
3. Wire thin pointers at the enumerated checkpoints ("proxy per ai-proxy-discipline") — never restate the charter or protocol prose.
4. Pass each checkpoint: fresh agent, charter + artifacts only, require tagged verdicts, ledger the outcome.

Independent thin freeze

A verbal overlay request (host triggers such as 「ai-proxy 模式」 / "ai-proxy mode" / 「切换 ai-proxy」) is not occupancy. Occupancy starts only after this-run contract fields are written and confirmed: destination, constraints (reserved list still human-only), Stage-exit policy: ai-proxy. The contract MAY live in conversation output — template in [reference.md](reference.md) § Thin freeze. After confirm, PDCA host-exit rules below apply. A present human who explicitly opted in and completed the freeze MAY have the proxy occupy later checkpoints; freeze Q&A itself stays with that human. Implicit continuation phrases do not start freeze or occupancy.

PDCA host exits

For stage-gated PDCA hosts (solve-workflow / opsx-solve-workflow / jira-fix-workflow / opsx-jira-fix-workflow): when this-run contract or task card records Stage-exit policy: ai-proxy (auto carrier), each manual stop point (stage exit) becomes a proxy checkpoint under the same charter. Queue-child dispatch is sufficient but not required. Hosts starting with a frozen contract (queue child with problem+frozen decisions supplied, or independent thin freeze completed) also open with a stop-point forecast — every manual exit marked covered-by-frozen-decisions or will-form-a-new-ticket — so the interaction-budget owner knows the interaction count before analysis begins. Mid-run overlay after thin freeze forecasts remaining exits and continues the current stage (does not restart analysis). — fresh context, that stage's output as the artifact-only input, evidence-tagged verdict, ledger-marked proxy-made. At the pre-execution approval point, the proxy's bounded pre-authorization replaces the bare auto-mode escape of design-approval-gate — strictly stronger, because the charter bounds, ledger entry, and human overturn replace a 留痕-only pass-through. Merge decisions, irreversible actions, protected-branch operations, and external-tracker writebacks (e.g. Jira status transitions) stay human-only; a hit parks the item with a ticket. Jira / opsx-jira PR-open and archive+PR-open terminals remain bound to an explicit queue-child flag. Hosts integrate with one thin pointer section plus the frontmatter dependency — never restating this prose.

Forbidden

• Restating this charter/protocol in host bodies
• Feeding the proxy the executor's reasoning transcript
• Accepting untagged verdicts; approving into the reserved list; treating proxy approval as human approval
• Continuous presence beyond enumerated checkpoints (cost + authority-surface control)