Proto-Pattern Tracking

Candidates for formalization that need additional evidence before full pattern status.

Purpose: Track emerging practices that have been observed but not yet proven across multiple instances. Proto-patterns graduate to full patterns when they meet the evidence threshold (typically 2+ additional instances beyond initial observation).

Review cadence: Evaluated during 6-week pattern sweeps. Proto-patterns that meet evidence threshold get promoted; those with no new instances after two sweeps get archived.


Active Proto-Patterns

PP-002: Load-Bearing vs. Commodity Work in a Role

Observed: April 22–26, 2026 (Apr 22–26 leadership migration wave) Source: Agent 360 v0.2 §6 candor reflections from seven retiring Chat-instance leadership roles (HOST, CIO, Comms, CXO, PPM, Architect, Exec) Logged here: April 27, 2026 per PM directive Elevation Criteria: confirm the distinction holds across at least one full sprint of post-migration operation (target: review during the next pattern sweep), and confirm it survives translation to Lead Dev + Docs (the two roles that did not migrate)

Description: Each role has a subset of its formal scope that is load-bearing (where the role’s distinctive judgment lives — without this work the role isn’t doing its job) and a remainder that is commodity (work the role owns where filesystem-direct access makes execution fast, and which can crowd out distinctive work if not bounded). The structural distinction surfaced independently in every Section 6 across seven role retirements — same shape, different surface manifestations. The consistency across seven different roles is structural, not coincidental.

Cross-role manifestations (extracted from Agent 360 §6 + handoff memos):

Role Load-bearing Commodity
HOST Noticing + naming dysfunction (specifically: “X is 107 days stale” beats “docs are outdated”); cross-checking memos against omnibus to detect drift Reading omnibus comprehensively; human-network status table maintenance; session-log archival
CIO Methodology audits (Mar 15 + Apr 17 produced structural insight + downstream policy); discovering and formalizing emerging patterns Workstream-review timeline reconstruction (commodity by CIO’s own naming); cross-pollination routing
Comms Narrative-arc awareness (which pieces connect, what arc they form, where the gaps are — lives in role-holder’s head; doesn’t survive session boundaries) Placeholder discipline once learned; calendar bookkeeping; mail delivery coordination
CXO Colleague Test application + experience-quality judgment (“the Colleague Test is more important than the CXO role”) Workstream review authorship; voice-and-tone iteration housekeeping
PPM Roundtable synthesis (“the distinctive function”) + spec pipeline translation; quality threshold judgment Workstream memos (“most often work, but not what makes the role distinctive”); reading 7 omnibus logs
Architect Cross-project protocol decisions (Klatch alignment, URI conventions); ADR synthesis; specification-vs-existing-work review Timeline reconstruction in workstream memos; ADR formatting housekeeping
Exec Review work (Ship draft, handoff, workstream against omnibus) — judgment lives here Tracker maintenance, handoff packaging, status synthesis
Lead Dev (inferred — no migration 360) Engineering judgment + audit-cascade + closing issues with evidence Manifest housekeeping, session-log archival, routine git mechanics
Docs (inferred — no migration 360) Omnibus synthesis + canonical-verification discipline + methodology custodianship Mailbox shuttling, calendar bookkeeping, session-log archival

Pattern observation: commodity work clusters around information management and housekeeping. Load-bearing work clusters around judgment, verification, and cross-context synthesis. The risk: when Code-era filesystem access makes commodity work faster (direct reads instead of search), agents may still allocate the same time to it, causing load-bearing work to be crowded out.

Known Instances:

  1. CXO Apr 25 §6: “the Colleague Test is more important than the CXO role” — load-bearing artifact > role identity (originally framed)
  2. PPM Apr 25 §6: workstream memos as “the recurring obligation, not what makes the role distinctive” — same shape
  3. Exec Apr 26 §6: review-vs-tracker split named explicitly — same shape
  4. HOST/CIO/Comms/Architect §6: same shape across all four (Apr 22–25)
  5. Apr 26 omnibus Core Theme #2: structural convergence across all seven independently — meta-instance

Elevation criteria:

What Would Make This a Pattern:

Related Patterns:

Methodology meta-insight (PM Apr 27): The Agent 360 v0.2 was originally a feedback questionnaire (Mar 19 first round). It gained a second life as the migration handoff baseline (validated through Apr 22–26). It is now generating a third-degree value: §6 reflections are surfacing methodology-codifiable patterns that no single role-holder would have found alone. The instrument was designed for one purpose; it’s compounding to three.

PP-001: Design Archaeology

Observed: February 3, 2026 (Pattern Sweep 2.0, #777) Source: History sidebar design investigation (February 2, 2026) CIO Decision: Deferred to proto-pattern tracking (February 4, 2026) Elevation Criteria: 2+ additional instances before March 17, 2026 sweep

Description: When investigating a design question, conduct archaeological analysis of how the current design evolved before proposing changes. Examines commit history, omnibus logs, and decision records to understand why the current state exists — preventing accidental reversal of intentional decisions.

Known Instance:

  1. History sidebar 404 investigation (#780) — discovered that sidebar design had evolved through 3 distinct phases, each responding to different user feedback. Without archaeology, the fix would have reverted to Phase 1 design.

What Would Make This a Pattern:

Related Patterns:


Archived Proto-Patterns

Proto-patterns that were not elevated after two sweep cycles.

Historical (Pre-Tracking)

The following were identified informally but never tracked with this mechanism:


Process

Adding a Proto-Pattern

  1. Identify candidate during pattern sweep or ad-hoc observation
  2. Verify it’s genuinely distinct from existing patterns (FALSE POSITIVE test)
  3. Add entry to Active Proto-Patterns with: observation date, source, known instances, elevation criteria
  4. Set review date (next scheduled sweep)

Elevating a Proto-Pattern

  1. During pattern sweep, review active proto-patterns for new instances
  2. If evidence threshold met: draft full pattern document, submit for CIO approval
  3. Move entry from Active to the main pattern index
  4. Remove from this file

Archiving a Proto-Pattern

  1. If no new instances after two sweep cycles (~12 weeks), archive
  2. Move to Archived section with brief explanation
  3. Can be reactivated if new evidence surfaces

Created: February 5, 2026 Per CIO assignment (memo-cio-pattern-sweep-response-2026-02-04)