meta.book.self_description

The specification-book system is itself specified by anchors in Design. Its rules participate in the same naming, reference validation, implementation and test coverage, status reporting, index, and anchor-page generation as all other rules. A rule about the validator or renderer receives no exemption from those requirements; unfinished work uses explicit TODO entries.

Read in specification context · design/meta/book.md

Implementation

TODO crates/sage-meta/tests/spec_plan.rs:116–123

sage_meta::todo · test:spec_plan

TODO: Run the book's own rules through ordinary coverage and rendering, and show that deleting their implementation/test links fails.

#![allow(unused)]
fn main() {
    // {anchor}`meta.book.self_description`<<
    #[test]
    #[sage::test(meta.book.self_description)]
    fn book_rules_use_the_same_validation() {
        // TODO: Run the book's own rules through ordinary coverage and rendering,
        // and show that deleting their implementation/test links fails.
    }
    // >>

}

See more source ↗

Tests and review

Indexed tests and the implementation-completeness and test-adequacy review; no test run is implied.

TODO sage_meta::todo::book_rules_use_the_same_validation

crates/sage-meta/tests/spec_plan.rs · test:spec_plan

#![allow(unused)]
fn main() {
#[test]
    #[sage::test(meta.book.self_description)]
    fn book_rules_use_the_same_validation() {
        // TODO: Run the book's own rules through ordinary coverage and rendering,
        // and show that deleting their implementation/test links fails.
    }
}

See more source ↗

Review: Accepted · Codex /root/anchor_094.

Fresh final followup review of self_description. Saved/read prior report and inputs, started fresh and compared every initial fragment: claim, whole spec_plan.rs and TODO test are unchanged. Recaptured all nine prior dependencies. For shifted spec.rs ranges I located the previously intended contents and adjusted bounds, verifying exact equality; the validation-method range now 103-207 differs only by the implementation_references association comment. All other helper contents are unchanged. No validation, status or generation behavior changed.

The full claim requires book-system Design anchors to use the same naming/reference validation, independent implementation/test coverage, status reporting, index and page generation as other rules, with no validator/renderer exemptions and explicit TODO evidence for unfinished work. The sole associated implementation is the TODO region around todo::book_rules_use_the_same_validation, and the sole associated test is that empty TODO. It explicitly calls for ordinary coverage/rendering of the book's own rules and failures after deleting implementation/test links. It is not ordinary behavioral proof; no N/A evidence exists.

Current captured foundations support the intended uniformity without completing that integration claim. The normative predicate includes Design meta/book sources while excluding motivations/history/generated views. Shared namespace and reference loops operate over canonical anchors without book/validator/renderer prefix exemptions. Implementation and test coverage checks iterate anchors independently, and reverse-reference checks use the same map. Review inventory handles all anchors uniformly and preserves explicit TODO/N/A ancestry through the captured status helper. Generated index/page code consumes that same inventory, walks canonical names and computes separate implementation/test statuses. The new unknown-reference association comment only improves tracking and creates no exception.

The unchanged claim is itself a named Design anchor and its TODO evidence is discovered by the ordinary inventory, but this observation does not prove every self-hosting scenario. The assertion-free TODO remains an honest deferral. Completing it requires a real book-system fixture with validator/renderer claims, valid naming/references and explicit implementation/test links; independent deletion of each evidence side; malformed/dangling-reference mutations; and substantive index/page/status assertions, including TODO handling. Shared pipeline code is already a foundation for that work, not a substitute for the missing integrated assertions or a passing dummy-test proof.

All claim aspects were reassessed against the prior complete accounting and actual marker/range-shift delta. The substantive context remains unchanged, and the explicit deferral is preserved. No source edits, builds, rendering or behavioral test runs occurred; fresh start/read/record and source inspection only. No requested edits.

Browse meta anchors

116 anchors

Anchor Implementation Tests

meta (116) 102 Implemented24 TODO 103 Implemented36 TODO

meta.anchors (22) 22 Implemented 21 Implemented12 TODO

anchor_pages Implemented ImplementedTODO

Every specification anchor has a stable page identifying the rule and showing its definition, context, implementation entries, and tests/evidence. The page includes Rust excerpts and access to surrounding source, and exposes each entry’s placeholder status and explanation. Multiple sites remain individually inspectable rather than being reduced to a single coverage badge.

Symposiun AGentic Environment (SAGE)

meta.book.self_description

Implementation

Tests and review