Poesis
Usage / Use case Partial
Author and approve a shared definition
Replace a document-only change with an attributable, revision-bound definition decision.
Platform
What serves this use case
Capabilities
Values
Values composed with this use case
- Value Partial
Keep governance closer to its evidence.
Bring shared definitions, reviewed candidates and scoped appraisal together to simplify reconciliation. For running systems, keep observation coverage and freshness visible.
Supported by Affordances(2)
Supported by Capabilities(2)
- Value Partial
Give AI attributable context.
Ground planned read-only answers in authorized, versioned definitions, with citations and abstention for review. Build that context through direct authoring or reviewed sourcing.
Supported by Affordances(1)
Supported by Capabilities(2)
Supported by Features(1)
- Value Partial
A shared workspace for IT decisions.
Author and review a common inventory through planned integrated workflows and scoped permissions, reducing handoffs between separate representations.
Supported by Capabilities(1)
Supported by Features(1)
Realized through Use cases(2)
- Value Partial
Make shared context attributable.
Build toward policy-filtered snapshots that people and AI can inspect. Direct API authoring is independent of sourcing, with MCP planned as an additional interface.
Supported by Affordances(1)
Supported by Capabilities(2)
Supported by Features(1)
- Value Partial
Use evidence to inform revisions.
Carry reviewed candidates into authorized revisions with promotion lineage. Collection, approval and confirmation against running systems remain distinct steps.
Supported by Affordances(1)
Supported by Capabilities(1)
Realized through Use cases(2)
- Value Partial
Make transitions inspectable.
Check lifecycle advancement against defined transitions, with authentication, policy and current grammar alignment completing the governance boundary.
Supported by Affordances(1)
Supported by Capabilities(3)
Supported by Features(2)
Realized through Use cases(6)
- Assess dependent definitions after foundation invalidation
- Author and approve a shared definition
- Read and revise definitions through the API
- Hold definitions as the authoritative, revision-bound source
- Enforce definition lifecycle boundaries
- Make review and activation boundaries explicit
- Value Partial
Separate exploration from acceptance.
Collect candidates on the board, reconcile them in a client and govern promoted drafts in the Definition Manager through an explicit integration handoff.
Supported by Affordances(1)
Supported by Capabilities(2)
Supported by Features(1)
Pains
Pain points
- Pain point Partial
The architecture repository is out of date the day it’s written.
Hand-maintained models detach from the territory the moment delivery moves on — and every decision made on them inherits the drift.
Addressed by Affordances(1)
Addressed by Capabilities(3)
Addressed by Features(2)
Experienced by Actor types(4)
Addressed through Use cases(7)
- Author and approve a shared definition
- Reconcile code evidence into reviewed definitions
- React to a committed definition change
- Extract definition candidates from a code revision
- Source IT definitions from inspected evidence
- Hold definitions as the authoritative, revision-bound source
- Review candidates from selected sources
- Pain point Partial
Anything can change anything — there is no approval trail.
Definitions, standards, and obligations mutate without review; who approved what, and when, is unanswerable.
Addressed by Affordances(1)
Addressed by Capabilities(4)
Addressed by Features(7)
Experienced by Actor types(8)
Addressed through Use cases(9)
- Review a governance package upgrade
- Author and approve a shared definition
- Execute a bounded response and inspect the receipt
- Read and revise definitions through the API
- Qualify an execution adapter for an integration
- Enforce definition lifecycle boundaries
- Run a Mechanism inside declared bounds
- Serve authorized definition context to a model
- Make review and activation boundaries explicit