Files
breakpilot-compliance/backend-compliance/compliance/reasoning/enums.py
T
Benjamin Admin 5e5002c883 refactor(reasoning): enforce ClaimCoverage (Welt 1) vs ComplianceStatus (Welt 2) boundary [F1]
Architecture-validation finding: the implementation mode produced compliance-
flavored output ("teilweise erfüllt", "covered") from a mere customer claim,
blurring the line to the Execution layer. This is a design decision, not a text
fix — the reasoning layer judges only the customer's STATEMENT, never conformity.

- CoverageStatus -> ClaimCoverage; values are claim-relative + carry "potential":
  potentially_addresses / partially_addresses / does_not_address /
  insufficient_information.
- ImplementationAssessment -> ClaimObligationMapping (coverage_status ->
  claim_coverage); ImplementationResponse -> ImplementationReasoningResponse
  (assessments -> mappings, + explicit `disclaimer`); request renamed; engine
  entry assess_implementation -> reason_implementation_claim.
- Endpoint /reasoning/implementation-assessment -> /reasoning/implementation-reasoning.
- Summary/explanations reworded: "adressiert wahrscheinlich N Pflichten … für
  eine Bewertung der tatsächlichen Umsetzung sind Nachweise erforderlich (keine
  Konformitätsaussage)". No "erfüllt"/"abgedeckt" leaks.
- New guard test asserts no compliance verdict leaks (no "erfüllt"; disclaimer
  separates ClaimCoverage from ComplianceStatus). 23 tests green, mypy clean.

Discovery (scope/obligations) was already structurally claim-free and unaffected.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-06-26 00:37:57 +02:00

93 lines
2.6 KiB
Python

"""Enumerations for the Regulatory Reasoning Engine.
Kept dependency-free and Python 3.9 compatible (str-Enums, no `|` unions).
The reasoning layer sits ON TOP of the Legal Knowledge Graph (obligation
registry) and the Compliance Execution Graph (control mapping / evidence).
See memory `project_compliance_graph.md` for the cross-session contract.
"""
from __future__ import annotations
from enum import Enum
class ManufacturerRole(str, Enum):
MANUFACTURER = "manufacturer"
IMPORTER = "importer"
DISTRIBUTOR = "distributor"
INTEGRATOR = "integrator"
OPERATOR = "operator"
SERVICE_PROVIDER = "service_provider"
class ProductLifecyclePhase(str, Enum):
DEVELOPMENT = "development"
PLACING_ON_MARKET = "placing_on_market"
OPERATION = "operation"
MAINTENANCE = "maintenance"
UPDATE = "update"
END_OF_LIFE = "end_of_life"
class MarketModel(str, Enum):
B2B = "b2b"
B2C = "b2c"
BOTH = "both"
class ApplicabilityStatus(str, Enum):
APPLICABLE = "applicable"
PARTIALLY_APPLICABLE = "partially_applicable"
UNCERTAIN = "uncertain"
NOT_APPLICABLE = "not_applicable"
class Confidence(str, Enum):
HIGH = "high"
MEDIUM = "medium"
LOW = "low"
class AuthorityLevel(str, Enum):
"""How binding a statement is — answers MUST visibly separate these."""
LEGAL_TEXT = "legal_text"
RECITAL = "recital"
GUIDANCE = "guidance"
HARMONIZED_STANDARD = "harmonized_standard"
TECHNICAL_STANDARD = "technical_standard"
BEST_PRACTICE = "best_practice"
INTERNAL_INTERPRETATION = "internal_interpretation"
class OverlapType(str, Enum):
IDENTICAL = "identical"
SIMILAR = "similar"
COMPLEMENTARY = "complementary"
CONFLICTING = "conflicting"
DIFFERENT_SCOPE = "different_scope"
class ClaimCoverage(str, Enum):
"""How a customer's *claim* relates to an obligation — Welt 1 (reasoning).
This is NOT a conformity verdict. It judges only the customer's statement,
never whether the obligation is actually met. The real compliance verdict
(erfüllt/offen/unklar from verified evidence) is `ComplianceStatus`, owned by
the Compliance Execution Graph — the two must never be conflated.
"""
POTENTIALLY_ADDRESSES = "potentially_addresses"
PARTIALLY_ADDRESSES = "partially_addresses"
DOES_NOT_ADDRESS = "does_not_address"
INSUFFICIENT_INFORMATION = "insufficient_information"
class InterpretationVerdict(str, Enum):
PLAUSIBLE = "plausible"
TOO_NARROW = "too_narrow"
TOO_BROAD = "too_broad"
PARTIALLY_CORRECT = "partially_correct"
UNSUPPORTED = "unsupported"
UNCERTAIN = "uncertain"