- Why a decision is required now: New harness workflow needs explicit defaults for compatibility, safety bias, and governance discipline.
## Options
1. Compatibility posture
- Option A: strict backward compatibility
- Option B: controlled compatibility breaks with migration notes
2. Safety posture
- Option A: protection-first
- Option B: availability-first
3. Decision logging scope
- Option A: required only for breaking/risky changes
- Option B: required for all decision-gate outcomes
## Decision
- Selected option: Compatibility `controlled`; Safety `availability-first`; Decision logging `required for all decision-gate changes`.
- Decision owner: User
- Date: February 16, 2026
- Rationale: Maintain delivery and operational continuity while preserving governance through mandatory, durable decision records.
## Consequences
- Compatibility impact: Breaking contract changes are permissible only when migration/deprecation is explicit.
- Safety/security impact: Control changes should bias toward continuity with bounded safeguards; critical protections still require explicit constraints.
- Data/operations impact: Decision traceability improves cross-turn consistency and auditability.
