VibePackr™
Part.4
All manualsClient setup guideSkills · MCP · TOML

Contract and Document authoring

Contents

VibePackr Enterprise · Part.4

Part.4 · Contract and Document authoring

Guide connections, workflow and input/output map

First-use checkpoint and return points

Start here
First read the source-only quality-document.json; then open a separate working copy of the full read-only-custom-api.json envelope.
Have ready
A UTF-8 plain-text editor, the complete synthetic files, and published target references for the chosen release. A text worksheet or excerpt is not a machine request.
Expected exercise result
Keep the source object in draft.source; retain definition, mapping, fixture and request identity. Record syntax separately from Helper semantic validation.

Exercise and next steps

Open the relevant failure case

How to read numbers and file names

Part.1–8 identifies the current tool manuals. W1–W4 and codes such as GUI-01 identify exercises inside a Part. Use Case 1–5 is a separate retained procedure sequence, not the Part numbering. Case A–J and codes such as SDK-1 or IH-1 identify troubleshooting scenarios. Older filenames and pN section IDs remain valid bookmarks; read the page heading for the current Part number.

Exercise files: check the role before saving

Distinguish source-only JSON, complete requests and intentional errors. TXT files are human worksheets, not profiles, API inputs or GAPE manifests. If a file opens in the browser, save it with the correct extension and UTF-8.

Before starting: file roles, paths and shell

Save the exercise files at the beginning of this manual into a fresh workspace and check their roles. TXT worksheets are human notes, not client profiles, API requests or GAPE manifests. Distinguish source-only JSON, complete requests and intentional type-error examples too.

Use bash for macOS/Linux and PowerShell for Windows. Do not copy prompts. Replace /absolute/path, C:\absolute\path and bracketed values with actual supplied values first; retain quotes. Commands using variables need the setup shell. In a new shell restore paths only, without overwriting old outputs/logs. Long code and tables scroll horizontally.

Company connection/enrollment, approval, supported Packs, published targets and approved manifests require actual supplied material at their relevant steps. Do not invent IDs, screen names or addresses. Read each W section's success and failure/return criteria, then perform one step at a time.

W1 · DOC-01: save, parse and read the complete source JSON

Save quality-document.json from the exercise files into a fresh private folder. If it opens in the browser, use Save As and check against an accidental .json.txt extension. Reopen as UTF-8 plain text. This is source only, not a full Helper/SDK request.

Shell
document_path="/absolute/path/quality-document.json"
python3 -m json.tool "$document_path"
PowerShell
$documentPath = 'C:\absolute\path\quality-document.json'
$document = Get-Content -LiteralPath $documentPath -Raw -Encoding UTF8 -ErrorAction Stop | ConvertFrom-Json -ErrorAction Stop
$document.operations.read_quality | Format-List
Get-FileHash -LiteralPath $documentPath -Algorithm SHA256

The macOS/Linux command assumes Python 3 is already available. Windows can use built-in ConvertFrom-Json. Parsing checks syntax, not product semantics, every duplicate key or unsupported schema.

Location in the actual fileSupplied valueMeaning
document_kindCUSTOM_APISource format
operations.read_quality.input_schemaresource string, required resourceSource operation input
operations.read_quality.output_schemacomponent/score stringsDeclared source response

Complete: the file parses and you have read these declarations. Failure: correct line/column punctuation or encoding errors, then parse the same file again. Do not submit this source-only file to a tool requiring a complete request.

W2 · DOC-02: review properties, required and mapping together

Text
Intent: resource → resource_name
Check 1: exact replacement for properties.resource
Check 2: required contains that same name
Check 3: impact on full request mapping/published target
Check 4: new source remains within supported schema
Result: record syntax separately from Helper semantics

This is a change-review note, not a complete new API request. Preserve the original and edit a copy. Valid syntax with required: ["resource"] still has a name mismatch. Do not fabricate a schema digest; evaluate the new request through supplied normalization/validation. Return to preparation once the actual refused declaration is resolved.

W3 · DOC-03: place the source object in the correct envelope slot

Supplied read-only-custom-api.json is a complete synthetic request example. Open the whole file and separate three layers.

LayerActual file fieldsBefore changing
Request identityrequest_id/correlation_idRelease-supported request shape
draft.sourceObject matching quality-document.jsonNot a path or double-encoded string
draft.definition/mapping/fixtureTarget/transform/synthetic responsePublished target, supported transform, synthetic scope

To practise the envelope edit without losing fields:

  1. Preserve both originals. Save a new complete request copy as request-02.json in your private workspace.
  2. In that copy locate draft.source. Replace only its object value with the complete object from quality-document.json, from its opening { to matching closing }. Keep it an object, without wrapping the JSON in quotes or substituting a path.
  3. Keep request_id, correlation_id, draft.definition, draft.mapping and draft.fixture from the supplied full request. For this first copy exercise the supplied source objects already match; no new target or digest is required.
  4. Save UTF-8 and parse the full request-02.json, using the parser command from W1 with that actual path. This proves syntax only. Return to Part.3B for Helper validation before treating the edited request as prepared.

Source score is a string; example target quality_score is integer, using supported STRING_TO_INTEGER. The logical expectation for score: "88" is integer 88. This is neither a real API response nor a CLI execution log. Do not guess new target IDs, adapter revisions or digests from the example. Stop at missing target provisioning for a different release.

W4 · DOC-04: hand over a reviewable file set

Text
source/quality-document.json   source-only document
request.json                   working copy of full supplied request
notes.txt                      change reason, target, check state
results/                       only checks actually executed

This is a workspace layout illustration. Record actual file digests, syntax and any Helper results separately: e.g. Syntax checked / semantics not executed / registration not performed. Exclude keys/tokens/customer responses. Stop sharing if sensitive data is present and follow organizational response procedures. The recipient must distinguish the full request from source excerpts.

More exercises and checklists

Reading sequence

Check inputs → choose a task → use the detailed first exercise/commands below → inspect results → modify/repeat → follow the relevant failure case. Part numbers are not a mandatory installation sequence; choose only needed tools.

Prerequisites and input

UTF-8 editor, complete source JSON below and an OS parser. Semantics additionally need a full request and published target.

Both online and offline environments remain available. The optional SDK Rust set provisions SDK builds in closed on-premises environments; it is not a product default. Use actual supplied company endpoints, approval and enrollment material where an exercise needs them.

Find an exercise or case

ExerciseTask
DOC-01Declare a read-only quality operation
DOC-02Trace the impact of renaming a field
DOC-03Separate a target Contract from source description
DOC-04Prepare a review record with synthetic data

Exercise DOC-01 · Declare a read-only quality operation

Open actual input and steps →

read_quality accepts a resource string and returns component/score strings. Author the full source Document without calling a server.

Actions:

  1. Save the complete JSON below as a fresh UTF-8 quality-document.json.
  2. Read input/output properties and required under operations.read_quality.
  3. Parse it using the OS-specific syntax check and retain its digest.
  4. Insert the object into draft.source of a complete request with published target references, then hand to Helper.

Read the result: Valid source JSON and a syntax result; target semantics are checked separately in Part.3.

Failure and next branch: Fix JSON line/column errors; without a complete request, record source preparation only.

Retain: Source revision/digest, syntax, target and request availability.

Your exercise record: fill in time, version, input reference, actual actions, observed result and next owner. Do not copy expected outcomes into an execution success record.

Exercise DOC-02 · Trace the impact of renaming a field

Open actual input and steps →

You want resource renamed to resource_name. A name-only change can break required fields, mapping and target compatibility.

Actions:

  1. Preserve the original and state the purpose in a new input copy.
  2. Review properties/required together and check explicit request mapping for the name.
  3. Check syntax, then read refused fields through supplied normalization/semantic validation.
  4. Prepare only a supported new request and distinguish old inputs/results.

Read the result: A changed declaration bound to affected mapping and validation results.

Failure and next branch: Do not edit schema digests to force acceptance; retain unsupported extensions as implementation-needed.

Retain: Before/after names, required/mapping, request revision, parsing/semantic results.

Your exercise record: fill in time, version, input reference, actual actions, observed result and next owner. Do not copy expected outcomes into an execution success record.

Exercise DOC-03 · Separate a target Contract from source description

Open actual input and steps →

Source score is a string and published target quality_score is an integer. Separate human description, supplier target and explicit transformation.

Actions:

  1. Obtain actual contract_id/revision and adapter_id/revision from the supplied inventory.
  2. Compare returned source types with required target types.
  3. Choose only supported transforms such as the supplied STRING_TO_INTEGER example and review synthetic responses.
  4. Validate the complete request semantically; a source document title is not a Contract ID.

Read the result: Exact target references and validated supported mapping, not issuance of a new product Contract.

Failure and next branch: Hand missing targets or unsupported transforms to supplier/implementation owners.

Retain: Source/target types, target revision, transform declaration and validation reason.

Your exercise record: fill in time, version, input reference, actual actions, observed result and next owner. Do not copy expected outcomes into an execution success record.

Exercise DOC-04 · Prepare a review record with synthetic data

Open actual input and steps →

Prepare reproducible input for a colleague using declarations and synthetic examples, without real tokens/customer responses.

Actions:

  1. Separate source Document, full request copy, target references and change reason.
  2. Review examples/descriptions/defaults/attachments for secrets or customer content.
  3. Bind syntax and any actual Helper/SDK results to their respective input digests.
  4. Label executable full requests versus illustrative excerpts, including pending semantic checks/approval.

Read the result: A minimal record identifying the next input and last verified stage.

Failure and next branch: If sensitive content is present, stop sharing and follow the organization's response procedure.

Retain: File kind/revision/digest, synthetic scope, performed checks and pending items.

Your exercise record: fill in time, version, input reference, actual actions, observed result and next owner. Do not copy expected outcomes into an execution success record.

Repeat, modify and resume after failure

Preserve earlier input/version/validation/results and distinguish a new input or revision. Use fresh output paths for SDK/GAPE; retain product-returned candidate revisions for Builder. Helper commands take the same complete request rather than the preceding result. Query an existing ID first when Work is running or uncertain.

After closing a terminal, restore absolute paths and the selected environment. Recheck affected stages and hand over pending company authority, registration or approval as pending. Support records use minimal messages/shareable references, without bulk private keys, raw prompts, customer responses or full logs.

Detailed commands, inputs and troubleshooting sources

The following detailed guides share the same maintained documentation source. Use their first exercises, complete JSON, OS-specific commands, file inspection and symptom cases. Cross-Part references lead to the appropriate manual.

Full workflow and skip conditions
Contract & Document: declare an operation and match a supported target

Contract & Document: declare an operation and match a supported target

Detailed section contents

First Document exercise: save a file and hand it to Helper

Goal: save the complete source Document below as quality-document.json and check syntax. This file contains a source declaration only; it is not a complete SDK/Helper request or GAPE manifest.

  1. Create an organization-approved fresh working folder and open a text editor. Copy only the JSON block from its opening { through the final }. Do not include code fences or the json label.
  2. Save as quality-document.json, UTF-8. Use plain text rather than a Word/formatted document; check for an accidental .json.txt suffix. Reopen the saved file and confirm operations.read_quality exists.
  3. Use the command below when Python 3 is already available on macOS/Linux. Windows can use PowerShell's built-in JSON parser; this exercise does not require installing Python.
  4. After parsing, compare resource/component/score in properties with their required lists. This review and JSON parsing do not replace product semantic validation.
  5. Preserve an original copy, then place the object into draft.source of the supplier's complete request. Do not insert a file-path string or double-encoded JSON string. Check target references, mapping and fixture separately in the supplied request, then follow Helper's first exercise.
Shell
document_path="/absolute/path/quality-document.json"
python3 -m json.tool "$document_path"
PowerShell
$documentPath = 'C:\absolute\path\quality-document.json'
Get-Content -LiteralPath $documentPath -Raw -Encoding UTF8 -ErrorAction Stop | ConvertFrom-Json -ErrorAction Stop | Format-List
Get-FileHash -LiteralPath $documentPath -Algorithm SHA256

Expected result: the parser displays an object without a parsing error. On syntax errors inspect the reported line/column, commas, quotes and braces. This parser does not adjudicate every duplicate key or unsupported product schema. Record syntax checked / Helper semantic validation not executed, and add actual Helper results separately.

Small edit exercise: renaming an input requires reviewing properties, required, explicit request mappings and the supported target together. Check the supplied original once before editing. DOC-1/2 cover name mismatch and incomplete requests.

Decide which artifact you are editing

ArtifactExample fieldMeaning
Planning brief“Read one service health state”Human goal; not parser input
Source Documentdocument_kind: CUSTOM_APIDeclared source operation and input/output shape
Target referencecontract_id, contract_revision, adapter_idValues copied from a supported supplier release
Complete request enveloperequest_id, correlation_id, draftMachine request; contains the source Document in draft.source
Typed resultstatus, reason, next_required_actionsProduct preparation decision; not execution authority

Build a bounded source Document

  1. Write a short goal and the operation's data boundary. Example: read_quality accepts a resource name and returns a component name and quality score as strings. It does not change the resource.
  2. In the supported CUSTOM_API format, set document_kind to CUSTOM_API, use the supported protocol_revision value, and place read_quality under operations. Declare input_schema as an object with a required resource string. Declare output_schema as an object with required component and score strings. Copy the complete example below for punctuation and nesting; these inline field names are an explanation, not a full JSON file.
  3. Keep property names and required lists consistent. The bounded example accepts only supported primitive fields; nested objects, arrays, extra JSON Schema keywords, duplicate keys, and comments are not silently accepted. Never put a credential or sample production response into schema defaults or descriptions.
  4. Check JSON syntax on a local copy, for example with python3 -m json.tool quality-document.json. A syntax PASS proves only that JSON parsed. Preserve the original document and its digest when making a correction.
  5. Obtain the exact published capability, Contract, adapter, operation and revision identifiers. Put those references in the release-defined request envelope, not inside the standalone source Document. Then follow the Integration Helper preparation path.

Complete source Document example

The CUSTOM_API example below declares a read-only read_quality operation. It does not call a live API or create a product Contract. Save the JSON as quality-document.json; put it under draft.source in the complete request supplied for your release and provide a compatible supported target reference.

JSON
{
  "document_kind": "CUSTOM_API",
  "protocol_revision": "1",
  "operations": {
    "read_quality": {
      "input_schema": {
        "type": "object",
        "properties": {"resource": {"type": "string"}},
        "required": ["resource"]
      },
      "output_schema": {
        "type": "object",
        "properties": {
          "component": {"type": "string"},
          "score": {"type": "string"}
        },
        "required": ["component", "score"]
      }
    }
  }
}
Shell
python3 -m json.tool quality-document.json > /dev/null
sha256sum quality-document.json

The first command proves JSON syntax only. Use shasum -a 256 quality-document.json on macOS or Get-FileHash -Algorithm SHA256 quality-document.json in PowerShell. The Helper's typed validation still decides whether the full envelope, target and mapping are acceptable.

Worked example: valid JSON, wrong target revision

The source document parses and discovery accepts read_quality. The request references an adapter revision from a different release. Normalization refuses the target. Compare the release manifest and supplier reference; correct the target revision in a new request only if an approved compatible value exists. Changing the source operation name to force a match would conceal the actual mismatch.

Worked example: a field is renamed without updating required

An editor changes the input property from resource to resource_name but leaves required: ["resource"]. The document is syntactically valid JSON but semantically inconsistent. Restore the property or update the required list, then re-run the exact local parser and Helper validation. Do not treat a successful syntax check as Contract validation.

Completion evidence

Keep the source Document revision and digest, exact published target references, request identity, typed Helper result, and remaining approval owner. Do not call the declaration “connected” until actual authenticated registration and runtime evidence exists; do not call it “executed” without Work and receipt.

A practical operational use case

Suppose a read-only quality query needs one additional output field. Separate the human goal, source schema, target reference and full request envelope. Review output properties, required fields, synthetic response and explicit mapping together. Retain unsupported schema extensions as implementation requirements; a customer document does not replace a product-issued Contract.

Symptom-specific checks and return to operation

Symptom or situationFacts to check separatelyAction and result to recheck
JSON parses but semantic validation refusesProperty/required alignment, types and supported schema subsetRecord parsing and semantic checks separately; correct the specifically refused declaration.
A source-field change no longer matches the mapping digestSource revision, schema digest and mapping targetPrepare the changed request through supplied normalization/validation; do not edit just the digest.
A document includes live tokens or customer responsesSensitive content in defaults, descriptions, examples and attachmentsStop sharing and create new synthetic inputs; follow organizational exposure handling.

Minimum handover to the next owner

Handover: source Document revision/digest, envelope revision, published Contract/adapter references, mappings, synthetic inputs/expected outputs, parsing/semantic results and change reason. Distinguish an unfilled template from a complete executable request.

Read the tool-specific troubleshooting examples

These teaching examples use documented input, command and authority boundaries. Read them alongside actual product states/reasons; do not treat illustrative outcomes as execution history. Distinguish checks shared by online/offline environments from checks specific to the optional dependency route.

Worked scenario DOC-1: A property is renamed while required stays unchanged

Situation: The input property resource is renamed resource_name, but required still lists resource. JSON parsing can succeed while the declaration is semantically inconsistent.

Read these observations separately.

  • Syntax: JSON parsing succeeds.
  • Declaration: properties and required name different fields.
  • Target/mapping: source-change effects need separate checking.

Check and action sequence:

  1. Retain the complete Document and original revision/digest.
  2. Establish the intended field and align property/required/explicit mapping within supported coverage.
  3. Perform and distinguish local JSON parsing and Helper semantic validation.

Condition for resuming: Use the changed request for preparation only after both parsing and semantic validation are confirmed.

If still unresolved: Retain unsupported schema extensions as implementation requirements instead of silently accepting them.

Worked scenario DOC-2: A source Document excerpt is used as a full request

Situation: A user saves a short CUSTOM_API example and sends it to Helper/SDK. The source description may be valid, but it is not the complete envelope containing request identity, targets, mappings and fixture.

Read these observations separately.

  • Source Document: input for draft.source.
  • Full request: needs request_id/correlation_id/draft and supported references.
  • Excerpt: explains fields; it is not a complete executable input.

Check and action sequence:

  1. Obtain the supplied version-matched full request template and retain its original.
  2. Populate source/target/mapping/fixture in their defined locations without secrets or live customer responses.
  3. After parsing, use product analyze or Helper stage decisions for semantic checks.

Condition for resuming: Proceed to preparation only with a complete request and published target validated within supported coverage.

If still unresolved: Do not guess explanatory values as real target identifiers when required references are unavailable.

Post-install tools

Local documentation edition. Company connection, approval and enrollment require actual supplied material. Educational scenarios are not customer execution evidence. Apple signing/notarization and customer activation/delivery remain held.

Connect the Guides and Parts 1–8

Choose a purpose in a Guide, then use the relevant Part for exact tool steps. The same sequence, vocabulary and artifact roles apply in both.

Source/request, SDK candidate and actual Work are distinct stages; the table explains each artifact.
Source/request, SDK candidate and actual Work are distinct stages; the table explains each artifact.

Purpose guides

  • Common PoC Guide

    Choose a question, collect scoped observations and review the result. A retained-reading route needs no new installation.

  • Google Reviewer Guide

    Bind the exact review delivery and criterion evidence. Cloud access, document coverage and actual Google approval remain separate.

  • On-premises Guide

    Prepare the exact OS, package, network choice and toolchain. Use the local SDK shortcut only after its prerequisites are supplied.

  • Custom Execution Guide

    Choose a supported task. Keep source-document preparation, full SDK candidates and actual Work/report inspection as distinct routes.

  • Guide links open the public website and require network access; this offline manual and its local examples remain readable without it.
Recommended integration order and shortcuts
  1. Part.1 · Install and prepare
  2. Part.2 · Observe structure with GAPE
  3. Part.3A · Plan with Integration Helper
  4. Part.4 · Write the source Document and bind the published target Contract
  5. Part.3B · Check the complete request and identify implementation needs
  6. Part.5 if needed · SDK candidate, implementation review and separate registration
  7. Part.6 if needed · Builder Pack candidate and its approval path
  8. Part.7 · Permitted GUI or headless operation
  9. Part.8 · Results, troubleshooting and human review

Helper B checks the completed declarations before you decide whether implementation or a new Pack is needed. After an implementation or declaration change, repeat only the affected supported checks and finish the separate implementation/registration/Pack approval path before operation. A generated candidate grants no operating authority.

Select only the route needed for your goal. Retained PoC reading can begin without installation. A supplied local SDK exercise uses Part.1 → Part.5 and does not require a new GAPE scan or appliance account. An existing approved Pack can use Part.1 → Part.7 → Part.8 after its current prerequisites are checked. New integration/Pack authoring follows the full conditional sequence.

Part map and tool responsibilities
PartRole and expected boundary
Part.1 · Installation and first connectionOS preparation, supplied packages and first connection. Installation is not an executed Work.
Part.2 · GAPE observation, comparison and sharingRevision-bound architecture observation. A worksheet is not the approved GAPE input manifest.
Part.3 · Integration Helper operationA plans before the Document; B checks the completed full request. Each stage reads its typed status/reason.
Part.4 · Contract and Document authoringAuthor the source Document and mappings; use the supplied target Contract/revision. JSON syntax alone does not establish semantic compatibility.
Part.5 · SDK Engine practice and candidatesGenerate a local SDK implementation candidate. Reuse an implemented, registered, release-compatible integration when it already meets the need.
Part.6 · Builder and Additional PacksPrepare a Pack candidate when a new Pack is needed. Reuse an existing approved Pack that meets the goal and installation scope.
Part.7 · PackrGUI and headless operationUse the supplied GUI/headless route under its current authority and preconditions. Inspect the returned Work identity and result.
Part.8 · Operations, troubleshooting and supportCompare same-Work artifacts, receipt and closure; keep human acceptance pending until actually recorded.
Shared vocabulary
Guide / Part
A Guide is a purpose/role route; a Part is a tool reference. They complement each other and are not two competing numbered workflows.
Contract / source Document
The published target Contract defines the supported target and revision. The source Document declares your source shapes. A source declaration does not authorize execution.
Complete request / source-only file
A complete SDK request includes request_id, correlation_id and draft with definition/source/mapping/fixture. The source-only status Document is one component, not that complete request.
Fixture / actual observation
A fixture supplies synthetic values for a declared local exercise. Its declared fields do not prove a real provider call, current connectivity or a customer result.
SDK candidate / Pack candidate
The SDK candidate has README.md, adapter.rs, libadapter.rlib and manifest.json. A Builder Pack candidate is a separate product-returned candidate with its own validation/approval path. Neither automatically becomes an approved Pack.
Worksheet / receipt / acceptance
A worksheet records a human note. A receipt is a product execution record. PASSED validation and automation completion can coexist with human acceptance pending; record each field at its actual scope.
Online / Offline
These are setup choices. Offline product development requires the exact declared dependency set and native tools; an offline manual ZIP only supports document reading.
Match each input to the right output

The status.read source-only example and the read_quality SDK exercise are different examples. Use a matching complete request; do not pass the status source file directly as the quality SDK request. Expected mapping values below are teaching expectations, not a newly captured run.

File / roleInputOutput / check
status-document.json

Source-only CUSTOM_API declaration for status.read. Use it inside the complete supplied preparation request.

service: stringDeclared service: string and healthy: boolean. This is a schema, not an observed service response.
read-only-custom-api.json / custom-api-01.json

The complete maintained SDK base request; the guide copy is byte-equivalent JSON.

fixture.response.component = "fixture-component"; score = "97" (string)STRING_TO_INTEGER maps score to expected integer quality_score 97. The documented SDK result is a local candidate.
custom-api-02.json

A complete second SDK request changing only the two fixture response values.

component = "my-test-component"; score = "88" (string)Expected mapped component is "my-test-component" and quality_score is integer 88. Inspect actual manifest/stages; identical mapping source is possible.
custom-api-score-number.json

Intentional negative input, not a successful base example.

fixture.response.score = 88 (JSON number) against a declared string schemaKeep the actual typed failure result. Do not convert the example into a claimed successful candidate.
Worksheet / SDK artifacts / Work reports

Three different artifact classes: human notes, local compiled candidate, actual Work/report/receipt records.

Use the matching tool and current target; never submit a worksheet or previous result as the next full request.Bind outputs to the actual input, version, candidate or Work identity. File presence and exit 0 alone are insufficient.