Inquiry Ecosystem Framework

Application Specification Index

This specification enables another LLM to implement the complete Inquiry Ecosystem Framework without access to original source code.

Specification Files

Quick Reference

What This System Creates

Users create structurally accountable inquiry journeys where:

• Every decision point asks: ceremony? relationship? ancestral wisdom?
• Inquiries track their genealogy (parent-child relationships)
• Sessions inherit context when they fork
• Assumptions are visible and revisitable
• Structural tension charts guide creative advancement

Core Mechanism

Ceremony Check — the gate that ensures relational accountability is structural, not decorative: ``` Decision → ceremony_check → 3 Questions → Pass/Block/Override → Proceed or Halt ```

Component Stack

``` CEREMONY LAYER ceremony_check, gate validation, history INQUIRY LAYER register_inquiry, genealogy, linking SESSION LAYER fork_session, context inheritance CHART LAYER ceremony-aware structural tension charts ASSUMPTION LAYER log_assumption, validation, decision linking ```

Implementation Priority

1. Phase 1: Ceremony Check — The structural accountability mechanism (core innovation)
2. Phase 2: Inquiry Registry — Question genealogy and semantic tracking
3. Phase 3: Context Continuum — Session forking with inheritance
4. Phase 4: IAIP Integration — Four Directions and relational assessment
5. Phase 5: Seremia Memory — Project-level knowledge persistence

Existing Systems Leveraged

Key Design Decisions

Why Ceremony Check Is Structural, Not Optional

From ceremony-check.spec.md:

"The system literally cannot proceed without the check. Not by ignoring it, not by skipping it—the check is the path through."

Why Override Is Permanently Visible

From ceremony-check.spec.md:

"If someone overrides a 'no' answer, that override is permanently visible in the inquiry's history. Accountability is structural."

Why Context Inherits on Fork

From inquiry-ecosystem.spec.md:

"A child session inherently knows what the parent discovered, without redundant effort."

Success Criteria

The prototype succeeds when:

• ✅ Ceremony check required to create structural tension chart
• ✅ Session fork inherits parent context automatically
• ✅ Inquiry genealogy is visible and navigable
• ✅ Override decisions are permanently visible
• ✅ LLM can conduct structurally accountable inquiry via MCP tools

The prototype fails the Wilson test if:

• ❌ Ceremony checks can be skipped without trace
• ❌ Technology leads and ceremony follows

Usage

For Implementer:

1. Read inquiry-ecosystem.spec.md for component understanding
2. Read ceremony-check.spec.md for core mechanism
3. Read integration-plan.spec.md for implementation phases
4. Build Phase 1 (ceremony check) first

For User:

1. Register inquiry with direction (East/South/West/North)
2. Ceremony check before major decisions
3. Create structural tension chart for goals
4. Fork sessions when branching exploration
5. Log assumptions explicitly
6. Mark actions complete (advances current reality)

Origin

This specification reverse-engineered from:

• Podcast Episodes 001-031 (Inquiry Ecosystem Framework dialogue)
• Wilson, Shawn - Research Is Ceremony
• RISE Framework methodology

The podcast's central question was:

"Can we build a framework that asks, at every decision point, 'Does this serve ceremony?'"

These specifications answer: Yes. Here's how.

Specification Version: 0.1 Created: 2026-01-14 Method: RISE Framework (Reverse-engineer → Intent → Specify → Export)