[Codegen#6] Ship codegen CLI and cross-backend golden and differential conformance #6

Required implementation language and containment

Owner directive (2026-09-07): first-party production and possible qualification paths must be Rust, including libraries, CLI/tools, generators, validators, canonicalization, result adapters, test assertions and fixture/CI audits. "Glue", prototypes, scripts and tests are not exemptions; a Rust wrapper around non-Rust semantic logic is not remediation.

• Every new TypeScript choice needs explicit owner approval for its exact scope. Any other executable language must be brought to the owner's attention; do not silently introduce or expand it.
• Quoin's existing implementation is explicitly retained for now: contain its spread, do not schedule a wholesale Quoin rewrite. Keep new reusable semantics in Rust behind versioned, structured interfaces. Existing Node/TypeScript is not blanket permission for new components or expanded language scope.
• Inventory existing JavaScript/Python/shell and executable generated/inline CI logic; record a Rust remediation owner or an explicit owner disposition. Data schemas and foreign-language fixture samples must be distinguished from executable checks. External tools/hosts/bindings need a scoped disposition, not an invented exemption.
• Reuse shared assurance contracts and Quoin evidence ownership; do not recreate local evidence frameworks. Classify each helper as an existing shared capability, a missing reusable capability, or domain-specific logic before porting.
• Complete /specify and /spec-review for the changed requirements/interfaces, resolve findings, then implement and verify. Preserve ongoing work and actual evidence provenance. Do not claim a language port or qualification complete from a policy update.
• Filament repositories/tickets are excluded from this remediation. Interface consumption does not authorize producer changes.

Before closure: record executable-path inventory, approved dispositions, Rust implementation/test/CI parity and failure-path evidence for the reviewed scope. Existing Quoin retention is the only accommodation recorded here; this block grants no new TypeScript approval.

Required spec cycle — owner directive

Every change requires the spec cycle before implementation: /specify → /spec-review → resolve findings and repeat as needed → implement and verify against the reviewed specification. Architecture notes, ticket acceptance checklists, an ADR draft, passing code tests, or quire validate alone do not satisfy this gate.

• Run /specify for the affected change in the owning repository. Use the repository's installed workflow/catalog templates; create or update the actual scoped requirement artifacts and traceability, including applicable behavior, interface, compatibility and adverse-case requirements. Do not substitute rows in an issue or index for required artifact files.
• Run /spec-review on that specification. Record the owner-selected review set (base/all/subset and selected analyses); if it has not been chosen, obtain that choice through the workflow rather than silently skipping review or selecting a weaker set. Produce the required review artifacts and validation evidence.
• Resolve blocking findings, update the specification, and rerun the affected review/validation cycle until the required review is accepted. Record the reviewed specification revision, review artifact(s), finding dispositions and any required owner approval on this ticket before implementation proceeds.
• Implement only the reviewed scope; maintain the required test/traceability matrix and implementation plan. If implementation exposes a changed requirement, interface, semantics, compatibility promise or acceptance criterion, return to /specify and /spec-review before proceeding with that changed scope.
• Before review/merge/closure, link the spec and review evidence plus implementation/test results for the same scope and revisions. Do not mark the task complete merely because code, repository setup or tests exist.

Already started without this cycle? Preserve existing work, but pause further unreviewed implementation and merge/release. Specify and review the actual change now, correct discrepancies, and record the true sequence; do not imply a retrospective review occurred before the code was written. Read-only inspection, specification authoring and review remediation may continue.

Workflow unavailable or review blocked? Report the exact missing tool/skill, review choice or approval. Use an explicitly approved equivalent procedure only; an ad hoc summary or checkbox is not a substitute. Never claim /specify or /spec-review ran when it did not.

This applies to child work under epics, existing-code changes, new crates/adapters, test/CI behavior and executable research spikes. For a spec-only or research/decision task, author and review its scoped specification/experiment contract; do not manufacture unrelated application artifacts or claim the experiment implemented. Follow the owning repository's current workflow and disclosure rules. Board status is not evidence that the gate passed.

Outcome

Ship codegen CLI and cross-backend golden and differential conformance.

Deliverables

• Expose a library-first API and deterministic CLI over serialized contract packages.
• Run golden tests over the shared contract corpus.
• Use permitted Sireum/INSPECTA outputs as attributed differential fixtures.
• Check executable oracle, proptest, Kani, and coverage mappings for semantic parity.

Acceptance criteria

• The CLI writes artifacts atomically and never edits developer-owned regions.
• Generated files and manifests are reproducible on supported platforms.
• Every differential discrepancy becomes a retained regression fixture or a documented semantic difference.
• The repository Assurance Argument cites the completed conformance results.

Dependencies

• CL-11
• CL-12
• CL-13

Workflow gate

This ticket is spec-first. Update or author the owning requirements and test matrix, complete review, and produce the plan delta before implementation. Completion requires code review, requirement-tagged tests, gap analysis, and retained evidence.