Menu
Mental model for a provider-neutral capability contract at the head of the Habitat product chain.
Install with Codex or Claude Copy this prompt, paste it into Codex, Claude, or another assistant, and let it review the skill page and install it for you.
Based on SOC occupation classification
Mental model for a sealed service whose context and authorship narrow toward operation handlers.
Mental model for locating work in RAWR's blueprint kinds while keeping semantic direction, ownership, and structural proof distinct.
Mental model for Nx as the repository graph and scheduler while project owners retain their qualified build and verification work.
Mental model for one conventional installed Oclif application that owns CLI identity while commands retain qualified capability boundaries.
Mental model for a first-party Oclif command plugin as one host-composed terminal projection on public package boundaries.
Mental model for an application as the concrete selection and realization boundary of the product chain.
| name | habitat-resource-frame |
| description | Mental model for a provider-neutral capability contract at the head of the Habitat product chain. |
A resource names one capability without naming how it is supplied. Its contract owns the values, operations, typed failures, and lifecycle expectations that every provider must satisfy. Vendor clients, provider selection, product policy, and service decisions remain outside.
resource -> provider -> service -> plugin -> app
This direction is an authorship law, not a call-stack claim. The resource defines the neutral vocabulary; a provider realizes it; a service consumes the ready capability while owning its domain meaning; a plugin projects that service; an app chooses the concrete runtime assembly.
At runtime, selection and context flow downward from the app. The service sees the resource value, never the concrete vendor construction. A resource does not import its providers or select among them, and a provider-specific fact does not widen the neutral contract merely because one implementation exposes it.
The closed root makes contract.ts the visible neutral face and providers/
the hard implementation boundary. When logic cannot remain provider-neutral,
it does not belong in the contract.
capability, contract, failure, lifecycle, neutrality, provider, resource