{
  "standard_family": "IARPG Operations Standards",
  "current_release": "IARPG-OPS-1",
  "version": "1.0.0",
  "published_utc": "2026-07-19T00:00:00Z",
  "canonical": "https://iarpg.com/standards",
  "plain_english": "A public game-design standard for fictional intelligence operations, mission interaction, evidence, tradecraft, tasking, and review.",
  "normative_language": {
    "MUST": "required for conformance",
    "SHOULD": "recommended unless a documented reason applies",
    "MAY": "optional supported behavior"
  },
  "categories": [
    "Foundation",
    "Mission Design",
    "Collection",
    "Evidence & Analysis",
    "Tradecraft",
    "Counterintelligence",
    "Synthetic Sources",
    "Interaction & Interfaces",
    "Tasking & Logistics",
    "Governance & Safety"
  ],
  "record_count": 26,
  "records": [
    {
      "code": "FOUND-01",
      "slug": "operational-neutrality-and-authority",
      "title": "Operational Neutrality and Authority",
      "category": "Foundation",
      "status": "Current",
      "version": "1.0.0",
      "summary": "Authorities define mandates, resources, constraints, and customers; the system does not assign permanent hero or villain status.",
      "keywords": [
        "authority",
        "mandate",
        "neutrality",
        "multi-polar",
        "allegiance",
        "motivation"
      ],
      "mission_phases": [
        "Task",
        "Plan",
        "Debrief"
      ],
      "canonical": "https://iarpg.com/standard/operational-neutrality-and-authority",
      "json": "https://iarpg.com/records/operational-neutrality-and-authority.json",
      "requirements": [
        {
          "level": "MUST",
          "text": "Every operation identify the sponsoring authority, customer, mandate, and jurisdiction before player acceptance."
        },
        {
          "level": "MUST",
          "text": "No authority receive a permanent good, evil, hero, or villain flag in canonical game logic."
        },
        {
          "level": "SHOULD",
          "text": "Conflicting authorities expose different objectives, constraints, and definitions of success without hiding their operational interests."
        },
        {
          "level": "MAY",
          "text": "Authorities cooperate temporarily when requirements overlap, even when their long-term interests conflict."
        }
      ],
      "research": [
        {
          "label": "Geopolitical agnosticism and faction ecology",
          "href": "/docs/report/systemic-subterfuge-architecting-a-geopolitically-neutral-classless-espionage-mmo#architectural-pillar-i-geopolitical-agnosticism-and-dynamic-faction-ecology",
          "note": "Neutral authority architecture and fluid loyalty."
        },
        {
          "label": "Post-national worldbuilding",
          "href": "/docs/report/architectural-and-narrative-design-specifications-for-a-vr-first-post-national-espionage-mmo#post-national-worldbuilding-and-the-elimination-of-geopolitical-bias",
          "note": "International representation without nationality-based moral assignment."
        }
      ],
      "related": [
        "mandate-customer-and-jurisdiction",
        "mission-brief-contract",
        "versioning-change-control-and-telemetry"
      ]
    },
    {
      "code": "FOUND-02",
      "slug": "mandate-customer-and-jurisdiction",
      "title": "Mandate, Customer, and Jurisdiction",
      "category": "Foundation",
      "status": "Current",
      "version": "1.0.0",
      "summary": "Operational authority is bounded by who requested the work, where it applies, what methods are permitted, and what review follows.",
      "keywords": [
        "mandate",
        "customer",
        "jurisdiction",
        "scope",
        "constraints",
        "authorization"
      ],
      "mission_phases": [
        "Task",
        "Plan",
        "Deliver"
      ],
      "canonical": "https://iarpg.com/standard/mandate-customer-and-jurisdiction",
      "json": "https://iarpg.com/records/mandate-customer-and-jurisdiction.json",
      "requirements": [
        {
          "level": "MUST",
          "text": "Tasking declare a customer, intelligence requirement, legal or organizational authority, and operating jurisdiction."
        },
        {
          "level": "MUST",
          "text": "The mission distinguish authorized methods from prohibited or unsupported methods."
        },
        {
          "level": "SHOULD",
          "text": "Cross-jurisdiction work declare which authority can recognize, deny, contest, or punish an action."
        },
        {
          "level": "MAY",
          "text": "A mission include compartmented customers whose identities are revealed only when the player has the required access."
        }
      ],
      "research": [
        {
          "label": "The multi-polar intelligence ecosystem",
          "href": "/docs/report/typology-of-intelligence-operatives-and-tradecraft-frameworks-a-comprehensive-architecture-for-clandestine-beh#the-multi-polar-intelligence-ecosystem",
          "note": "State, private, corporate, and independent operational customers."
        },
        {
          "label": "Recommended warrant architecture",
          "href": "/docs/report/justice-system-and-warrant-escalation-for-rogue-intelligence#recommended-warrant-architecture",
          "note": "Jurisdiction and evidence thresholds remain separate from severity."
        }
      ],
      "related": [
        "operational-neutrality-and-authority",
        "intelligence-requirement",
        "evidence-based-jurisdiction-and-warrants"
      ]
    },
    {
      "code": "MISS-01",
      "slug": "intelligence-requirement",
      "title": "Intelligence Requirement",
      "category": "Mission Design",
      "status": "Current",
      "version": "1.0.0",
      "summary": "Every mission begins with a question or decision need that collection and analysis are meant to support.",
      "keywords": [
        "requirement",
        "question",
        "decision",
        "tasking",
        "priority",
        "collection"
      ],
      "mission_phases": [
        "Task",
        "Plan"
      ],
      "canonical": "https://iarpg.com/standard/intelligence-requirement",
      "json": "https://iarpg.com/records/intelligence-requirement.json",
      "requirements": [
        {
          "level": "MUST",
          "text": "State the primary intelligence requirement as a decision-oriented question."
        },
        {
          "level": "MUST",
          "text": "Separate the requirement from assumptions, preferred explanations, and desired political outcomes."
        },
        {
          "level": "SHOULD",
          "text": "Define priority intelligence gaps and the minimum evidence needed to close them."
        },
        {
          "level": "MAY",
          "text": "Include secondary requirements that become active when new evidence changes the operational picture."
        }
      ],
      "research": [
        {
          "label": "Case officer and operations cycle",
          "href": "/docs/report/typology-of-intelligence-operatives-and-tradecraft-frameworks-a-comprehensive-architecture-for-clandestine-beh#the-case-officer-and-the-intelligence-operations-cycle",
          "note": "Requirement-driven tasking and operational coordination."
        },
        {
          "label": "Strategic fit with evidence-based play",
          "href": "/docs/report/justice-system-and-warrant-escalation-for-rogue-intelligence#strategic-fit-with-rogue-intelligence",
          "note": "Consequences should follow evidence and explainable reasons."
        }
      ],
      "related": [
        "mission-brief-contract",
        "mission-lifecycle",
        "competing-hypotheses-and-assessment"
      ]
    },
    {
      "code": "MISS-02",
      "slug": "mission-brief-contract",
      "title": "Mission Brief Contract",
      "category": "Mission Design",
      "status": "Current",
      "version": "1.0.0",
      "summary": "A mission brief is a reviewable contract connecting authority, requirement, roles, constraints, evidence thresholds, abort conditions, and extraction.",
      "keywords": [
        "brief",
        "contract",
        "objective",
        "constraints",
        "abort",
        "extraction",
        "reward"
      ],
      "mission_phases": [
        "Task",
        "Plan",
        "Extract"
      ],
      "canonical": "https://iarpg.com/standard/mission-brief-contract",
      "json": "https://iarpg.com/records/mission-brief-contract.json",
      "requirements": [
        {
          "level": "MUST",
          "text": "Include title, authority, mandate, intelligence requirement, jurisdiction, roles, known facts, assumptions, constraints, abort condition, extraction plan, and debrief deliverable."
        },
        {
          "level": "MUST",
          "text": "Disclose whether rewards are engine-verified, authority-reviewed, or dependent on an unverified sponsor."
        },
        {
          "level": "SHOULD",
          "text": "Expose evidence thresholds for irreversible actions and major consequence states."
        },
        {
          "level": "MAY",
          "text": "Hide compartmented details behind role access while preserving the shared mission contract."
        }
      ],
      "research": [
        {
          "label": "Verified and unverified contract design",
          "href": "/docs/report/social-deception-and-player-generated-fake-quests#quest-design-unverified-vs-verified-contracts",
          "note": "Transparent risk tiers for tasking and payment."
        },
        {
          "label": "Escrow, verification, and reputation",
          "href": "/docs/report/trust-deception-and-virtual-economies#escrow-verification-and-reputation-systems",
          "note": "Trust signals, histories, and settlement boundaries."
        }
      ],
      "related": [
        "intelligence-requirement",
        "verified-and-unverified-tasking",
        "success-abort-extraction-and-debrief"
      ]
    },
    {
      "code": "MISS-03",
      "slug": "mission-lifecycle",
      "title": "Mission Lifecycle",
      "category": "Mission Design",
      "status": "Current",
      "version": "1.0.0",
      "summary": "Operations progress through explicit lifecycle states from tasking to debrief, with observable transitions and recoverable failure states.",
      "keywords": [
        "lifecycle",
        "state machine",
        "task",
        "plan",
        "access",
        "collect",
        "validate",
        "deliver",
        "debrief"
      ],
      "mission_phases": [
        "Task",
        "Plan",
        "Access",
        "Collect",
        "Validate",
        "Deliver",
        "Extract",
        "Debrief"
      ],
      "canonical": "https://iarpg.com/standard/mission-lifecycle",
      "json": "https://iarpg.com/records/mission-lifecycle.json",
      "requirements": [
        {
          "level": "MUST",
          "text": "Represent Task, Plan, Access, Collect, Validate, Deliver, Extract, and Debrief as distinct states or reviewable milestones."
        },
        {
          "level": "MUST",
          "text": "Persist accepted brief revision, evidence state, role assignments, and consequence state across transitions."
        },
        {
          "level": "SHOULD",
          "text": "Permit fail-forward transitions when a planned path closes but the intelligence requirement remains answerable."
        },
        {
          "level": "MAY",
          "text": "Allow parallel collection tasks to converge into a shared validation state."
        }
      ],
      "research": [
        {
          "label": "Case officer and intelligence operations cycle",
          "href": "/docs/report/typology-of-intelligence-operatives-and-tradecraft-frameworks-a-comprehensive-architecture-for-clandestine-beh#the-case-officer-and-the-intelligence-operations-cycle",
          "note": "Role coordination through an intelligence cycle."
        },
        {
          "label": "Fail-forward mission design",
          "href": "/docs/report/systemic-implementation-of-delusional-ai-and-hallucinated-mission-vectors-in-virtual-reality-mmorpgs#balancing-risk-reward-the-fail-forward-paradigm",
          "note": "Failure changes the operation instead of erasing player time."
        }
      ],
      "related": [
        "mission-brief-contract",
        "success-abort-extraction-and-debrief",
        "player-interaction-and-social-stealth"
      ]
    },
    {
      "code": "MISS-04",
      "slug": "roles-and-information-asymmetry",
      "title": "Roles and Information Asymmetry",
      "category": "Mission Design",
      "status": "Current",
      "version": "1.0.0",
      "summary": "Operative, handler, analyst, technical, liaison, and support roles receive different information and actions while contributing to one requirement.",
      "keywords": [
        "roles",
        "operative",
        "handler",
        "analyst",
        "technical",
        "liaison",
        "asymmetry"
      ],
      "mission_phases": [
        "Plan",
        "Access",
        "Collect",
        "Validate",
        "Deliver"
      ],
      "canonical": "https://iarpg.com/standard/roles-and-information-asymmetry",
      "json": "https://iarpg.com/records/roles-and-information-asymmetry.json",
      "requirements": [
        {
          "level": "MUST",
          "text": "Each assigned role have at least one unique information source, decision, or action that materially affects the operation."
        },
        {
          "level": "MUST",
          "text": "Shared mission truth remain server-authoritative even when roles receive incomplete or conflicting views."
        },
        {
          "level": "SHOULD",
          "text": "Role coordination reward concise handoffs, explicit uncertainty, and timely escalation."
        },
        {
          "level": "MAY",
          "text": "One player occupy multiple low-intensity support roles when population is limited, provided information boundaries remain visible."
        }
      ],
      "research": [
        {
          "label": "Operative archetypes and support roles",
          "href": "/docs/report/intelligence-operative-archetypes-and-tradecraft#analytical-liaison-and-support-roles",
          "note": "Distinct analytical, liaison, and support responsibilities."
        },
        {
          "label": "Operative and handler interdependence",
          "href": "/docs/report/architectural-and-narrative-design-specifications-for-a-vr-first-post-national-espionage-mmo#interactive-cross-dimensional-media-the-operative-and-the-handler",
          "note": "Asymmetric cross-platform interaction design."
        }
      ],
      "related": [
        "mission-lifecycle",
        "vr-and-browser-role-interdependence",
        "collection-discipline-selection"
      ]
    },
    {
      "code": "MISS-05",
      "slug": "success-abort-extraction-and-debrief",
      "title": "Success, Abort, Extraction, and Debrief",
      "category": "Mission Design",
      "status": "Current",
      "version": "1.0.0",
      "summary": "Operations define success beyond completion, permit professional aborts, and require extraction and debrief as first-class gameplay.",
      "keywords": [
        "success",
        "abort",
        "extraction",
        "debrief",
        "partial success",
        "consequence"
      ],
      "mission_phases": [
        "Deliver",
        "Extract",
        "Debrief"
      ],
      "canonical": "https://iarpg.com/standard/success-abort-extraction-and-debrief",
      "json": "https://iarpg.com/records/success-abort-extraction-and-debrief.json",
      "requirements": [
        {
          "level": "MUST",
          "text": "Define complete success, partial success, professional abort, compromised extraction, and failed debrief outcomes."
        },
        {
          "level": "MUST",
          "text": "Record why the operation ended and which intelligence gaps remain."
        },
        {
          "level": "SHOULD",
          "text": "Reward source protection, cover preservation, evidence quality, and decision usefulness independently of objective completion."
        },
        {
          "level": "MAY",
          "text": "Convert an unsuccessful collection attempt into future access, counterintelligence warning, or environmental discovery."
        }
      ],
      "research": [
        {
          "label": "Operational egress and contingencies",
          "href": "/docs/report/operational-directive-analog-tradecraft-and-counter-surveillance-in-high-density-virtual-urban-environments#operational-egress-and-contingencies",
          "note": "Egress and contingency planning as part of the operation."
        },
        {
          "label": "Mitigating zero-payout frustration",
          "href": "/docs/report/systemic-implementation-of-delusional-ai-and-hallucinated-mission-vectors-in-virtual-reality-mmorpgs#mitigating-the-frustration-of-zero-payout",
          "note": "Fail-forward value and meaningful secondary outcomes."
        }
      ],
      "related": [
        "mission-lifecycle",
        "provenance-confidence-and-corroboration",
        "versioning-change-control-and-telemetry"
      ]
    },
    {
      "code": "COLL-01",
      "slug": "collection-discipline-selection",
      "title": "Collection Discipline Selection",
      "category": "Collection",
      "status": "Current",
      "version": "1.0.0",
      "summary": "HUMINT, SIGINT, OSINT, cyber, imagery, geospatial, and technical methods produce different evidence and exposure profiles.",
      "keywords": [
        "HUMINT",
        "SIGINT",
        "OSINT",
        "cyber",
        "GEOINT",
        "IMINT",
        "collection"
      ],
      "mission_phases": [
        "Plan",
        "Access",
        "Collect"
      ],
      "canonical": "https://iarpg.com/standard/collection-discipline-selection",
      "json": "https://iarpg.com/records/collection-discipline-selection.json",
      "requirements": [
        {
          "level": "MUST",
          "text": "Every collection method declare what it can observe, what it cannot establish, and what exposure it creates."
        },
        {
          "level": "MUST",
          "text": "Collection output identify source discipline and acquisition context."
        },
        {
          "level": "SHOULD",
          "text": "Missions offer at least two plausible collection approaches when the environment supports them."
        },
        {
          "level": "MAY",
          "text": "Collection disciplines conflict, requiring players to reconcile timing, identity, or attribution differences."
        }
      ],
      "research": [
        {
          "label": "The intelligence disciplines",
          "href": "/docs/report/typology-of-intelligence-operatives-and-tradecraft-frameworks-a-comprehensive-architecture-for-clandestine-beh#the-intelligence-disciplines-the-ints",
          "note": "A multi-discipline intelligence taxonomy."
        },
        {
          "label": "Technical and signals operatives",
          "href": "/docs/report/intelligence-operative-archetypes-and-tradecraft#technical-and-signals-operatives",
          "note": "Technical collection roles and constraints."
        }
      ],
      "related": [
        "roles-and-information-asymmetry",
        "source-handling",
        "provenance-confidence-and-corroboration"
      ]
    },
    {
      "code": "HUM-01",
      "slug": "source-handling",
      "title": "Source Handling",
      "category": "Collection",
      "status": "Current",
      "version": "1.0.0",
      "summary": "Human sources are relationships with access, motivation, reliability, vulnerability, and independent agency.",
      "keywords": [
        "HUMINT",
        "source",
        "recruitment",
        "handling",
        "motivation",
        "reliability",
        "protection"
      ],
      "mission_phases": [
        "Access",
        "Collect",
        "Validate",
        "Extract"
      ],
      "canonical": "https://iarpg.com/standard/source-handling",
      "json": "https://iarpg.com/records/source-handling.json",
      "requirements": [
        {
          "level": "MUST",
          "text": "Represent source access, motivation, placement, reliability history, and protection risk separately."
        },
        {
          "level": "MUST",
          "text": "Store source statements as reports with attribution and context, not as direct game truth."
        },
        {
          "level": "SHOULD",
          "text": "Allow sources to refuse, misunderstand, omit, exaggerate, or change cooperation based on treatment and risk."
        },
        {
          "level": "MAY",
          "text": "Permit source relationships to outlive individual operations and change future access."
        }
      ],
      "research": [
        {
          "label": "HUMINT operatives",
          "href": "/docs/report/intelligence-operative-archetypes-and-tradecraft#humint-operatives",
          "note": "Case officers, agents, sources, and relationship-centered collection."
        },
        {
          "label": "State intelligence and HUMINT operatives",
          "href": "/docs/report/typology-of-intelligence-operatives-and-tradecraft-frameworks-a-comprehensive-architecture-for-clandestine-beh#state-intelligence-architecture-and-humint-operatives",
          "note": "Source and case officer roles within an operational system."
        }
      ],
      "related": [
        "collection-discipline-selection",
        "observation-report-interpretation-and-hypothesis",
        "cover-identity-and-congruence"
      ]
    },
    {
      "code": "EVID-01",
      "slug": "observation-report-interpretation-and-hypothesis",
      "title": "Observation, Report, Interpretation, and Hypothesis",
      "category": "Evidence & Analysis",
      "status": "Current",
      "version": "1.0.0",
      "summary": "The game separates what was observed, what a source reported, what an analyst inferred, and what explanation is being tested.",
      "keywords": [
        "observation",
        "report",
        "interpretation",
        "hypothesis",
        "fact",
        "claim",
        "analysis"
      ],
      "mission_phases": [
        "Collect",
        "Validate",
        "Deliver",
        "Debrief"
      ],
      "canonical": "https://iarpg.com/standard/observation-report-interpretation-and-hypothesis",
      "json": "https://iarpg.com/records/observation-report-interpretation-and-hypothesis.json",
      "requirements": [
        {
          "level": "MUST",
          "text": "Classify every dossier item as observation, source report, interpretation, hypothesis, assessment, or decision."
        },
        {
          "level": "MUST",
          "text": "Preserve author, time, context, source, and revision lineage for each item."
        },
        {
          "level": "SHOULD",
          "text": "Allow players to challenge, annotate, supersede, or retain competing interpretations without deleting the original record."
        },
        {
          "level": "MAY",
          "text": "Display disagreements between roles as parallel analytic notes."
        }
      ],
      "research": [
        {
          "label": "Strategic fit with explainable evidence",
          "href": "/docs/report/justice-system-and-warrant-escalation-for-rogue-intelligence#strategic-fit-with-rogue-intelligence",
          "note": "Observation, report, interpretation, and hypothesis should remain distinct."
        },
        {
          "label": "Counterintelligence data collection methodology",
          "href": "/docs/report/counterintelligence-directive-alliance-leak-investigation#data-collection-and-analysis-methodology",
          "note": "Structured collection and suspect isolation."
        }
      ],
      "related": [
        "provenance-confidence-and-corroboration",
        "competing-hypotheses-and-assessment",
        "evidence-based-jurisdiction-and-warrants"
      ]
    },
    {
      "code": "EVID-02",
      "slug": "provenance-confidence-and-corroboration",
      "title": "Provenance, Confidence, and Corroboration",
      "category": "Evidence & Analysis",
      "status": "Current",
      "version": "1.0.0",
      "summary": "Confidence is earned through source context, provenance, independence, consistency, and discriminating evidence.",
      "keywords": [
        "provenance",
        "confidence",
        "corroboration",
        "independence",
        "chain of custody",
        "reason codes"
      ],
      "mission_phases": [
        "Collect",
        "Validate",
        "Deliver",
        "Debrief"
      ],
      "canonical": "https://iarpg.com/standard/provenance-confidence-and-corroboration",
      "json": "https://iarpg.com/records/provenance-confidence-and-corroboration.json",
      "requirements": [
        {
          "level": "MUST",
          "text": "Every material claim carry provenance, source type, acquisition time, confidence, and reason codes."
        },
        {
          "level": "MUST",
          "text": "Independent corroboration be required for mission-defined irreversible actions."
        },
        {
          "level": "SHOULD",
          "text": "Confidence changes reference the specific evidence or contradiction responsible for the update."
        },
        {
          "level": "MAY",
          "text": "Mission authors define different evidence thresholds for public attribution, operational action, and internal warning."
        }
      ],
      "research": [
        {
          "label": "Recommended warrant architecture",
          "href": "/docs/report/justice-system-and-warrant-escalation-for-rogue-intelligence#recommended-warrant-architecture",
          "note": "Severity and evidentiary certainty are separate axes."
        },
        {
          "label": "Mission verification guidelines",
          "href": "/docs/report/hallucinated-ai-quest-design-in-vr-mmorpgs#mitigation-strategies-and-design-guidelines",
          "note": "Verification tools and intentional reliability signals."
        }
      ],
      "related": [
        "observation-report-interpretation-and-hypothesis",
        "competing-hypotheses-and-assessment",
        "synthetic-source-disclosure-and-authority"
      ]
    },
    {
      "code": "ANAL-01",
      "slug": "competing-hypotheses-and-assessment",
      "title": "Competing Hypotheses and Assessment",
      "category": "Evidence & Analysis",
      "status": "Current",
      "version": "1.0.0",
      "summary": "Analysis compares multiple explanations and records what evidence would discriminate among them.",
      "keywords": [
        "analysis",
        "hypotheses",
        "alternatives",
        "bias",
        "assessment",
        "indicators"
      ],
      "mission_phases": [
        "Plan",
        "Validate",
        "Deliver",
        "Debrief"
      ],
      "canonical": "https://iarpg.com/standard/competing-hypotheses-and-assessment",
      "json": "https://iarpg.com/records/competing-hypotheses-and-assessment.json",
      "requirements": [
        {
          "level": "MUST",
          "text": "Material assessments identify at least one plausible alternative explanation when evidence is incomplete."
        },
        {
          "level": "MUST",
          "text": "Each hypothesis list supporting, contradicting, and non-discriminating evidence."
        },
        {
          "level": "SHOULD",
          "text": "Collection planning prioritize evidence that can distinguish among leading hypotheses."
        },
        {
          "level": "MAY",
          "text": "Allow analysts to publish dissenting assessments with separate confidence and reasoning."
        }
      ],
      "research": [
        {
          "label": "Alliance leak threat assessment",
          "href": "/docs/report/counterintelligence-directive-alliance-leak-investigation#threat-assessment",
          "note": "Counterintelligence investigation with multiple suspects and evidence types."
        },
        {
          "label": "Investigation workflow",
          "href": "/docs/report/counterintelligence-directive-alliance-leak-investigation#investigative-workflow-and-timeline",
          "note": "Structured collection and analysis over time."
        }
      ],
      "related": [
        "intelligence-requirement",
        "provenance-confidence-and-corroboration",
        "counterintelligence-investigation"
      ]
    },
    {
      "code": "TRADE-01",
      "slug": "cover-identity-and-congruence",
      "title": "Cover Identity and Congruence",
      "category": "Tradecraft",
      "status": "Current",
      "version": "1.0.0",
      "summary": "Cover is a persistent system of identity, access, behavior, records, competence, relationships, and exposure—not a costume slot.",
      "keywords": [
        "cover",
        "legend",
        "identity",
        "congruence",
        "access",
        "behavior",
        "backstopping"
      ],
      "mission_phases": [
        "Plan",
        "Access",
        "Collect",
        "Extract"
      ],
      "canonical": "https://iarpg.com/standard/cover-identity-and-congruence",
      "json": "https://iarpg.com/records/cover-identity-and-congruence.json",
      "requirements": [
        {
          "level": "MUST",
          "text": "A cover define identity, occupation, purpose, access rationale, expected competence, records, relationships, and exposure indicators."
        },
        {
          "level": "MUST",
          "text": "Suspicion respond to incongruence among behavior, environment, documentation, and known history rather than a hidden alignment score."
        },
        {
          "level": "SHOULD",
          "text": "Cover consequences persist across operations and permit repair, reinforcement, compartmentation, or retirement."
        },
        {
          "level": "MAY",
          "text": "Multiple covers coexist with separate access, relationships, and risk histories."
        }
      ],
      "research": [
        {
          "label": "Taxonomy of cover identities",
          "href": "/docs/report/cover-identities-and-tradecraft-in-espionage-executive-summary#taxonomy-of-cover-identities",
          "note": "Cover types, verification, and risk."
        },
        {
          "label": "Maintaining the legend",
          "href": "/docs/report/the-architecture-of-deception-constructing-and-maintaining-cover-backgrounds-in-modern-espionage#maintaining-the-legend-operational-tradecraft-and-communications",
          "note": "Persistent identity maintenance and communications."
        }
      ],
      "related": [
        "player-interaction-and-social-stealth",
        "surveillance-detection-and-counter-surveillance",
        "source-handling"
      ]
    },
    {
      "code": "TRADE-02",
      "slug": "surveillance-detection-and-counter-surveillance",
      "title": "Surveillance, Detection, and Counter-Surveillance",
      "category": "Tradecraft",
      "status": "Guidance",
      "version": "1.0.0",
      "summary": "Surveillance is represented as pattern recognition, route pressure, environmental observation, and exposure management within fictional game spaces.",
      "keywords": [
        "surveillance",
        "counter-surveillance",
        "detection",
        "route",
        "pattern",
        "exposure"
      ],
      "mission_phases": [
        "Plan",
        "Access",
        "Collect",
        "Extract"
      ],
      "canonical": "https://iarpg.com/standard/surveillance-detection-and-counter-surveillance",
      "json": "https://iarpg.com/records/surveillance-detection-and-counter-surveillance.json",
      "requirements": [
        {
          "level": "MUST",
          "text": "Keep public documentation at fictional, abstract, game-system level and avoid practical real-world targeting instructions."
        },
        {
          "level": "MUST",
          "text": "Represent surveillance through observable game patterns, uncertainty, and resource trade-offs."
        },
        {
          "level": "SHOULD",
          "text": "Provide more than one response to suspected surveillance, including delay, route change, abort, decoy, or controlled exposure."
        },
        {
          "level": "MAY",
          "text": "Use accessibility settings to surface patterns through visual, audio, or interface cues."
        }
      ],
      "research": [
        {
          "label": "Philosophy of urban counter-surveillance",
          "href": "/docs/report/operational-directive-analog-tradecraft-and-counter-surveillance-in-high-density-virtual-urban-environments#the-philosophy-of-urban-counter-surveillance",
          "note": "Fictional urban surveillance mechanics and cognitive load."
        },
        {
          "label": "Maintaining cover and counter-surveillance",
          "href": "/docs/report/cover-identities-and-tradecraft-in-espionage-executive-summary#maintaining-cover-and-counter-surveillance-tradecraft",
          "note": "Cover maintenance and detection risk."
        }
      ],
      "related": [
        "cover-identity-and-congruence",
        "communications-and-compartmentation",
        "success-abort-extraction-and-debrief"
      ]
    },
    {
      "code": "TRADE-03",
      "slug": "communications-and-compartmentation",
      "title": "Communications and Compartmentation",
      "category": "Tradecraft",
      "status": "Current",
      "version": "1.0.0",
      "summary": "Operational information moves through role-aware channels with explicit need-to-know boundaries, delivery state, and exposure cost.",
      "keywords": [
        "communications",
        "compartmentation",
        "need to know",
        "handoff",
        "dead drop",
        "channel"
      ],
      "mission_phases": [
        "Plan",
        "Collect",
        "Deliver",
        "Extract"
      ],
      "canonical": "https://iarpg.com/standard/communications-and-compartmentation",
      "json": "https://iarpg.com/records/communications-and-compartmentation.json",
      "requirements": [
        {
          "level": "MUST",
          "text": "Operational messages identify sender role, intended recipient, mission context, sensitivity, and delivery status."
        },
        {
          "level": "MUST",
          "text": "Compartmented information remain inaccessible to roles without a declared need-to-know path."
        },
        {
          "level": "SHOULD",
          "text": "Communication methods expose latency, reliability, interception, and attribution trade-offs."
        },
        {
          "level": "MAY",
          "text": "Allow deliberate misinformation inside the game when it is bounded, discoverable, and separated from authoritative system truth."
        }
      ],
      "research": [
        {
          "label": "Clandestine communications and physical exchanges",
          "href": "/docs/report/typology-of-intelligence-operatives-and-tradecraft-frameworks-a-comprehensive-architecture-for-clandestine-beh#clandestine-communications-and-physical-exchanges",
          "note": "Communication and exchange methods in the tradecraft taxonomy."
        },
        {
          "label": "Pre-exchange protocol",
          "href": "/docs/report/operational-directive-analog-tradecraft-and-counter-surveillance-in-high-density-virtual-urban-environments#pre-exchange-protocol-the-analog-signal",
          "note": "Fictional signaling and exchange preparation."
        }
      ],
      "related": [
        "roles-and-information-asymmetry",
        "surveillance-detection-and-counter-surveillance",
        "courier-and-handoff-state-machine"
      ]
    },
    {
      "code": "CI-01",
      "slug": "counterintelligence-investigation",
      "title": "Counterintelligence Investigation",
      "category": "Counterintelligence",
      "status": "Current",
      "version": "1.0.0",
      "summary": "Counterintelligence identifies compromise through competing explanations, evidence provenance, access analysis, behavioral change, and controlled tests.",
      "keywords": [
        "counterintelligence",
        "mole hunt",
        "compromise",
        "insider risk",
        "damage assessment",
        "deception"
      ],
      "mission_phases": [
        "Task",
        "Plan",
        "Collect",
        "Validate",
        "Deliver"
      ],
      "canonical": "https://iarpg.com/standard/counterintelligence-investigation",
      "json": "https://iarpg.com/records/counterintelligence-investigation.json",
      "requirements": [
        {
          "level": "MUST",
          "text": "Separate access, opportunity, action, motive, and attribution as distinct investigative questions."
        },
        {
          "level": "MUST",
          "text": "Counterintelligence consequences require case evidence and reason codes rather than omniscient server accusation."
        },
        {
          "level": "SHOULD",
          "text": "Offer controlled tests, source validation, audit, surveillance, and damage assessment as different investigative tools."
        },
        {
          "level": "MAY",
          "text": "The apparent compromise be a deception operation intended to redirect investigators."
        }
      ],
      "research": [
        {
          "label": "Alliance leak investigation workflow",
          "href": "/docs/report/counterintelligence-directive-alliance-leak-investigation#investigative-workflow-and-timeline",
          "note": "A structured fictional counterintelligence investigation."
        },
        {
          "label": "Counterintelligence matrix",
          "href": "/docs/report/typology-of-intelligence-operatives-and-tradecraft-frameworks-a-comprehensive-architecture-for-clandestine-beh#the-counterintelligence-matrix-and-the-double-agent-paradigm",
          "note": "Double-agent and insider-risk archetypes."
        }
      ],
      "related": [
        "competing-hypotheses-and-assessment",
        "provenance-confidence-and-corroboration",
        "evidence-based-jurisdiction-and-warrants"
      ]
    },
    {
      "code": "AI-01",
      "slug": "synthetic-source-disclosure-and-authority",
      "title": "Synthetic Source Disclosure and Authority",
      "category": "Synthetic Sources",
      "status": "Current",
      "version": "1.0.0",
      "summary": "Synthetic characters and generated dialogue are visibly disclosed and cannot create authoritative game facts, inventory, permissions, or settlement.",
      "keywords": [
        "AI",
        "synthetic source",
        "disclosure",
        "server authority",
        "memory",
        "generated dialogue"
      ],
      "mission_phases": [
        "Access",
        "Collect",
        "Validate",
        "Deliver"
      ],
      "canonical": "https://iarpg.com/standard/synthetic-source-disclosure-and-authority",
      "json": "https://iarpg.com/records/synthetic-source-disclosure-and-authority.json",
      "requirements": [
        {
          "level": "MUST",
          "text": "Disclose synthetic characters and generated responses in the interaction surface."
        },
        {
          "level": "MUST",
          "text": "Keep mission facts, inventory, access, rewards, legal status, and world state server-authoritative."
        },
        {
          "level": "MUST",
          "text": "Treat synthetic output as a report or claim unless validated against authoritative state."
        },
        {
          "level": "SHOULD",
          "text": "Store only reviewed, scoped continuity in durable character memory."
        },
        {
          "level": "MAY",
          "text": "Synthetic sources intentionally mislead when the mission clearly supports verification and fail-forward outcomes."
        }
      ],
      "research": [
        {
          "label": "Controlled generative architecture",
          "href": "/docs/report/systemic-implementation-of-delusional-ai-and-hallucinated-mission-vectors-in-virtual-reality-mmorpgs#generative-architectures-for-delusional-npcs",
          "note": "Separate mechanical truth from narrative generation."
        },
        {
          "label": "Mitigation strategies and design guidelines",
          "href": "/docs/report/hallucinated-ai-quest-design-in-vr-mmorpgs#mitigation-strategies-and-design-guidelines",
          "note": "Reliability signaling, player agency, and bounded falsehoods."
        }
      ],
      "related": [
        "mission-claim-verification",
        "provenance-confidence-and-corroboration",
        "safety-and-fiction-boundary"
      ]
    },
    {
      "code": "AI-02",
      "slug": "mission-claim-verification",
      "title": "Mission Claim Verification",
      "category": "Synthetic Sources",
      "status": "Current",
      "version": "1.0.0",
      "summary": "Potentially unreliable tasking is checked against records, world state, source history, logic, location, and mission economics before acceptance.",
      "keywords": [
        "verification",
        "reliability",
        "contradiction",
        "location",
        "logic",
        "broker",
        "AI mission"
      ],
      "mission_phases": [
        "Task",
        "Plan",
        "Validate"
      ],
      "canonical": "https://iarpg.com/standard/mission-claim-verification",
      "json": "https://iarpg.com/records/mission-claim-verification.json",
      "requirements": [
        {
          "level": "MUST",
          "text": "Provide at least one accessible method to test high-impact mission claims before commitment."
        },
        {
          "level": "MUST",
          "text": "Distinguish object, relation, event, location, authority, and reward claims in the verification model."
        },
        {
          "level": "SHOULD",
          "text": "Use reliability history, contradiction checks, coordinate checks, source comparison, and authority confirmation as complementary tools."
        },
        {
          "level": "SHOULD",
          "text": "False or misleading tasking still produce some recoverable intelligence, discovery, or progression value when pursued in good faith."
        },
        {
          "level": "MAY",
          "text": "Player skills prioritize anomalies but never output infallible truth labels."
        }
      ],
      "research": [
        {
          "label": "Sanity-check mechanics and skill-based detection",
          "href": "/docs/report/hallucinated-ai-quest-design-in-vr-mmorpgs#sanity-check-mechanics-and-skill-based-detection",
          "note": "Verification as an active gameplay loop."
        },
        {
          "label": "Taxonomy of hallucinated vectors",
          "href": "/docs/report/systemic-implementation-of-delusional-ai-and-hallucinated-mission-vectors-in-virtual-reality-mmorpgs#the-taxonomy-of-hallucinated-vectors",
          "note": "Object, relation, and event falsehood classes."
        }
      ],
      "related": [
        "synthetic-source-disclosure-and-authority",
        "verified-and-unverified-tasking",
        "observation-report-interpretation-and-hypothesis"
      ]
    },
    {
      "code": "GAME-01",
      "slug": "player-interaction-and-social-stealth",
      "title": "Player Interaction and Social Stealth",
      "category": "Interaction & Interfaces",
      "status": "Current",
      "version": "1.0.0",
      "summary": "Social stealth evaluates behavioral congruence, access, timing, environment, and explanation rather than invisibility or costume alone.",
      "keywords": [
        "social stealth",
        "behavior",
        "suspicion",
        "interaction",
        "cover",
        "access"
      ],
      "mission_phases": [
        "Access",
        "Collect",
        "Extract"
      ],
      "canonical": "https://iarpg.com/standard/player-interaction-and-social-stealth",
      "json": "https://iarpg.com/records/player-interaction-and-social-stealth.json",
      "requirements": [
        {
          "level": "MUST",
          "text": "Suspicion derive from observable incongruence, restricted actions, known records, and environmental context."
        },
        {
          "level": "MUST",
          "text": "Provide nonviolent paths for access, collection, recovery, and extraction when the mission design supports them."
        },
        {
          "level": "SHOULD",
          "text": "NPC reactions communicate what changed through behavior, dialogue, posture, access, or attention."
        },
        {
          "level": "MAY",
          "text": "Players recover from minor mistakes through explanation, assistance, delay, or role-consistent action."
        }
      ],
      "research": [
        {
          "label": "Social stealth and behavioral mimicry",
          "href": "/docs/report/architectural-and-narrative-design-specifications-for-a-vr-first-post-national-espionage-mmo#social-stealth-and-behavioral-mimicry",
          "note": "Behavioral congruence as stealth."
        },
        {
          "label": "Anatomy of suspicion and congruence",
          "href": "/docs/report/systemic-subterfuge-architecting-a-geopolitically-neutral-classless-espionage-mmo#the-anatomy-of-suspicion-and-congruence",
          "note": "Suspicion from context and mismatch."
        }
      ],
      "related": [
        "cover-identity-and-congruence",
        "vr-and-browser-role-interdependence",
        "evidence-based-jurisdiction-and-warrants"
      ]
    },
    {
      "code": "GAME-02",
      "slug": "vr-and-browser-role-interdependence",
      "title": "VR and Browser Role Interdependence",
      "category": "Interaction & Interfaces",
      "status": "Current",
      "version": "1.0.0",
      "summary": "Embodied VR, desktop, mobile, and browser roles coordinate through complementary information and actions.",
      "keywords": [
        "VR",
        "WebXR",
        "browser",
        "handler",
        "analyst",
        "mobile",
        "cross-platform"
      ],
      "mission_phases": [
        "Plan",
        "Access",
        "Collect",
        "Validate",
        "Extract"
      ],
      "canonical": "https://iarpg.com/standard/vr-and-browser-role-interdependence",
      "json": "https://iarpg.com/records/vr-and-browser-role-interdependence.json",
      "requirements": [
        {
          "level": "MUST",
          "text": "Define unique responsibilities for embodied and non-embodied roles within the same mission requirement."
        },
        {
          "level": "MUST",
          "text": "Synchronize authoritative mission state while allowing role-specific latency, visibility, and presentation."
        },
        {
          "level": "SHOULD",
          "text": "Non-VR roles support short sessions, asynchronous continuity, and accessibility without trivializing field decisions."
        },
        {
          "level": "MAY",
          "text": "The system adapt role distribution when a cell has fewer players than available roles."
        }
      ],
      "research": [
        {
          "label": "Asymmetric cross-platform multiplayer",
          "href": "/docs/report/architectural-and-narrative-design-specifications-for-a-vr-first-post-national-espionage-mmo#the-asymmetric-cross-platform-multiplayer-paradigm",
          "note": "Cross-dimensional role design."
        },
        {
          "label": "Mirrored interdependence and collaboration",
          "href": "/docs/report/architectural-and-narrative-design-specifications-for-a-vr-first-post-national-espionage-mmo#mirrored-interdependence-and-collaboration",
          "note": "Complementary roles and shared operation state."
        }
      ],
      "related": [
        "roles-and-information-asymmetry",
        "player-interaction-and-social-stealth",
        "mission-lifecycle"
      ]
    },
    {
      "code": "TASK-01",
      "slug": "verified-and-unverified-tasking",
      "title": "Verified and Unverified Tasking",
      "category": "Tasking & Logistics",
      "status": "Current",
      "version": "1.0.0",
      "summary": "Verified tasking uses engine-backed terms and settlement; unverified tasking exposes disclosed counterparty and deception risk.",
      "keywords": [
        "verified",
        "unverified",
        "tasking",
        "escrow",
        "reputation",
        "deception",
        "contract"
      ],
      "mission_phases": [
        "Task",
        "Plan",
        "Deliver"
      ],
      "canonical": "https://iarpg.com/standard/verified-and-unverified-tasking",
      "json": "https://iarpg.com/records/verified-and-unverified-tasking.json",
      "requirements": [
        {
          "level": "MUST",
          "text": "Label tasking as verified, authority-reviewed, reputation-backed, or unverified before acceptance."
        },
        {
          "level": "MUST",
          "text": "Verified tasking lock reward terms and use deterministic completion or review rules."
        },
        {
          "level": "MUST",
          "text": "Unverified tasking disclose that objective, reward, or sponsor claims may fail without engine settlement."
        },
        {
          "level": "SHOULD",
          "text": "Expose issuer history, proof of interaction, dispute record, and relevant reputation without presenting them as infallible truth."
        },
        {
          "level": "MAY",
          "text": "Unverified tasking offer higher potential reward or unique access to justify risk."
        }
      ],
      "research": [
        {
          "label": "Quest design: unverified vs verified",
          "href": "/docs/report/social-deception-and-player-generated-fake-quests#quest-design-unverified-vs-verified-contracts",
          "note": "Safety-with-fee versus freedom-with-risk."
        },
        {
          "label": "Trust recovery through escrow and reputation",
          "href": "/docs/report/trust-deception-and-virtual-economies#escrow-verification-and-reputation-systems",
          "note": "Layered trust signals and dispute histories."
        }
      ],
      "related": [
        "mission-brief-contract",
        "mission-claim-verification",
        "courier-and-handoff-state-machine"
      ]
    },
    {
      "code": "LOG-01",
      "slug": "courier-and-handoff-state-machine",
      "title": "Courier and Handoff State Machine",
      "category": "Tasking & Logistics",
      "status": "Current",
      "version": "1.0.0",
      "summary": "Physical or digital operational handoffs use deterministic states, accessible destinations, tamper evidence, timeouts, and reviewable settlement.",
      "keywords": [
        "courier",
        "handoff",
        "escrow",
        "state machine",
        "collateral",
        "delivery",
        "drop box"
      ],
      "mission_phases": [
        "Plan",
        "Deliver",
        "Extract"
      ],
      "canonical": "https://iarpg.com/standard/courier-and-handoff-state-machine",
      "json": "https://iarpg.com/records/courier-and-handoff-state-machine.json",
      "requirements": [
        {
          "level": "MUST",
          "text": "Use Created, Accepted, In Transit, Delivered, Breached, Expired, and Canceled states with atomic settlement."
        },
        {
          "level": "MUST",
          "text": "Verify destination accessibility before posting and protect accepted couriers from later access revocation or obstruction."
        },
        {
          "level": "MUST",
          "text": "Keep reward, collateral, cargo ownership, and fees distinct in the economic ledger."
        },
        {
          "level": "SHOULD",
          "text": "Physicalized cargo communicate burden and tamper state without exposing protected contents by default."
        },
        {
          "level": "MAY",
          "text": "Support remote perimeter deposit when post-acceptance obstruction would otherwise make delivery impossible."
        }
      ],
      "research": [
        {
          "label": "Finite state machine architecture",
          "href": "/docs/report/systemic-architecture-for-trustless-escrow-and-courier-contracts-in-a-virtual-reality-mmorpg#2-1-finite-state-machine-fsm-architecture",
          "note": "Deterministic contract lifecycle."
        },
        {
          "label": "Universal perimeter receptacle",
          "href": "/docs/report/systemic-architecture-for-trustless-escrow-and-courier-contracts-in-a-virtual-reality-mmorpg#5-0-systemic-resolutions-the-universal-perimeter-receptacle-upr",
          "note": "Delivery access separated from private structure permissions."
        }
      ],
      "related": [
        "verified-and-unverified-tasking",
        "communications-and-compartmentation",
        "operational-economy-and-resource-pressure"
      ]
    },
    {
      "code": "JUR-01",
      "slug": "evidence-based-jurisdiction-and-warrants",
      "title": "Evidence-Based Jurisdiction and Warrants",
      "category": "Tasking & Logistics",
      "status": "Current",
      "version": "1.0.0",
      "summary": "Severity and evidentiary certainty are separate axes; jurisdiction determines who can observe, investigate, restrict, pursue, or review.",
      "keywords": [
        "jurisdiction",
        "warrant",
        "evidence",
        "severity",
        "certainty",
        "witness",
        "review"
      ],
      "mission_phases": [
        "Collect",
        "Validate",
        "Deliver",
        "Debrief"
      ],
      "canonical": "https://iarpg.com/standard/evidence-based-jurisdiction-and-warrants",
      "json": "https://iarpg.com/records/evidence-based-jurisdiction-and-warrants.json",
      "requirements": [
        {
          "level": "MUST",
          "text": "Track offense severity separately from evidentiary certainty."
        },
        {
          "level": "MUST",
          "text": "Use anomaly, suspect file, confirmed warrant, and active manhunt as distinguishable case states."
        },
        {
          "level": "MUST",
          "text": "Expose reason codes, jurisdiction, evidence basis, review path, and applicable restrictions."
        },
        {
          "level": "SHOULD",
          "text": "Fund bounty outcomes through fines, bonds, seized value, or capped budgets rather than unconstrained currency creation."
        },
        {
          "level": "SHOULD",
          "text": "Provide surrender, appeal, restitution, review, evasion, and lawful resolution paths."
        },
        {
          "level": "MAY",
          "text": "Different jurisdictions recognize or contest the same case differently based on evidence and agreements."
        }
      ],
      "research": [
        {
          "label": "Recommended warrant architecture",
          "href": "/docs/report/justice-system-and-warrant-escalation-for-rogue-intelligence#recommended-warrant-architecture",
          "note": "Dual-axis severity and certainty model."
        },
        {
          "label": "Economy and anti-exploit controls",
          "href": "/docs/report/justice-system-and-warrant-escalation-for-rogue-intelligence#economy-and-anti-exploit-controls",
          "note": "Bounty funding and anti-collusion constraints."
        }
      ],
      "related": [
        "mandate-customer-and-jurisdiction",
        "counterintelligence-investigation",
        "operational-economy-and-resource-pressure"
      ]
    },
    {
      "code": "ECON-01",
      "slug": "operational-economy-and-resource-pressure",
      "title": "Operational Economy and Resource Pressure",
      "category": "Tasking & Logistics",
      "status": "Guidance",
      "version": "1.0.0",
      "summary": "Currency, access, time, cover, source trust, equipment, transport, and safe locations are operational resources with explicit creation, transfer, lock, and destruction semantics.",
      "keywords": [
        "economy",
        "faucet",
        "sink",
        "transfer",
        "lock",
        "escrow",
        "resources",
        "mission rewards"
      ],
      "mission_phases": [
        "Task",
        "Plan",
        "Deliver",
        "Extract"
      ],
      "canonical": "https://iarpg.com/standard/operational-economy-and-resource-pressure",
      "json": "https://iarpg.com/records/operational-economy-and-resource-pressure.json",
      "requirements": [
        {
          "level": "MUST",
          "text": "Classify currency events as creation, destruction, transfer, lock, or unlock in an immutable UTC ledger."
        },
        {
          "level": "MUST",
          "text": "Treat escrow and frozen funds as temporary locks unless a separate rule destroys or forfeits value."
        },
        {
          "level": "SHOULD",
          "text": "Compose mission rewards from currency, access, intelligence, reputation, supplies, and persistent opportunities rather than raw cash alone."
        },
        {
          "level": "SHOULD",
          "text": "Measure newcomer and operational affordability before changing sinks or payouts."
        },
        {
          "level": "MAY",
          "text": "Use property, communications, transport, cover maintenance, and logistics as mission-relevant sinks."
        }
      ],
      "research": [
        {
          "label": "Currency flow definitions",
          "href": "/docs/report/monetary-architecture-genesis-allowance-and-economic-stabilization#currency-flow-definitions",
          "note": "Creation, destruction, transfer, lock, and unlock semantics."
        },
        {
          "label": "Ledger schema and telemetry",
          "href": "/docs/report/monetary-architecture-genesis-allowance-and-economic-stabilization#ledger-schema-and-telemetry",
          "note": "Immutable double-entry records with UTC timestamps."
        }
      ],
      "related": [
        "courier-and-handoff-state-machine",
        "verified-and-unverified-tasking",
        "versioning-change-control-and-telemetry"
      ]
    },
    {
      "code": "GOV-01",
      "slug": "versioning-change-control-and-telemetry",
      "title": "Versioning, Change Control, and Telemetry",
      "category": "Governance & Safety",
      "status": "Current",
      "version": "1.0.0",
      "summary": "Public standard records are versioned, citable, machine-readable, and changed through visible release notes and test evidence.",
      "keywords": [
        "governance",
        "versioning",
        "changelog",
        "roadmap",
        "telemetry",
        "conformance",
        "release"
      ],
      "mission_phases": [
        "Task",
        "Debrief"
      ],
      "canonical": "https://iarpg.com/standard/versioning-change-control-and-telemetry",
      "json": "https://iarpg.com/records/versioning-change-control-and-telemetry.json",
      "requirements": [
        {
          "level": "MUST",
          "text": "Every standard record publish code, version, status, canonical URL, summary, requirements, related records, and research links."
        },
        {
          "level": "MUST",
          "text": "Breaking changes increment the major version and retain the superseded public record."
        },
        {
          "level": "MUST",
          "text": "Current, guidance, experimental, planned, and retired states remain visibly distinct."
        },
        {
          "level": "SHOULD",
          "text": "Mission implementations attach validation evidence and telemetry before claiming conformance."
        },
        {
          "level": "MAY",
          "text": "Publish machine-readable catalogs, schemas, examples, and discovery manifests beside human-readable pages."
        }
      ],
      "research": [
        {
          "label": "Telemetry and live-ops tuning",
          "href": "/docs/report/justice-system-and-warrant-escalation-for-rogue-intelligence#telemetry-and-live-ops-tuning",
          "note": "Instrumentation and controlled regional pilots."
        },
        {
          "label": "Simulation and validation plan",
          "href": "/docs/report/monetary-architecture-genesis-allowance-and-economic-stabilization#simulation-validation-plan",
          "note": "Shock testing and acceptance criteria before launch."
        }
      ],
      "related": [
        "operational-neutrality-and-authority",
        "safety-and-fiction-boundary",
        "mission-brief-contract"
      ]
    },
    {
      "code": "SAFE-01",
      "slug": "safety-and-fiction-boundary",
      "title": "Safety and Fiction Boundary",
      "category": "Governance & Safety",
      "status": "Current",
      "version": "1.0.0",
      "summary": "Public material stays fictional, game-system focused, and clearly separated from real-world medical, legal, investigative, or tactical authority.",
      "keywords": [
        "safety",
        "fiction",
        "medical boundary",
        "real-world claims",
        "tradecraft boundary",
        "representation"
      ],
      "mission_phases": [
        "Task",
        "Debrief"
      ],
      "canonical": "https://iarpg.com/standard/safety-and-fiction-boundary",
      "json": "https://iarpg.com/records/safety-and-fiction-boundary.json",
      "requirements": [
        {
          "level": "MUST",
          "text": "Label organizations, authorities, operations, jurisdictions, and examples as fictional where ambiguity could cause harm."
        },
        {
          "level": "MUST",
          "text": "Keep psychiatric status separate from guilt, danger, credibility, alignment, and punishment mechanics."
        },
        {
          "level": "MUST",
          "text": "Do not investigate, validate, or amplify a visitor's real-world espionage or surveillance claims."
        },
        {
          "level": "MUST",
          "text": "Keep public tradecraft documentation abstract and game-oriented rather than practically actionable for real-world wrongdoing."
        },
        {
          "level": "SHOULD",
          "text": "Link real-world grounding and urgent-help information to the separate EspionagePsychosis.com resource."
        },
        {
          "level": "MAY",
          "text": "Use content warnings and accessibility controls for distressing fictional scenarios."
        }
      ],
      "research": [
        {
          "label": "Strategic fit and representation boundary",
          "href": "/docs/report/justice-system-and-warrant-escalation-for-rogue-intelligence#strategic-fit-with-rogue-intelligence",
          "note": "Avoid psychiatric framing as guilt or punishment."
        },
        {
          "label": "Post-national worldbuilding and bias mitigation",
          "href": "/docs/report/architectural-and-narrative-design-specifications-for-a-vr-first-post-national-espionage-mmo#mitigating-techno-orientalism-and-casual-colonialism",
          "note": "Representation constraints for international fiction."
        }
      ],
      "related": [
        "synthetic-source-disclosure-and-authority",
        "operational-neutrality-and-authority",
        "versioning-change-control-and-telemetry"
      ]
    }
  ]
}