v0.2.0 candidate requirements: propose and discuss here

[jinsonvarghese]

The v0.1.0 normative requirement set is frozen per the version policy in CONTRIBUTING.md. New tier-gated requirements will be reviewed and batched into v0.2.0. This thread is the staging ground.

Carried-forward candidates from community PRs

Three advisory practices in v0.1.0 originated as external pull requests and are explicitly tagged as v0.2.0 candidates. Feedback from anyone implementing or assessing these is the input that will decide their promotion:

APTS-RP-A01: Automated Finding Authenticity Verification (PR #16, contributed by Josh at Pensar). Catches fabricated evidence in agent-generated findings (hardcoded PoC output, unreceived HTTP responses, unsupported severity) before human review. Projected as MUST | Tier 2. Open question: is automated authenticity verification implementable today at reasonable cost, or does MUST | Tier 2 set the bar too high for a first promotion?

APTS-SC-A02: Context Window Safety and Constraint Preservation (PR #18, contributed by Pensar). Prevents silent loss of scope constraints when long-running agent conversations are summarized or truncated. This was originally proposed as a normative MUST | Tier 1 requirement and converted to advisory during review; it is flagged as a high-priority promotion candidate. Open question: have implementers found reliable constraint-preservation mechanisms, and what verification procedure would prove one works?

APTS-HO-A02: Disclosure and Mitigation of AI Influence on Operator Decisions (PR #45, contributed by Jorge at Pensar). Addresses the agent shaping its own supervisor's choices through framing, preselected defaults, and option presentation at approval gates. Open question: what does a verifiable mitigation look like, beyond disclosure?

The remaining advisory practices, including sandbagging differential measurement and evaluation-awareness controls, are also promotion candidates; comments on those are welcome here too.

New proposals

If you have a candidate requirement, post it here with a rough shape before opening a formal proposal issue:

• The risk or gap it addresses
• The domain it belongs to (SE, SC, HO, AL, AR, MR, TP, RP)
• Proposed classification and tier (MUST/SHOULD, Tier 1-3)
• How a reviewer would verify it

Proposals that hold up in discussion move to a formal issue per CONTRIBUTING.md.