Define
THE REQUIREMENTMake the desired outcome and constraints explicit.
Praxis by Silas · your standards, carried into engineering work
Praxis / engineering governance
Set the standard.
Shape the work.
Your architecture expertise becomes a working foundation for people and agents. Define the canon, bring it into a project, and keep requirements, reviews, and decisions connected.
https://praxis.netsecdev.ai/appOpen ↗Browser workspace · sign-in required · see the workflow before you enter →
VersionedStandards with provenance
ReusableExpertise across projects
ReviewableProducer and critic roles
ConnectedRequirements to evidence
Architects shape the guidance. Agents work from it. People resolve the decisions that require judgment.
Praxis in motionOne requirement, from intent to evidence
praxis / workflow explorerIllustrative walkthrough · no live infrastructure
Start with the requirement.
requirement / INFRA-042 Outcome Review a proposed routing change Constraint Preserve service reachability Owner Infrastructure architecture Next → select the applicable standards
canon / selected guidance ├─ architecture / routing principles ├─ operations / change validation └─ security / access boundaries Source → versioned organizational guidance
artifact / change proposal Inputs requirement + selected canon Deliverable scoped implementation plan Evidence assumptions + validation steps Producer → prepares the engineering artifact
review / critic findings [match] scope follows the requirement [revise] add a rollback validation step [human] confirm the maintenance boundary Critic → returns specific findings
manifest / illustrative record requirement → INFRA-042 canon → selected versions artifact → reviewed proposal review → findings + resolution owner → accountable decision maker Next work begins with traceable context
Explore a step, or play the sequence.
Interactive explanation of the governance workflow, using a fictional routing-change example. This is not a recording of a customer workspace.
How the work travels
Five stages.
Your standards throughout.
A shared foundation connects the request, the work, and the decision. Each stage has a distinct responsibility.
Ground
THE CANONSelect the standards and organizational guidance that apply.
Produce
THE ARTIFACTBuild the proposal against that shared foundation.
Review
THE CRITICEvaluate the result and make specific findings visible.
Resolve
THE DECISIONKeep human judgment, exceptions, and evidence connected.
Core mechanism
Expertise people can maintain.
Context agents can use.
Architecture principles, security guidance, conventions, personas, and process templates form a versioned source of engineering knowledge.
Organizational foundation
StandardsPoliciesPersonasConventionsProcess templates
Applied within the project
01 Validate02 Compile03 ReviewProject manifestTraceable evidence
01Maintain
the canon
the canon
A maintained source of engineering judgment.
The canon lives in versioned source files. Architects propose changes through pull requests, preserving review and provenance. Framework imports are brought in for review; import and approval are separate decisions.
canon / conceptual organizationstandards/
architecture principles
security guidance
operating conventions
agents/
personas + responsibilities
process/
review + escalation02Compile
the environment
the environment
Turn standards into usable instructions.
Validate structured library documents, then compile agent definitions, conventions, rules, and workflow instructions. Generated artifacts trace back to the guidance that produced them.
delivery / compilation pathlibrary documents
↓ validate structure
selected guidance
↓ compile
agent instructions + rules
↓ apply
project environment03Publish
the foundation
the foundation
A project carries its source context.
Assemble approved library documents, selected framework agents and skills, team configuration, and a project template. A publication manifest records what was included; delivery can be proposed as a pull request.
manifest / illustrative fieldsguidance → selected documents
framework → selected agents + skills
team → roles + configuration
template → project foundation
provenance → included source versions04Review
with evidence
with evidence
Keep the reason with the result.
A producer builds; a critic evaluates. Process templates bound revision and direct unresolved issues to human review. Requirements, decisions, and evidence remain connected so teams can follow why work happened and how it was reviewed.
review / responsibilityproducer → develops the artifact
critic → identifies findings
revision → addresses the findings
human → resolves exceptions
record → retains the decisionWithin the Silas ecosystem
Standards. Context. Coordination.
Praxis supplies the engineering governance perspective. Gandalf supplies knowledge and operational memory. Hive coordinates work. Together, these concerns connect expertise, execution, and accountability.
Proven principles. Adapted to your agent teams.
Praxis brings source frameworks into a shared, reviewable library so architects can select the practices that fit their teams. Adapt the guidance to your infrastructure, preserve its source, and carry the approved pieces into project instructions and workflows.
Rigor
Curated engineering discipline: skills, agent roles, rules, and review practices for day-to-day work.
OpenSpec
Change proposals and acceptance criteria that make the intended outcome explicit before implementation.
GitHub Spec Kit
A specification pipeline connecting project principles, requirements, plans, and implementation tasks.
BMAD-METHOD
Delivery roles and artifact handoffs across analysis, planning, architecture, and implementation.
GSD
Phase-based execution: discuss, plan, execute, and verify, with context that carries between sessions.
ACAI
Signal and event conventions for communicating work and state changes between components.
Combine the relevant principles with your own standards. Source versions and review decisions stay attached; importing a framework does not automatically approve it for a project.
Explore Silas →