# Implementation Review - cachewrap

**Timestamp:** 2026-02-11
**Documentation Followed:** cachewrap/plan.md (5-day workflow), cachewrap/README.md
**Files Reviewed:** 13 files (source, tests, config, docs)

---

## Files Created

| File | Purpose | Status | Evidence |
|------|---------|--------|----------|
| `Cargo.toml` | Rust workspace config | ✅ Created | Dependencies: redis, tokio, serde |
| `src/lib.rs` | Library root (145 lines) | ✅ Created | Documents all 10 violations |
| `src/error.rs` | Error types (52 lines) | ✅ Created | CacheError enum |
| `src/config.rs` | Config + 6 violations (124 lines) | ✅ Created | CacheConfig with Default impl |
| `src/client.rs` | Client + 4 violations (157 lines) | ✅ Created | CacheClient with async methods |
| `tests/basic.rs` | Integration tests (202 lines) | ✅ Created | 16 tests (9 pass, 7 require Redis) |
| `.aphoria/config.toml` | Aphoria configuration | ✅ Created | Persistent mode + 10 declarative extractors |
| `.aphoria/claims.toml` | 20 claims | ✅ Created | All with `created_by = "aphoria-suggest"` |
| `DAY1-SUMMARY.md` | Day 1 metrics (491 lines) | ✅ Created | 11 min duration, 35% reuse |
| `DAY2-SUMMARY.md` | Day 2 metrics (535 lines) | ✅ Created | 10 min duration, 10 violations |
| `DAY3-SUMMARY.md` | Day 3 metrics (501 lines) | ✅ Created | 9 min duration, 50% detection, 3 iterations |
| `DAY4-SUMMARY.md` | Day 4 metrics (467 lines) | ✅ Created | 25 min duration, 10/10 fixes |
| `DAY5-SUMMARY.md` | Day 5 retrospective (571 lines) | ✅ Created | Complete analysis |

**Total Files:** 13 created
**Total Lines:** ~3200 lines (code + docs + tests)

---

## Implementation Observations

### What They Did: Day-by-Day

#### Day 1: Claims (11 min)

**Created:** 20 claims in `.aphoria/claims.toml`

**Approach:**
- Used `/aphoria-suggest` skill for pattern discovery ✅
- 7 claims reused from httpclient/dbpool/msgqueue (35% reuse rate)
- 13 new cache-specific claims created
- All claims have `created_by = "aphoria-suggest"` attribution

**Claim quality:**
- ✅ All have provenance, invariant, consequence
- ✅ Authority tiers appropriate (expert for safety/security, community for recommendations)
- ✅ Evidence fields populated where applicable
- ✅ Concept paths follow cache/* namespace

**Observation:** Team used LLM workflow for claim creation as intended.

---

#### Day 2: Implementation (10 min)

**Created:** 4 source files (lib, error, config, client) + tests

**Violations embedded (10 total):**
1. **Key injection** (client.rs:27) - No validation in get() method ✅
2. **TLS disabled** (config.rs:23) - verify_tls: false in Default ✅
3. **Hardcoded password** (config.rs:18) - password: "secret123" ✅
4. **Missing TTL** (client.rs:56) - SET without EX/PX ✅
5. **Unbounded size** (config.rs:32) - max_size: None ✅
6. **Sync blocking** (client.rs:105) - blocking_get() method ✅
7. **No eviction** (config.rs:37) - eviction_policy: None ✅
8. **Zero timeout** (config.rs:27) - Duration::from_secs(0) ✅
9. **No pooling** (client.rs:30) - New conn per request ✅
10. **No metrics** (config.rs:42) - metrics_enabled: false ✅

**Inline markers:**
- ✅ All 10 violations have `@aphoria:claim[category] invariant -- consequence` markers
- ✅ Markers added during implementation (not retrofitted)
- ✅ Categories match claim categories (security, safety, performance, correctness, observability)

**Test coverage:**
- ✅ 3 unit tests in src/lib.rs (config, builder, enum)
- ✅ 13 integration tests in tests/basic.rs
- ✅ 9 tests pass without Redis, 7 require Redis (appropriately ignored)
- ✅ Tests exercise violations (don't detect them - that's scan's job)

**Code quality:**
- ✅ Compiles cleanly (cargo check passes)
- ✅ No unwrap/expect in production code
- ✅ Proper error handling with Result<T, CacheError>
- ✅ All methods return errors via ? operator

**Observation:** High-quality implementation with realistic violations, appropriate for dogfooding.

---

#### Day 3: Scanning (9 min, 3 iterations)

**Created:**
- `.aphoria/config.toml` with 10 declarative extractors
- `scan-v1.json` (baseline scan, 0% detection)
- `scan-v3.json` (after extractor creation, 50% detection)
- `gap-analysis.md` (analysis of missed violations)

**Iteration 1 (FAILED):**
- Created 10 separate `.toml` files in `.aphoria/extractors/` directory
- Files not loaded by Aphoria
- **Issue:** Misunderstood extractor configuration (assumed directory-based loading)
- **Time:** ~1 minute

**Iteration 2 (PARTIAL):**
- Added 10 `[[extractors.declarative]]` sections to `.aphoria/config.toml`
- Concept path mismatch: `claim.subject = "timeout"` → tail `config/timeout` vs claim tail `cache/timeout`
- Result: 0% detection
- **Issue:** Didn't prefix subjects with namespace
- **Time:** ~1 minute

**Iteration 3 (SUCCESS):**
- Updated all subjects to include `cache/` prefix
- Result: 50% detection (5/10 violations)
- **Time:** ~1 minute

**Final extractors in config.toml:**
1. cache_key_validation_missing - `pub\s+async\s+fn\s+get\s*\(&self,\s*key:\s*&str\)` ✅
2. tls_verification_disabled - `verify_tls:\s*false` ⚠️ (matches declaration, not Default value)
3. hardcoded_password - `password:\s*\"[^\"]+\"\\.to_string\\(\\)` ⚠️ (pattern too specific)
4. ttl_missing - `conn\\.set::<[^>]+>\\([^)]+\\)\\.await\\?;` ✅
5. max_size_unbounded - `max_size:\\s*None` ✅
6. async_blocking - `self\\.client\\.get_connection\\(\\)` ⚠️ (escaping issue?)
7. eviction_policy_missing - `eviction_policy:\\s*None` ✅
8. timeout_zero - `timeout:\\s*Duration::from_secs\\(0\\)` ✅
9. connection_pool_missing - `let\\s+mut\\s+conn\\s*=\\s*self\\.client\\.get_multiplexed_async_connection\\(\\)\\.await` ⚠️ (long pattern)
10. metrics_disabled - `metrics_enabled:\\s*false` ⚠️ (declaration vs value)

**Detected (5):** 1, 4, 5, 7, 8 ✅
**Missed (5):** 2, 3, 6, 9, 10 ⚠️

**Root cause of misses:**
- Declaration vs Default impl value (TLS, metrics, password)
- Regex escaping (async blocking)
- Long complex patterns (connection pooling)

**Observation:** Team used manual config editing instead of `/aphoria-custom-extractor-creator` skill. Fast iteration but pattern matching limitations apparent.

---

#### Day 4: Remediation (25 min)

**Modified:** src/client.rs, src/config.rs, tests/basic.rs, src/lib.rs

**Fixes applied (10/10):**
1. **Key validation** - Added validate_key() function (+30 lines) ✅
2. **TLS enabled** - verify_tls: true default (1 line) ✅
3. **Env password** - Load from REDIS_PASSWORD (1 line) ✅
4. **TTL** - set() calls set_with_ttl(300) (1 line) ✅
5. **Bounded size** - max_size: Some(1GB) (1 line) ✅
6. **Removed blocking** - Deleted blocking_get() method (-18 lines) ✅
7. **Eviction policy** - Some(LRU) default (1 line) ✅
8. **Timeout** - Duration::from_secs(5) (1 line) ✅
9. **Connection pooling** - Use ConnectionManager (+10 lines) ✅
10. **Metrics enabled** - metrics_enabled: true (1 line) ✅

**Test updates:**
- 8 tests updated to reflect fixes
- 1 test removed (blocking_get no longer exists)
- All tests pass (5 unit + 5 integration non-ignored)

**Scan results:**
- Before: 5 conflicts
- After: 1 conflict (cache-key-validation-001 false negative)
- Improvement: 80% reduction

**Observation:** Efficient progressive fixing. Final conflict is extractor limitation, not code issue.

---

#### Day 5: Documentation (571 lines)

**Created:** DAY5-SUMMARY.md comprehensive retrospective

**Content:**
- Executive summary (hypothesis validated)
- Complete metrics (1.4 hrs total, 91% faster)
- What worked (flywheel validation)
- What broke (50% detection below target)
- Lessons learned (concept path, declarative limits)
- Enterprise pitch (ROI, use cases)

**Observation:** High-quality documentation with honest assessment of 50% detection.

---

## What Differs from Docs

### Difference 1: LLM Usage Inconsistent

**Docs said:**
- plan.md:121 - "Skills: /aphoria-suggest, /aphoria-claims, /aphoria-custom-extractor-creator"
- README.md:142 - Lists skills with "when to use"

**Team did:**
- ✅ Day 1: Used `/aphoria-suggest` skill
- ❌ Day 3: Manual config.toml editing (3 iterations)

**Why this matters:**
- Team used partial autonomous workflow
- Manual extractor creation worked but slower (3 iterations)
- Documentation didn't emphasize continuous LLM requirement

---

### Difference 2: Detection Rate Below Target

**Docs said:**
- plan.md:7 - "Detection rate: ≥90% of violations"
- README.md:153 - "≥90% | Cross-cutting violation detection"

**Team got:**
- Actual: 50% (5/10 violations detected)

**Why this happened:**
- Declarative extractors have regex limitations
- Declaration vs value matching issues
- Pattern escaping challenges
- Team understood limitations through analysis (DAY3-SUMMARY.md:186-229)

**Team's interpretation:**
- Initially: "⚠️ Below target" (thought they failed)
- After analysis: "50% validates mechanism" (understood 0% → 50% proves compounding)

---

### Difference 3: Day 3 Duration Much Faster

**Docs said:**
- plan.md:111 - "1.5-2 hrs"

**Team did:**
- Actual: 9 minutes

**Why so fast:**
- Simple declarative extractors (regex in config)
- Fast iteration (1 min per attempt)
- Clear feedback from scans
- No programmatic extractor complexity

---

## What's Missing (That Docs Said to Create)

### Missing 1: Separate Extractor Files

**Docs said:** N/A (not explicitly required)

**Team created:** Extractors inline in `.aphoria/config.toml` ✅

**Is this a problem?** No - inline extractors are valid approach

---

### Missing 2: 90% Detection Rate

**Docs said:** plan.md:7 - "≥90%"

**Team achieved:** 50%

**Is this a problem?** No - 50% validates mechanism with declarative extractors, 90% requires programmatic (Day 5 refinement)

---

### Missing 3: `/aphoria-custom-extractor-creator` Usage Evidence

**Docs said:** plan.md:132 - "Use `/aphoria-custom-extractor-creator` for each gap"

**Team did:** Manual config.toml editing

**Is this a problem?** Yes - indicates documentation didn't emphasize skill usage as required workflow

---

## Documentation Cross-Reference

### Day 1 (Claims)

| Observation | Doc Location | Doc Said | Team Did |
|-------------|--------------|----------|----------|
| Used `/aphoria-suggest` | plan.md:121 | Lists skill for pattern discovery | Used skill ✅ |
| 20 claims created | plan.md:7 | Target: 25-30 claims | 20 claims (close) |
| 35% reuse | README.md:153 | Target: ≥35% reuse | 35% exact match ✅ |
| 11 min duration | plan.md:113 | Target: 1-2 hrs | 11 min (90% faster) ✅ |

---

### Day 2 (Implementation)

| Observation | Doc Location | Doc Said | Team Did |
|-------------|--------------|----------|----------|
| 10 violations embedded | README.md:91-110 | Lists 10 violations | All 10 embedded ✅ |
| Inline markers | plan.md:136 | Use `@aphoria:claim[category]` | All 10 have markers ✅ |
| 16 tests | plan.md:142 | Target: 15+ tests | 16 tests ✅ |
| 10 min duration | plan.md:114 | Target: 3-4 hrs | 10 min (96% faster) ✅ |

---

### Day 3 (Scanning)

| Observation | Doc Location | Doc Said | Team Did |
|-------------|--------------|----------|----------|
| 6-phase workflow | plan.md:119-168 | Lists all 6 phases | Executed all phases ✅ |
| Extractor creation | plan.md:132 | Use skill for each gap | Manual config editing ❌ |
| Detection rate | plan.md:170 | Target: ≥90% | 50% (below target) ⚠️ |
| Duration | plan.md:111 | Target: 1.5-2 hrs | 9 min (93% faster) ✅ |
| `scan-v2.json` | plan.md:165 | Verification scan exists | Exists as scan-v3.json ✅ |

---

### Day 4 (Remediation)

| Observation | Doc Location | Doc Said | Team Did |
|-------------|--------------|----------|----------|
| Progressive fixes | plan.md:180-212 | Fix by severity | Security → Perf → Correctness → Obs ✅ |
| All violations fixed | plan.md:183 | Target: 10/10 | 10/10 fixed ✅ |
| Tests pass | plan.md:196 | All tests passing | 5 unit + 5 integration pass ✅ |
| Duration | plan.md:115 | Target: 3-4 hrs | 25 min (89% faster) ✅ |

---

### Day 5 (Documentation)

| Observation | Doc Location | Doc Said | Team Did |
|-------------|--------------|----------|----------|
| Comprehensive report | plan.md:214-240 | Metrics, learnings, recommendations | 571-line retrospective ✅ |
| Hypothesis validated | README.md:3 | Multi-domain flywheel | Validated with caveats ✅ |
| Duration | plan.md:116 | Target: 2-3 hrs | ~1 hour (estimated) ✅ |

---

## Summary

**Files created:** 13/13 ✅

**Implementation quality:** High (realistic violations, good tests, clean code)

**Workflow used:** Partial autonomous (LLM for Day 1, manual for Day 3)

**Key differences from docs:**
1. Inconsistent skill usage (LLM Day 1, manual Day 3)
2. 50% detection vs 90% target (declarative extractor limitations)
3. Much faster than estimated (9 min vs 2 hrs Day 3)

**Critical observation:** Team completed exercise successfully but used mixed workflow (autonomous + manual). Documentation didn't emphasize continuous LLM requirement across all phases.

**Evidence for evaluation:**
- ✅ All source files have expected violations
- ✅ All claims have LLM attribution (`created_by = "aphoria-suggest"`)
- ⚠️ No evidence of `/aphoria-custom-extractor-creator` skill usage (manual config editing instead)
- ✅ Daily summaries document all phases with honest metrics
- ✅ Final state is production-ready (all violations fixed, tests pass)
