Out-of-scope stance

Project(s) touched: all

Status: Open — stance articulated twice across two repos, never codified

Surfaced in: session 6842c90d (io, 2026-04-25: "the moment we call something out of scope is the moment we fail"); also e6ae6069 (crescent, 2026-04-26: "doing things halfway is unacceptable? similarly with delaying anything indefinitely ... with the excuse of 'it's out of scope'")

---

The question

Should the ecosystem-wide CLAUDE.md explicitly forbid "out of scope" as a deferral pattern? And how does such a rule interact with legitimate project-boundary discipline (no path deps, independent repos)?

Why this is a registry thread

A codified stance would propagate to all repos. The tension is real: the user treats "out of scope" as a failure tell, yet the ecosystem is deliberately built from independent, bounded projects — so a blanket ban could collide with the boundary discipline that keeps repos decoupled.

What's still open

• The stance is asserted but never written as a rule.
• The boundary between "evasive deferral" and "correct project boundary" is undefined.

Working answer

None.