What it is
A coverage report turns the cluster's coverage read into a structured, warranted document. It is the productised form of the coverage figures the FrameGraph already computes: the match between the expected questions and the generated subsets, the source counts and tiers per aspect, the decaying premises, and the conflicts. It is a governance artifact, not an answer.
Every framed view in the Canvas already carries a one-line coverage read in its Knowledge cluster. The coverage report is that read, made complete and signed: it names what is strong, what is thin, and what is missing, with a candidate source pre-staged for each gap and a prioritised list of actions at the end.
What it reports
Organised by aspect and by concept, the same axes as the cluster, so a thin concept is visible even when its aspect looks covered.
Coverage by aspect, illustrated
A worked extract, the kind of table the report leads with. The figures come from the cluster; nothing is invented.
| Aspect | Status | Answered / open | Subsets | Sources by tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Who | Strong | 6 / 0 | 3 of 3 | T1×2 · T2×3 |
| What | Strong | 5 / 1 | 3 of 3 | T1×1 · T2×4 |
| When | Thin | 2 / 3 | 1 of 3 | T3×2 |
| Where | Strong | 4 / 0 | 2 of 2 | T1×1 · T2×2 |
| Why | Gap | 0 / 4 | 0 of 2 | none |
| How | Thin | 3 / 2 | 2 of 3 | T2×1 · T3×1 |
How it is produced
The coverage report is produced by the same deliverable job as any other report, render_deliverable, run over the cluster. It reads the cluster's coverage data only; the figures come from the cluster, and there is no fabrication.
Populate
Gather the coverage data: the expected questions, the subsets and their answers, the coverage gaps, the sources and tiers, and the decay and conflict records.
Apply the rubric
Score the report for faithful representation of coverage, source grounding, and no overstatement, with the standard caps.
Generate the executive summary
The headline coverage and the top three actions, drawn from the report and the rubric results.
Seal the warrant
An optional final step seals an E10 Validity Warrant over the report, so the coverage figures are themselves provable.
Who uses it, and where it sits
One deliverable, three homes. In the catalogue it sits in the picker's Generally applicable group, tied to a coverage frame, so it is produced through the same picker, job, and result as every other deliverable.
The steward
Runs it on a branch to see where to curate. Its recommendations feed straight into the preview-first curation queue. This is its primary home.
The auditor
Runs it on a framework, where the coverage report is the crosswalk in report form, exception-first, and folds into an evidence package.
The application user
Runs it on a topic to judge how strongly the base covers something before relying on it.
The document, section by section
- Summary, with the overall coverage, the headline gaps, and the top recommendations.
- Coverage by aspect, a table of aspect, status, answered and open, subsets, and sources by tier.
- Coverage by concept, the same read over the concept decomposition.
- Expected questions, answered against open.
- Gaps, each with a candidate source.
- Decay and conflicts, the premises past refresh and the sources that disagree.
- Recommendations, prioritised and routed to curation.
- Provenance, the warrants and sources behind the figures, by id.