Rigor Relocation

Problem

Treating agentic coding as if rigor itself were optional produces drift: undocumented conventions the agent re-invents each session, invariants that exist only in code review folklore, and verification that runs by hand when somebody remembers. The opposite mistake — preserving every prior practice unchanged — applies rigor at the wrong layer, so reviewers grade tokens the agent wrote on autopilot while the load-bearing decisions go unexamined. The team is forced to choose between performative discipline at the old layer and accepting that discipline has quietly left the building.

Solution

Identify, for each existing rigor practice, which agent-readable surface now carries it, and relocate it there. Three concrete relocations: (a) tacit conventions and architecture decisions move into the agent's context file (CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md, system prompt) so they are read every session, not learned once by a human; (b) hand-enforced invariants move into machine-enforced rules — types, assertions, schema validators, policy-as-code gates — so they bind every generated change, not only the reviewed ones; (c) periodic verification moves into continuous evaluation — eval-as-contract on every PR, agent-as-judge on trajectories, scorer-live-monitoring in production — so the bar is enforced on every change instead of every release. Pair with decision-log and provenance-ledger so the relocations are auditable.

When to use

• Code-writing work is materially handed to agents and prior rigor practices were tied to human keystrokes.
• Senior engineers can point to specific disciplines (invariant checks, naming, architecture decisions) that used to bind behaviour and now do not.
• Agent-readable surfaces (context files, machine-enforced rules, continuous evals) exist or can be introduced.