What RIPP Is and Is Not

Category: Protocol Boundaries and Positioning

What RIPP™ Is

Core Identity

✅ A structured specification format

RIPP is a schema-defined format (YAML/JSON) for documenting feature requirements
Validated against JSON Schema in CI/CD pipelines
Human-readable, machine-validatable

✅ An intent preservation protocol

Captures the “why,” “what,” and “how” of features in durable format
Prevents intent erosion through structured documentation
Versioned alongside code in Git

✅ A contract between concept and implementation

Defines what a feature does before code is written
Serves as the specification that implementations must satisfy
Enables code review against an approved specification

✅ A handoff artifact for prototype-to-production workflows

Bridges rapid prototyping and production-grade implementation
Preserves learnings from prototypes without requiring code reuse
Documents decisions, constraints, and outcomes

✅ A review-first development framework

Enables spec review before code is written
Catches security gaps, edge cases, and permission issues early
Provides single source of truth for approval processes

✅ Language and platform agnostic

Not tied to any programming language, framework, or cloud provider
Same RIPP packet can guide implementations in Python, Go, JavaScript, etc.
Focus on contracts, not implementation details

✅ Deterministic by design

RIPP normalizes explicitly declared structure—no inference required
AI is optional: useful when intent is implicit, lost, or ambiguous
Operates as a structure compiler when types, contracts, and workflows are explicit
Real-world use has produced complete handoffs without AI when source systems encoded intent structurally

What RIPP Is Not

Clear Boundaries

❌ Not a code generator

RIPP does not synthesize code from specifications
RIPP is a specification format; code generation is optional tooling
While tools MAY generate code from RIPP packets, this is not part of the core protocol
RIPP preserves intent; humans or AI still write implementations

❌ Not a refactoring or migration tool

RIPP does not transform prototype code into production code
RIPP does not provide automated code modernization
RIPP does not perform lift-and-shift operations between codebases
RIPP documents desired state; refactoring is separate work

❌ Not a runtime enforcement engine

RIPP does not execute policies at runtime
RIPP does not validate requests or enforce permissions
RIPP documents authorization rules; code or policy engines enforce them
RIPP is specification, not execution

❌ Not an Infrastructure-as-Code (IaC) tool

RIPP does not provision cloud resources
RIPP does not manage deployment state
RIPP documents intent; IaC tools (Terraform, CloudFormation) manage infrastructure
RIPP and IaC coexist: RIPP captures “why,” IaC declares “what”

❌ Not a GitOps deployment system

RIPP does not orchestrate deployments
RIPP does not reconcile desired vs actual state
RIPP documents features; GitOps tools (ArgoCD, Flux) deploy them
RIPP defines the contract; GitOps ensures it’s running

❌ Not a project management tool

RIPP does not track tasks, timelines, or assignments
RIPP does not replace Jira, Linear, or GitHub Issues
RIPP documents feature specifications, not project plans
RIPP complements project management, not replaces it

❌ Not a testing framework

RIPP does not execute tests or run assertions
RIPP defines acceptance criteria; test frameworks (Jest, pytest) validate them
RIPP’s acceptance_tests section describes what to test, not how to run tests
RIPP is specification; test code is implementation

❌ Not a production hardening service

RIPP does not scan code for vulnerabilities
RIPP does not inject security controls into existing code
RIPP does not automatically make prototypes production-ready
RIPP documents security requirements; engineers implement them

❌ Not a prompt engineering framework

RIPP is not a tool for optimizing AI prompts
RIPP is not a prompt template library
RIPP provides the specification; prompts may reference it
RIPP complements AI workflows; it doesn’t manage prompts

❌ Not an AI-dependent system

RIPP does not require AI to function
RIPP operates deterministically when structure is explicit
AI assists when intent is implicit, not as a core requirement
RIPP is a structure compiler first, AI-assisted recovery tool second

Common Misconceptions

Misconception 1: “RIPP generates production code from prototypes”

Reality: RIPP is a specification format, not a code transformation tool. When transitioning from prototype to production:

RIPP captures: The intent, contracts, and requirements learned from the prototype
Engineers implement: Production code that satisfies the RIPP specification
Code may differ: Different languages, architectures, frameworks—RIPP preserves intent, not code

What RIPP actually does: Documents what the feature should do. Engineers build it.

Misconception 2: “RIPP replaces user stories”

Reality: RIPP complements user stories, not replaces them.

User stories: Define the problem and business value (“As a user, I want…”)
RIPP: Adds implementation contracts, permissions, failure modes, and verification criteria
Together: User story provides “why” and “for whom”; RIPP provides “how” and “under what conditions”

Workflow: Start with user story → Translate to RIPP packet → Implement to RIPP spec

Misconception 3: “RIPP enforces permissions at runtime”

Reality: RIPP documents authorization rules; it does not enforce them.

RIPP’s role: Specifies “who can do what” in the permissions section
Code’s role: Implements permission checks (e.g., if (user.hasRole('admin')))
Policy engines’ role (optional): Enforce policies at runtime (OPA, Cedar, etc.)

RIPP is specification. Enforcement happens in code or policy engines.

Misconception 4: “RIPP is only for AI-generated code”

Reality: RIPP solves intent erosion for all development workflows.

For AI-assisted teams: RIPP provides durable specs when prompts are ephemeral
For traditional teams: RIPP prevents scattered requirements and undocumented assumptions
Key insight: Intent erosion happens whether code is written by humans or AI

RIPP is for anyone who wants to preserve the “why” alongside the “what.”

Misconception 4a: “RIPP requires AI to be effective”

Reality: RIPP is deterministic by default—AI is optional and additive.

When a system’s intent is already structurally encoded (through data models, UI components, workflows, and contracts), RIPP operates as a structure compiler:

What RIPP does: Extracts and normalizes explicitly declared architecture
No AI needed when:
- Types are defined (TypeScript, OpenAPI, schema files)
- Contracts are explicit (API routes, validation rules)
- Workflows are documented (state machines, UI flows)
- Structure is observable (component hierarchies, data models)

When AI adds value:

❌ Intent is implicit (requirements only in conversations)
❌ Intent is ambiguous (multiple interpretations possible)
❌ Intent is lost (legacy systems with no documentation)

In these cases, AI assists by:

Proposing candidate specifications from incomplete information
Identifying patterns in undocumented code
Flagging inconsistencies for human review

Key distinction:

Deterministic extraction (structure-driven): RIPP compiles what is declared
AI-assisted recovery (semantic inference): AI helps reconstruct lost intent

Real-world proof: RIPP CLI has generated complete production-ready handoffs without invoking AI when source systems had explicit structure.

Misconception 5: “RIPP requires Level 3 for everything”

Reality: RIPP has progressive conformance levels (1, 2, 3).

Level 1: Simple features (30-60 minutes to write)
Level 2: Production features (1-2 hours)
Level 3: High-risk features (2-4 hours)

Choose the level that matches your feature’s risk. Not everything needs audit events and NFRs.

Misconception 6: “RIPP forces specific implementation choices”

Reality: RIPP is implementation-agnostic.

RIPP defines: Data contracts, API endpoints, permissions, failure modes
RIPP does NOT define: Which language, framework, database, or architecture to use
Example: Same RIPP packet can guide:
- A Python microservice with PostgreSQL
- A Go monolith with SQLite
- A Node.js serverless function with DynamoDB

RIPP preserves contracts, not implementation details.

What RIPP Explicitly Does NOT Attempt

Does NOT Attempt: Automated Production Deployment

RIPP packets describe features. They do not:

Deploy code to production environments
Manage infrastructure provisioning
Reconcile running state with desired state
Handle rollback or blue-green deployments

Use GitOps tools for deployment orchestration. RIPP provides the specification.

Does NOT Attempt: Static Code Analysis or Vulnerability Scanning

RIPP packets document security requirements. They do not:

Scan code for SQL injection or XSS vulnerabilities
Analyze dependencies for known CVEs
Perform static analysis or linting
Inject security controls into existing code

Use SAST/DAST tools for security scanning. RIPP documents security intent.

Does NOT Attempt: Real-Time Monitoring or Observability

RIPP defines what should be logged (audit events). It does not:

Collect logs or metrics from running systems
Provide dashboards or alerting
Trace requests across services
Analyze performance bottlenecks

Use observability platforms (Datadog, New Relic) for monitoring. RIPP specifies what to log.

Does NOT Attempt: Replacing Architectural Documentation

RIPP documents individual features. It does not:

Describe system-wide architecture (C4 diagrams, ADRs)
Document cross-service communication patterns
Define microservice boundaries
Specify infrastructure topology

RIPP complements architectural docs. Use ADRs and architecture diagrams for system-wide design.

When NOT to Use RIPP

RIPP is not suitable for all scenarios. Do NOT use RIPP for:

❌ One-off scripts or throwaway prototypes

If the code will never reach production, RIPP is overhead
RIPP is for durable features, not temporary experiments

❌ Configuration-only changes

Changing a timeout value or feature flag doesn’t need a RIPP packet
RIPP is for behavioral changes, not config tweaks

❌ Purely internal refactorings with no contract changes

If external behavior is identical, RIPP may not add value
RIPP shines when contracts, permissions, or UX change

❌ Emergency hotfixes

During production incidents, fix first, document later
RIPP can be written retroactively to capture learnings

❌ Projects that already have mature, stable specifications

If you have comprehensive ADRs, API docs, and test coverage, RIPP may be redundant
RIPP is most valuable when specifications are scattered or missing

When TO Use RIPP

RIPP is ideal for:

✅ New features with unclear requirements

RIPP forces clarity before implementation

✅ AI-assisted prototypes moving to production

RIPP bridges rapid iteration and production rigor

✅ Features with security or compliance requirements

RIPP ensures permissions, audit, and failure modes are documented

✅ APIs consumed by external teams or customers

RIPP provides a contract that consumers can rely on

✅ High-risk features (payments, auth, PII, multi-tenant)

RIPP Level 3 captures audit events, NFRs, and edge cases

✅ Onboarding new engineers

RIPP packets serve as authoritative feature documentation

Summary: RIPP’s Scope

RIPP DOES	RIPP DOES NOT
Document intent and contracts	Generate code automatically
Define permissions and failure modes	Enforce policies at runtime
Validate schema conformance	Deploy to production
Serve as specification for review	Replace architectural docs
Preserve “why” alongside “what”	Scan code for vulnerabilities
Bridge prototype to production	Manage project timelines
Enable regeneration with confidence	Force specific tech stack choices

Next Steps

Intent as Protocol — Why RIPP exists and what problem it solves
RIPP vs Existing Paradigms — Detailed comparisons to IaC, GitOps, Policy-as-Code
Who RIPP Is For — Ideal use cases and team readiness

Key Principle: RIPP is a specification protocol, not an automation framework. It documents intent; humans and tools implement it.