Source: https://guthlabs.ai/docs/field-guides/supabase-field-guide/qualification/ field guide / candidate # Supabase field guide โ€” qualification The distinct qualification record for Supabase field guide. This page is proposal-only. Status: **proposed**Lifecycle: **candidate** ## Record status **Record ID**: field-guide:supabase-field-guide **Parent lifecycle**: candidate **Page lane**: docs_urls **Lane lifecycle**: proposed **Owner**: Stan **Owner role**: Not separately recorded **Owner status**: Not separately recorded **Qualification result**: NOT RUN ยท held for evidence and human review **Working browser surface:** [Field guides โ€” documentation]() โ€” Inspect the guide and persist local checkpoints. This route is local-only; provider, credential, database, customer, publication, deployment, and production effects remain held. ## Qualification status **Result**: NOT RUN **Disposition**: HELD **Reviewer**: Not recorded **Receipt**: Not recorded This page defines proposed acceptance criteria for the docs_urls lane. It does not execute tests, establish compliance, qualify the subject, or authorize an effect. ### Lane-specific instrument aids No verified instrument is assigned to this qualification lane. ## Outcome definitions **Verified**: All stated evidence and acceptance requirements passed for the exact reviewed revision; this still does not authorize deployment or an external effect. **Failed**: One or more deterministic acceptance requirements failed with an inspectable reason. **Needs review**: Evidence or interpretation is incomplete, conflicting, or awaits an identified human reviewer. **Held**: Authority, required evidence, safe execution conditions, or a principal gate is absent. The current record remains NOT RUN / HELD. These definitions describe candidate outcomes only. ## Proposed deterministic acceptance tests Route-resolution and distinct-content checks apply only to the admitted canonical routes in this record. Held source-proposed extensions are non-resolving proposals and are excluded. - The guide record contains the exact supplied source reference agents/index.html#stan. - Every documentation route has distinct content: overview scope, steps, tools, forms, examples, qualification, or related-job mappings; no route is a keyword-only doorway. - The overview states that lifecycle is proposed and that the supplied source does not prove deployment, provider connection, credential access, database authority, customer indexing, publication, or qualification. - Each related job has an owner, scope, evidence requirement, deadline or workback, and failure state. - Forms include source location, provenance, record ownership, review state, deadlines, and receipt references where applicable. - Security and implementation claims are either source-backed, locally tested, or explicitly marked proposed, needs review, or held. - Provider, credential, database, customer, publication, and production effects have no unverified success state and remain human-held. - Failures for missing evidence, stale revisions, conflicting records, inaccessible sources, and rejected approvals are represented without deletion of prior receipts. - The guide can be opened from the Field Guides interface and linked to Notebook records without claiming that a connected web feature exists. - A reviewer can deterministically identify the canonical guide record, related job records, supporting evidence, open risks, next deadline, and handoff receipt. ## Negative and held-state tests - The source record names Supabase but supplies no Supabase documentation, configuration, schema, security policy, deployment evidence, or operational telemetry. - A named native surface does not prove a connected Supabase web feature or provider integration. - Credential exposure, unauthorized database access, accidental customer-data handling, and unapproved external writes must remain held. - Stale, conflicting, incomplete, or unverifiable source records can produce unsafe architecture or incident guidance. - Security, SRE, fleet, and implementation advice may be mistaken for production qualification unless lifecycle and evidence labels remain visible. - Local prototype routes may be mistaken for authoritative backend, provider, customer, publication, or deployment state. - Accessibility failures may block reviewers; forms must support keyboard navigation, labels, readable status text, and non-color-only state cues. ## Qualification claim boundary ### Potentially allowed only after the stated evidence - A proposed Supabase field guide is being designed. - The guide is intended to organize source-bound work across security engineering, architecture and implementation, SRE and incident command, fleet operations, and receipt-backed handoffs. - The guide uses explicit lifecycle, provenance, ownership, review, deadline, and receipt concepts. - The supplied source identifies Stan as the owner agent and agents/index.html#stan as the source locator. ### Still held - Supabase is connected to Guth. - Any provider, credential, database, customer, publication, or production effect exists. - Any Supabase schema, policy, backup, incident process, fleet state, or deployment has been verified. - The guide is qualified, indexed, published, customer-facing, or production-ready. - Any security, architecture, SRE, or fleet recommendation has been validated against live Supabase behavior. - Any external send, write, migration, credential operation, or incident action has occurred. ## Sources and evidence These pointers bind the page to evidence. They do not grant authority or collapse verification into deployment. - `source_record:field-guide:supabase-field-guide` - `agents/index.html#stan`