AI Native Foundations
Certified AI-capable: runs daily work on AI workflows with calibrated trust and hardened prompt systems.
SPECIMEN. A demonstration entry from the seed registry, published to show the shape of a record. It is not an issued credential and no person holds it.
Every node this credential stands on — its own track up to its level, plus the full prerequisite closure behind that, derived from the skill graph rather than restated by hand. Each is matched to the work on this record that closed it.
- n-l0-1Mental modelsFNDNO ARTIFACT LINKED
- n-l0-2Tool stackFNDNO ARTIFACT LINKED
- n-l0-3Prompt specsFNDART-03Prompt system: support triage v3VERIFIED
- n-l1-1First workflowFNDART-01Sprint retrospective autopilotVERIFIED
- n-l1-2Personal AI OSFNDART-02Personal briefing agentVERIFIED
2 of 5 nodes carry no artifact on this record. They are listed unresolved rather than omitted — a registry that printed only the backed half would read as complete, and would be worth less than nothing to the person auditing it.
What AINO-F requires of anyone who holds it. Published terms for the credential class, not a transcript of this holder's assessment.
- 5 nodes: the L0–L1 foundations region
- A verified artifact at every node, ending in a personal AI operating system
- Running gate — live-reviewed artifact coverage across the required graph
- Planned defense — unscripted foundations review after vetted examiner coverage
This page publishes the credential, the gate it stands on, and the artifacts linked to it. It does not publish artifact bodies, assessment transcripts, reviewer identities, or the holder's name — the registry is public and the work is not. An id that resolves to nothing returns 404, never a page.
For every artifact linked to this credential: the node it closes, the published rubric it was scored against, who reviewed it, the date, and the verdict. Each review stores its kind — AI or expert — at the moment it is written. Nothing on this page is inferred from a status.
- AI REVIEW · MODEL NAMED
- A model scored this artifact against the module's published rubric, one criterion at a time on a 0–4 scale. The model that scored it is named above. This is a machine verdict on a submitted artifact — it is not a human judgment, and it is not a statement about the person.
- AI REVIEW · NO MODEL RAN
- No model reviewed this artifact. A keyword and length check ran because no review provider was reachable, and that check cannot verify anything: the pass flag is forced false on this path, so it can neither mark an artifact verified nor close a graph node. It is recorded because the submission happened, not because it was assessed.
- EXPERT REVIEW
- A human practitioner reviewed this artifact against the same published rubric and recorded the verdict under their own account. Expert review is a distinct kind from AI review, written at the time of review; no model produces it and no process converts one into the other.
No expert review is recorded against any artifact on this record. Every verdict below came from a model scoring the work against a published rubric. Expert review is stored as a separate kind, and where it has not happened this record says so rather than leaving the question open.
First workflow · AI Native Foundations
- 01Definition covers trigger, gather, generate, verify, act
- 02Two run logs on different inputs are attached
- 03Checkpoint analysis states what the gate caught or would have
- 04Hours-saved estimate shows the math
- AI REVIEW2026-05-23PASSEDREVIEWED BYanthropic/claude-opus-4-8RUBRIC SCORE81 / 100 · PASS AT 70
Personal AI OS · AI Native Foundations
- 01Design fits one page: inputs, three AI stages, review gates
- 02Every stage names its review gate explicitly
- 03Retro notes cover three consecutive days
- 04Retro answers the stated weekly question with evidence
- AI REVIEW2026-05-29PASSEDREVIEWED BYanthropic/claude-opus-4-8RUBRIC SCORE88 / 100 · PASS AT 70
Prompt specs · AI Native Foundations
- 01After-prompt includes an output schema and defined failure behavior
- 02Both versions run on the same three inputs, outputs attached
- 03Analysis names which constraints actually changed behavior
- 04At least one test input is an edge or break case
- AI REVIEW2026-05-16PASSEDREVIEWED BYanthropic/claude-opus-4-8RUBRIC SCORE88 / 100 · PASS AT 70
- Which graph node each artifact was submitted against, and which module's rubric scored it. Both are printed on the artifact's panel, with the criteria in full.
- Which kind of reviewer produced each verdict. Every review stores one of two values — AI or expert — at the time it is written.
- The date of each review and the verdict it returned.
- That nothing here was verified by an offline check. Verification requires a live model review or an expert one; the heuristic path is forced to fail before a status is written.
- That a human read the work — unless a panel on this page is marked EXPERT REVIEW. Where there is none, the record states it outright rather than staying quiet.
- That the holder can do this work today. Read the review dates; a credential carries a term, not a guarantee of current practice.
- Anything about the artifact's contents. Bodies, per-criterion notes, and reviewer feedback stay in the holder's workspace and are not published here.
- Employment, identity, or conduct. This record covers assessed work and nothing else.