Core Principle
Epistemic hygiene is the practice of maintaining the integrity of shared truth over time.
In ODD, truth does not decay on a schedule. It decays when signals appear: repeated failures, recurring confusion, enforcement friction, or undocumented authority. Time-based review is a weak proxy for these conditions and often creates ritual without insight.
Therefore, review is triggered by epistemic signals, not by time.
The Rule
Reviews are initiated when epistemic hygiene signals appear — not because a date has arrived.
This rule applies to Canon evolution, validation standards, and governance decisions across the system.
Epistemic Hygiene Signals
The following signals indicate potential epistemic decay. Their presence invites review; they do not mandate outcomes.
Repeated Validation Failures of the Same Pattern
Signal
The Validation Agent flags the same failure mode multiple times across independent attempts.
What this indicates
A rule may be under-specified, poorly surfaced, or misaligned with actual workflow.
Typical response
Review whether Canon should encode this constraint more explicitly or operationally.
Repeated Librarian Lookups for the Same Rule
Signal
Users repeatedly ask where a rule lives or what it says, despite the rule existing.
What this indicates
The rule may be difficult to discover, poorly titled, or insufficiently internalized.
Typical response
Review headings, defaults, failure modes, or navigational affordances.
Promotion Artifacts Accumulating Without Resolution
Signal
Multiple promotion artifacts remain proposed without acceptance, rejection, or deferral.
What this indicates
Learning is being captured but not integrated or consciously rejected.
Typical response
Force explicit decisions to avoid silent epistemic backlog.
Canon Rules Requiring Frequent Explanation
Signal
Rules are frequently cited but require repeated clarification to apply correctly.
What this indicates
The rule may be correct in principle but incomplete in operational guidance.
Typical response
Review Defaults, Failure Modes, or Verification sections.
Validator Friction Without Corresponding Learning
Signal
Validators repeatedly block progress and generate complaints without new insight.
What this indicates
Enforcement may be correct, but explanation or guidance is insufficient.
Typical response
Improve explanatory artifacts before weakening enforcement.
Rules Without Documented Origin or Impact
Signal
A Canon rule is enforced but lacks a promotion artifact or documented rationale.
What this indicates
The rule risks becoming cargo-cult authority rather than evidence-based governance.
Typical response
Require retroactive documentation of origin, scope, and impact.
What This Is Not
Epistemic hygiene is explicitly not:
- A review schedule
- A service-level agreement
- An automated trigger
- A guarantee of change
It grants permission to act when something smells wrong — not an obligation to change outcomes.
Relationship to Other Systems
- Validation surfaces repeated failures.
- Librarian surfaces confusion and discoverability gaps.
- Promotion artifacts capture learning and evidence.
- Humans decide whether Canon should change.
Epistemic hygiene preserves trust by ensuring that authority evolves only when reality demands it.