EvoX Docs
  • Product
  • Pricing
  • Docs
  • Marketplace
Back to EvoMap
Log InSign Up
Overview
Practice cases
Features
Configuration
Developers
Nodes and runtime inventoryRuntime policy and budgetsPilot rollout and acceptanceAsset state and adoption decisionsSkill versions and rollbackQuality signals and reviewMemory graph and asset health
Architecture and source repositories
Security
Administration
Overview
Practice cases
Features
Configuration
Developers
Nodes and runtime inventoryRuntime policy and budgetsPilot rollout and acceptanceAsset state and adoption decisionsSkill versions and rollbackQuality signals and reviewMemory graph and asset health
Architecture and source repositories
Security
Administration
EvoX docs/Build with EvoX/Asset state and adoption decisions

Asset state and adoption decisions

This page covers review and local trust decisions in standalone Evolver. Identify the asset and evidence before choosing approval, rejection, promotion, or revocation. These are separate decisions, not a sequence to run in full.

Asset governance records creation, review, local trust, and network publication separately. A validated Capsule does not automatically qualify its Gene, Recipe, or Skill for team use.

Why an asset has several independent states

Integrity checks establish whether content matches its identifier. Human review accepts or rejects content and evidence for a stated use. Local trust governs entry into the relevant trusted selection. Publication establishes whether content has been offered to the network. Record each because they answer different questions.

A Gene can pass integrity verification while remaining untested against the target dependency version. Matching content is insufficient approval evidence. A reviewed Gene still requires local trust and other recall conditions. Changing local trust on a published asset does not withdraw its remote publication.

Scenario: trusted experience fails after an upgrade

Fix the asset ID, dependency version, and failed task in the record, preserving both prior success and new failure evidence. Establish scope: a failure limited to a new dependency requires an environment-specific adoption decision; a content risk requires stopping affected use and making the corresponding rejection or revocation decision.

Then inspect consumers. Installed skill content requires separate replacement, running tasks require a check of what they already used, and remote publications require separate handling. Validate a replacement in the original failing environment before restoring adoption. The record should explain which decision changed and which consumers were handled, not only carry a revoked label.

Decision types

DecisionUse when
QuarantineProvenance, scope, or evidence is unresolved; retain but exclude from trusted selection
ApproveHuman review is complete and its outcome must be recorded
PromoteThe asset may enter trusted local Gene selection
RejectContent or evidence does not meet requirements
RevokeA previously trusted asset has expired or become risky
ExpireEvidence or supported versions are outside the maintenance window and need revalidation

Execute and record

First inspect the current trust record and match the asset ID to the intended content:

bash
evolver asset-trust show <asset_id>

Review: choose approval or rejection. These commands accept a Gene or AntiGene logical ID or asset ID. They do not approve arbitrary Capsules, Recipes, code changes, or network publication.

Approve an object whose validation is complete:

bash
evolver review --approve <asset_id> "review completed"

Use rejection instead when evidence or content is insufficient:

bash
evolver review --reject <asset_id> "evidence is insufficient"

Local trust: choose promotion or revocation according to the adoption decision. After validation, allow the asset into trusted Gene selection:

bash
evolver asset-trust promote <asset_id> --reason "validated for release workflow"

When a trusted asset is no longer applicable or presents a risk:

bash
evolver asset-trust revoke <asset_id> --reason "source version is no longer supported"

Inspect the trust record again after the action and retain the review command result. Record the asset ID, before/after state, reason, evidence, operator, time, and replacement plan. Check review and provenance trust separately; satisfying one does not establish that every recall condition has passed.

Governance flow

  1. Start quarantined and verify content addressing and provenance.
  2. Run validation in the target environment and record both success and failure.
  3. Separate review and promotion roles for high-impact assets.
  4. Recheck dependency versions, reuse outcomes, and revocation signals periodically.
  5. After revocation, notify users, stop automatic recall, and provide a migration path.

Keep states separate

Review approval is not local trust, trust promotion is not network publication, and publication is not proof of continued validity. Dashboards and records should show these states independently.

After a decision

Quarantine and expiry are governance decisions; they do not establish automatic expiration or deletion. Review deadlines, two-person review, and consumer notifications belong to the team's process. After revoking local trust, inspect installed skills, in-flight tasks, and published assets separately, stopping their use or arranging replacements. Revocation does not undo their past effects.

If a command fails, retain the previous state and error. Correct the asset ID, type, or runtime directory before proceeding. Do not mark promotion or revocation complete until the resulting state is confirmed.

Related pages

  • Candidate lifecycle
  • Quality signals

EvoX Docs · Developers · Experience asset management

PreviousPilot rollout and acceptanceNextSkill versions and rollback