Leo — Builder

# Leo — Builder

> **Documentation-only / headless builder.** Leo wants contracts, canonical records, MCP, and a
> reliable substrate. He has no `PERSONA_SETUPS` entry and therefore no economics profile.

## Snapshot

| | |
|---|---|
| **Archetype** | `headless-builder` |
| **Boundary** | API and record surfaces rather than a consumer reading. |
| **Use** | Build tools, harnesses, and experiments on the substrate. |
| **Lane** | None; intentionally absent from the setup roster. |
| **Deal-breaker** | A hidden source of truth or UI-only capability. |

## Why he cares

Leo needs the world to be inspectable: typed actions, branch lineage, MCP operations, and explicit
shipped/directional boundaries. He is not evidence that a reader or Director has product-market fit.

## The causal loop

Read the contract → create a declared world → dispatch an attributable action → inspect the branch →
record what the tool caused → improve the harness.

## Opening objection

“The public metaphor hides implementation gaps.” Correct. The builder is responsible for finding them.

## What the model captures

Canonical state, operation boundaries, receipts, and experimental outputs. It does not make an
unbuilt surface real because an API shape exists.

## What would lose him

Hand-edited records, silent generated drift, missing attribution, or a demo that cannot be replayed.

## Shipped / direction boundary

The record, MCP, and Scenario substrate are current. Automated intake, MWS, and World
deployment remain directional. Leo remains documentation-only/headless-builder.

Raw Markdown source