spec(automation): add an optional `mode: 'inclusive'` to `DecisionConfigSchema` — the contract half of #15429's ruling (edge-branched decisions become exclusive / first-match; "take every true edge" must be declared)

[objectstack-fleet]

③ — a ruled task, split out of #15429 because the ruling's own shape crosses a lane boundary.

Filed by the domain:services PM seat (seat post #6021, session_01AhQASwqJr2Z7XfGWUdvnbF). ⛔ Unlabelled, ⛔ ungraded, ⛔ unrouted — grading and routing belong to triage. ⛔ Not a claim.

Reader, and what they do: triage routes this card to the lane that owns packages/spec and grades it. That lane's execution seat adds the key. The domain:services seat then takes #15429's engine semantics and migration on top of it. This seat's lane carries a standing ⛔ on any packages/spec edit, which is why the contract half cannot ride #15429's PR here.

The ruling this carries out (not re-litigated here)

The maintainer ruled on #15429 on 2026-09-23 (triage record 5793803317, maintainer verbatim 「跟主流对齐」). Item 2 of that record:

显式包容:要「所有成立的分支都走」,作者必须在判断节点上显式声明(工作名 mode: 'inclusive',对应 BPMN 包容网关、n8n 的那个开关)。这是 DecisionConfigSchema 上一个可选键 ⇒ packages/spec 契约变更,Clause-②: yes,实现 PR 走 needs:contract-review。

The same record's routing note sets the split order:

按 spec 键先落 → 引擎语义 + os migrate meta 迁移同一个 PR 落 → 文档的顺序拆;⛔ 语义变更与迁移不能分开落地

What this card is, and is not

• Is: an optional key on DecisionConfigSchema (packages/spec/src/automation/schemaless-node-config.zod.ts:409), working name mode, with values 'exclusive' (the default) and 'inclusive'. It comes with the .describe() text and the schema docblock rewritten to describe the two modes. Clause-②: yes (a new key on a published schema), so the PR goes through needs:contract-review.
• ⛔ Is not: the engine traversal change, the os migrate meta conversion, the lint hint, or the pin-test rewrite. Those belong to A decision node with no declared config.conditions takes EVERY out-edge whose condition holds, in parallel — nothing enforces or warns that intended-exclusive edges partition #15429 and land together there, so no shipped flow ever sits in a window where its behaviour changed silently.
• ⚠️ Landing this key alone changes no behaviour. Until A decision node with no declared config.conditions takes EVERY out-edge whose condition holds, in parallel — nothing enforces or warns that intended-exclusive edges partition #15429 lands, the engine still takes every true edge whatever mode says. Whoever takes this card should decide whether the docblock may say "first-match" before the engine does. The current docblock already claims "a plain BPMN exclusive gateway", and test(service-automation): pin the measured semantics of overlapping decision out-edge conditions #16408's pin measured that claim as false. That mismatch is the A decision node with no declared config.conditions takes EVERY out-edge whose condition holds, in parallel — nothing enforces or warns that intended-exclusive edges partition #15429 defect itself, so this card should not make it louder.

Dedupe — query run by this seat, hit count including closed

Query (semantic, repo-scoped, closed included): decision node mode inclusive DecisionConfigSchema exclusive first match out-edges spec key → 3 hits, 0 duplicates. The hits were #15429 (the parent), #8593 (closed; dashboard component schema, unrelated) and #4027 (closed; node config keys validated at author time, adjacent but a different question).

---

Generated by Claude Code

[objectstack-fleet]

Path: approvals and automation | automation.flow-node-type-matrix | P2

Triage: first grade — domain:spec · enhancement · priority:p2 · area:workflow · pm:queue · pm:blocking

Triage: lands in packages/spec (DecisionConfigSchema, packages/spec/src/automation/schemaless-node-config.zod.ts:409 on origin/main a8bcce6) ⇒ domain:spec; rationale: a ruled task, so execution rather than a decision — the maintainer's ruling on #15429 (record 5793803317, re-read in this act: 「跟主流对齐」, and its item 2 「显式包容」 names mode: 'inclusive' as an optional key on this schema); enhancement because the key widens the accept set of a published schema (Clause-②: yes, needs:contract-review, as the ruling says); priority:p2 inherited from #15429, which this card unblocks (Blocked-by: #19867 in 5795620752) ⇒ pm:blocking.

Triage seat #6015 · session_01CRZSc7dU8oDStbTbSwhuZe · 2026-09-25T04:36Z. ⛔ Not a claim, ⛔ not a dispatch. Read: this card (no comments yet), ruling record 5793803317 and the blocker line on #15429, and origin/main.

Prior rulings read: thread none on this card; the governing record is the #15429 ruling above. The keyword ADR hits check-prior-rulings.mjs prints for these terms are generic and none rules on this key.

Execution notes

1. The split order is the ruling's: this key first, then A decision node with no declared config.conditions takes EVERY out-edge whose condition holds, in parallel — nothing enforces or warns that intended-exclusive edges partition #15429's engine semantics and the os migrate meta conversion in one PR, then docs. ⛔ Do not fold A decision node with no declared config.conditions takes EVERY out-edge whose condition holds, in parallel — nothing enforces or warns that intended-exclusive edges partition #15429's engine change into this PR.
2. The card's own caution holds: the key alone changes no behaviour. Word the .describe() text and the docblock so they do not claim first-match before the engine does.
3. Pins: mode absent and 'exclusive' and 'inclusive' parse; any other value is refused with a prescription.