msd-core/docs/how-to/probe-edges-in-a-non-english-project.md

How to probe edges in a non-English project

Goal: Get real edge-completeness coverage on a spec written in a language other than English, instead of every requirement landing in unclassified and the whole taxonomy quietly contributing nothing.

Prerequisites: A project with response_language set (see Configuration), and a phase whose /gsd-spec-phase run has passed the ambiguity gate. The edge-completeness probe (Step 5.5) then runs automatically — you do not invoke it separately.

For the taxonomy and the reasoning behind front-of-pipeline edge analysis, see Spec-Phase Edge-Completeness Probe. For how to act on findings once they appear, see Resolve edge-coverage findings. This guide covers only what is different when your spec is not in English.

---

What happens, and why

The probe classifies each requirement's data/behavior shape by matching English word-boundary cues against the requirement text. A requirement written in another language matches nothing, classifies to zero shapes, raises zero categories, and surfaces as a single unclassified — review manually row.

That is not a rejection you can act on — it looks identical to a genuinely edge-free requirement. When it happens to every requirement, the probe has contributed nothing to the spec.

So Step 5.5 populates an optional text_en field alongside each requirement — a faithful English translation — which the engine reads in preference to text for classification (text_en ?? text). Your spec's own text stays in your language throughout. Concretely, for the same requirement:

Requirement text	Requirement text_en	Shapes	Edges raised
O sistema mescla intervalos sobrepostos em uma lista ordenada	(absent)	none	none — one unclassified row
O sistema mescla intervalos sobrepostos em uma lista ordenada	The system merges overlapping intervals in a sorted list	collection	adjacency, empty, ordering

What you do

Nothing extra. The translation happens inside Step 5.5 as part of the run, populating the engine-only text_en field.

What you should see is the split: your spec stays in response_language — its requirements, its acceptance criteria, its ## Edge Coverage section — while the probe's findings are reasoned about from text_en, an English rendering of the requirement text that lives alongside (never in place of) your requirement's own text. Requirement ids (R1, R2, …) are never translated or renumbered, so a finding always names the same requirement you wrote.

If your spec comes back anglicized, that is a bug worth reporting — only the transient text_en field is translated, never the document.

Tell "no edges here" apart from "the probe could not read it"

This is the distinction that matters, because both look like an unclassified row.

What you see	What it means	What to do
A few unclassified rows among normally-classified ones	Those requirements carry no shape cue in any language. This is the classifier's known recall gap, not a translation problem.	Resolve each like any other finding — or author an explicit shapes array on the requirement (below).
Every requirement unclassified, and a WARNING: edge-probe proposed ZERO applicable edges	The probe could not read your requirements at all.	Confirm the run really is translating the probe input. Do not accept an empty ## Edge Coverage section.
Some requirements classified, the rest unclassified, no warning	The silent case. The zero-applicable warning fires only when all requirements are unclassified, so a partly-classified spec raises nothing.	Check the unclassified ones individually against the row above.

Translation makes the classifier applicable; it does not make it omniscient. A requirement carrying no shape cue in English either — for example "the command exits with code 1 on invalid input" — still classifies to zero. That is expected, and the fix is the same one an English-language project uses.

Force the shape when the prose carries no cue

When a requirement is genuinely edge-relevant but no cue fires, do not fight the wording. Author the shape explicitly — an authored shapes array bypasses prose classification entirely, in any language:

{ "id": "R4", "text": "The command exits with code 1 on invalid input", "shapes": ["stateful"] }

shapes accepts any of numeric-range, collection, text, stateful, io. The example above raises idempotency and concurrency.

An explicit empty array — "shapes": [] — is the opposite signal: your deliberate "this requirement has no edge surface", which stays silent rather than surfacing an unclassified row.

Related

• Resolve edge-coverage findings — what to do with each finding once it is raised
• Spec-Phase Edge-Completeness Probe — the taxonomy and the rationale
• Configuration — the response_language setting