template · model update
Model update template
Copy-paste skeleton. Written the same hour as the retro. Four moves: close witnessed assumptions, add new ones, append signal reading to the brief, sharpen open questions. The artefact the next cycle inherits.
How to use
The model update is mechanical. Four moves, in order. Open the Initiative Brief and the Feature Brief side-by-side. The update is in-place edits to those briefs — not a new document. This template captures the change record — what moved, with date and evidence.
# Model update — [cycle name] · YYYY-MM-DD
Author: [PO name]
Triggered: Retro held YYYY-MM-DD; signal reading YYYY-MM-DD
## 1. Assumptions closed (witnessed during this cycle)
Brief / Initiative: [link]
Assumption: "[verbatim from the brief]"
Status: CONFIRMED | CONTRADICTED
Evidence: [how the cycle witnessed it]
Closed: YYYY-MM-DD
[Repeat per closed assumption]
## 2. Assumptions added (not yet witnessed at decision time)
New assumption: "[what the cycle surfaced that we hadn't
considered]"
Status: NOT WITNESSED at decision time, OBSERVED
during check
Implication: [what this means for the next cycle's
scope or design]
Added to: [which brief, which section]
[Repeat per added assumption]
## 3. Signal reading appended
Brief: [Feature Brief link]
Signal reading: [link]
Method: [Appended as new section in the brief, not
copied — the brief now points at the result
alongside the prediction.]
## 4. Open questions sharpened
Previous question: "[old phrasing]"
Resolved: [strike — answered during the cycle]
- or -
New phrasing: "[sharper question for the next cycle]"
Why sharpened: [what this cycle taught us about what to ask]
- or -
New question: "[surfaced during the cycle]"
[Repeat per question]
## 5. Templates / checklists / glossary updated
Artefact: [Feature Brief template | amigos template |
release-gate checklist | domain glossary | etc.]
Change: [What was added/removed/sharpened]
Why: [Link to the cycle finding that motivated it]
PR: [link if relevant]
[Repeat per artefact touched]
## Sign-off
PO: [Name] · [date]The test for a real model update
If the next cycle's brief does not change because of what this cycle revealed, the update did not happen. A wiki entry that lives in isolation is information; a model update is a change to the artefacts the next cycle uses without anyone remembering to look.
Where this lives in your project
Model updates are change records filed alongside the Initiative Brief — typically in briefs/<initiative>/model-updates/. They reference the in-place edits to the briefs themselves (which are versioned in git). The next cycle's discovery reads the updated Initiative Brief; the model update record is the audit trail.
What to do if a section resists
| Resistance | What it means | Where to go |
|---|---|---|
| Cannot name a closed assumption | The cycle did not witness anything new | Either the cycle ran without observation (chain-level signal) or the brief had no assumptions to close (also a signal) |
| No new assumptions surfaced | Either the cycle was over-confident or under-witnessed | Often the latter — re-read the helpdesk reading and signal reading for what the team did not expect |
| Template change is vague | "Improve the template" — not testable | Name the specific section, the specific addition, the specific check |
| Update done a week later | Loss already happening — momentum lost | The discipline is same hour as the retro; this slipped because no one owns it. Assign explicitly. |
Worked example — Grading-shortcut model update
# Model update — Grading shortcut · 2026-06-27
Author: Alex (PO)
Triggered: Retro held 2026-06-27 ; signal reading 2026-06-25
## 1. Assumptions closed
Brief: Feature Brief — Grading shortcut
Assumption: "Graders prefer keyboard shortcuts over deep
links."
Status: CONFIRMED
Evidence: 8 of 8 graders observed using ⌘+Enter to advance.
Deep links used by 1 grader once across 8 sessions.
Closed: 2026-06-25
## 2. Assumptions added
New assumption: "Graders working in non-English language packs
experience a perceived-freeze at submit due
to language-pack load delay."
Status: OBSERVED during check (3 schools, 8 tickets)
Implication: Next cycle needs to witness a Hebrew-default
grader's submit moment. Likely brief input
for a perceived-responsiveness initiative.
Added to: Initiative Brief — Grading · "Not yet witnessed"
## 3. Signal reading appended
Brief: /briefs/grading-shortcut.md
Signal reading: /briefs/grading-shortcut/signal-2026-06-25.md
Method: Linked from "Prediction" section as
"Result (2026-06-25): Met".
## 4. Open questions sharpened
Previous question: "Will graders use the new shortcut?"
Resolved: YES — 8/8 adoption.
New question: "What is the median submit time experienced
by a non-English-default grader?"
Why surfaced: Signal reading + helpdesk pattern revealed
a language-pack load delay we hadn't witnessed.
## 5. Templates / checklists updated
Artefact: Feature Brief template — "What we have NOT yet
witnessed" section
Change: Add required prompt: "Have we witnessed a
non-English-default user in this moment?"
Why: This cycle surfaced an observation-mismatch
specific to non-English-default graders.
PR: #248 (templates/feature-brief.md)
PO: Alex · 2026-06-27See also
- Practice — Model update
- Template — Retrospective — runs immediately before
- Template — Signal reading — the artefact this references
- Template — Feature Brief — the artefact this updates
- Canon — After We Build · The Model Update
- Principle — Compounding small changes