Dev

.release-please-manifest.json

@@ -1,3 +1,3 @@
 {
-  ".": "0.24.0"
+  ".": "0.25.0"
 }

AGENTS.md

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-# ACES SDL Agent Rules
+# RAES SDL Agent Rules
 
 Use the repo policy tooling before and after implementation work.
 

CHANGELOG.md

@@ -8,6 +8,19 @@ and this project adheres to [Semantic Versioning](https://semver.org/spec/v2.0.0
 PRs do **not** edit this file directly. release-please maintains it from the
 Conventional Commit history on `main` (#684).
 
+## [0.25.0](https://github.com/RAESystem/rae/compare/v0.24.0...v0.25.0) (2026-07-25)
+
+
+### Features
+
+* add ASR-515 validation-basis disclosure contract ([#871](https://github.com/RAESystem/rae/issues/871)) ([1cd7362](https://github.com/RAESystem/rae/commit/1cd73624c2a2a694e428f12969bc71f0899d29d3))
+* **contracts:** add participant control occurrence contracts ([#868](https://github.com/RAESystem/rae/issues/868)) ([9122de5](https://github.com/RAESystem/rae/commit/9122de5be5a961c6954a5ec501748f1a5f486c57))
+
+
+### Bug Fixes
+
+* **release:** publish package as raes ([#879](https://github.com/RAESystem/rae/issues/879)) ([dad6692](https://github.com/RAESystem/rae/commit/dad6692322eccede19d81fe424ff61d20b1a253b))
+
 ## [0.24.0](https://github.com/RAESystem/rae/compare/v0.23.1...v0.24.0) (2026-07-25)
 
 

README.md

@@ -1,8 +1,27 @@
 # Reproducible Agentic Environments System
 
-Reproducible Agentic Environments System (RAES) is a backend-agnostic scenario
-description language, Python reference implementation, and contract surface
-for cyber range scenarios and experiments.
+Reproducible Agentic Environments System (RAES) is a system for describing,
+realizing, controlling, evaluating, and reproducing agentic environments. An
+agentic environment is a declared and realized setting in which participants
+receive observations, take actions, interact with resources or other
+participants, and are evaluated under stated controls. Participants can
+include software agents, policies, scripts, and human-control proxies.
+
+RAES supports a bounded reproduction attempt by connecting authored intent,
+deterministic or governed variation, realization inputs, participant behavior,
+observations, apparatus identity, provenance, evidence, replay boundaries, and
+conformance results. It does not guarantee deterministic runtime behavior,
+equal outcomes, exact replay, scientific validity, or reproducibility.
+
+Cyber, AI security, AI safety, testing, research, and evaluation are
+non-exhaustive application areas. The general model can support additional
+domains through domain-specific examples, controlled vocabularies, semantic
+profiles, reusable assets, backend profiles, and evidence requirements.
+
+The current repository materializes RAES through its Scenario Description
+Language (SDL), Python reference implementation, published contracts, examples,
+and assurance material. RAES names the overall system; RAES SDL is the authored
+scenario language within it.
 
 The repository separates authored scenario meaning from processors, backends,
 participant implementations, runtime state, and archived evidence. In the
@@ -12,12 +31,13 @@ backend contracts without binding the authored scenario to one cloud, range
 implementation, or execution harness.
 
 This is an academic and engineering project. The repository is intended to be
-read, tested, and used as reference implementation code, not treated as a product
-surface.
+read, tested, and used as reference implementation code, not treated as a
+managed service.
 
-The repository is not a managed cyber range and does not include a production
-backend. Backend contracts, stubs, conformance checks, and examples are present;
-real deployment backends remain separate implementations.
+The repository is not a managed environment service and does not include a
+production backend. Backend contracts, stubs, conformance checks, and examples
+are present; real deployment backends remain separate implementations. Cyber is
+the strongest current example and lineage base, not the boundary of the core.
 
 A worked example of RAES SDL driving a concrete range is
 [APTL (Advanced Purple Team Lab)](https://github.com/Brad-Edwards/aptl), a
@@ -26,7 +46,7 @@ realizes the selected topology on a Docker Compose backend.
 
 ## Contents
 
-- [What RAES Describes](#what-raes-describes)
+- [Agentic Environments And RAES SDL](#agentic-environments-and-raes-sdl)
 - [Getting Started](#getting-started)
 - [Using the Python Reference Implementation](#using-the-python-reference-implementation)
 - [Repository Layout](#repository-layout)
@@ -39,12 +59,15 @@ realizes the selected topology on a Docker Compose backend.
 - [License](#license)
 - [Maintainer](#maintainer)
 
-## What RAES Describes
+## Agentic Environments And RAES SDL
 
-An SDL file is a declarative scenario document. It can describe topology,
-hosts, services, identities, content, relationships, agents, objectives,
-workflows, variables, and evaluation material without directly describing a
-specific backend's infrastructure primitives.
+RAES SDL records authored scenario and experiment intent. An SDL file can
+describe topology, hosts, services, identities, content, relationships, agents,
+objectives, workflows, variables, and evaluation material without directly
+describing a specific backend's infrastructure primitives. Processors,
+backends, participant implementations, and runtime choices turn that authored
+scenario into a realized environment; the realization is not identical to the
+SDL document.
 
 ```yaml
 name: hospital-ransomware-surgery-day
@@ -99,7 +122,7 @@ Parse and validate a scenario from Python:
 ```python
 from pathlib import Path
 
-from aces_sdl import parse_sdl_file
+from raes import parse_sdl_file
 
 scenario = parse_sdl_file(
     Path("../../examples/scenarios/hospital-ransomware-surgery-day.sdl.yaml")
@@ -234,12 +257,12 @@ must mint a new schema version as described in
 
 ## Citation
 
-If you use RAES SDL in academic work, cite the repository:
+If you use RAES in academic work, cite the system:
 
 ```bibtex
 @software{raes,
   author       = {Edwards, Brad},
-  title        = {RAES SDL: Backend-Agnostic Scenario Description Language for Cyber Range Experiments},
+  title        = {RAES: Reproducible Agentic Environments System},
   year         = {2026},
   license      = {MIT},
   url          = {https://github.com/RAESystem/rae}

THIRD_PARTY_NOTICES.md

@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
 
 ## Z3 Theorem Prover
 
-ACES uses the `z3-solver` Python package, version 4.16.0.0, for the governed
+RAES uses the `z3-solver` Python package, version 4.16.0.0, for the governed
 finite-domain scenario satisfiability profile. Z3 is distributed under the MIT
 License.
 
@@ -28,7 +28,7 @@ SOFTWARE.
 
 ## Open Cyber Range SDL Parser
 
-Portions of the ACES SDL model structure were translated and adapted from Open
+Portions of the RAES SDL model structure were translated and adapted from Open
 Cyber Range SDL Parser v0.21.2, revision
 `fe83e8281fc4b954967fbaa5a0d099007ddcb06c`.
 

contracts/concept-authority/behavioral-relations-v1.json

@@ -363,7 +363,7 @@
         "test_status": "tested",
         "proof_status": "deliberately-unproved",
         "evidence_refs": [
-          "implementations/python/packages/aces_sdl/validator/"
+          "implementations/python/packages/raes/validator/"
         ]
       },
       "source_refs": [
@@ -703,7 +703,7 @@
         "test_status": "tested",
         "proof_status": "not-applicable",
         "evidence_refs": [
-          "implementations/python/packages/aces_sdl/canonical.py"
+          "implementations/python/packages/raes/canonical.py"
         ]
       },
       "source_refs": [

contracts/profiles/scientific-completeness/delivery-assessment-2026-07-12.json

@@ -8,28 +8,28 @@
     {
       "concern_id": "source-profile-validity", "status": "implemented", "limitation": "Admission proves the governed source profile, not scientific adequacy.",
       "evidence": [
-        {"kind": "implementation", "path": "implementations/python/packages/aces_sdl/_yaml_loader.py", "claim": "Safe YAML ingress and source-profile enforcement."},
+        {"kind": "implementation", "path": "implementations/python/packages/raes/_yaml_loader.py", "claim": "Safe YAML ingress and source-profile enforcement."},
         {"kind": "test", "path": "implementations/python/tests/test_sdl_parser.py", "claim": "Source-profile and parser rejection coverage."}
       ]
     },
     {
       "concern_id": "closed-structural-model", "status": "implemented", "limitation": "Closed structure permits a name-only fragment and is not a completeness claim.",
       "evidence": [
-        {"kind": "implementation", "path": "implementations/python/packages/aces_sdl/scenario.py", "claim": "Closed Scenario model."},
+        {"kind": "implementation", "path": "implementations/python/packages/raes/scenario.py", "claim": "Closed Scenario model."},
         {"kind": "test", "path": "implementations/python/tests/test_sdl_models.py", "claim": "Closed-model validation coverage."}
       ]
     },
     {
       "concern_id": "semantic-reference-integrity", "status": "implemented", "limitation": "Semantic admission covers declared SDL references, not backend realization.",
       "evidence": [
-        {"kind": "implementation", "path": "implementations/python/packages/aces_sdl/validator/_core.py", "claim": "Collect-all semantic validation."},
+        {"kind": "implementation", "path": "implementations/python/packages/raes/validator/_core.py", "claim": "Collect-all semantic validation."},
         {"kind": "test", "path": "implementations/python/tests/test_sdl_validator.py", "claim": "Cross-section semantic validation coverage."}
       ]
     },
     {
       "concern_id": "topology-and-resource-intent", "status": "implemented", "limitation": "The SDL expresses intent; realizability remains apparatus and backend relative.",
       "evidence": [
-        {"kind": "implementation", "path": "implementations/python/packages/aces_sdl/scenario.py", "claim": "Typed scenario topology and resource surfaces."},
+        {"kind": "implementation", "path": "implementations/python/packages/raes/scenario.py", "claim": "Typed scenario topology and resource surfaces."},
         {"kind": "test", "path": "implementations/python/tests/test_sdl_realworld.py", "claim": "Real-world scenario authoring coverage."}
       ]
     },
@@ -39,12 +39,12 @@
     },
     {
       "concern_id": "scoped-specificity-open-world-intent", "status": "partial", "limitation": "Realization envelopes and explicitness semantics exist, but scenario-scoped default and most-specific override authority remain open.", "issue_refs": ["#539"],
-      "evidence": [{"kind": "implementation", "path": "implementations/python/packages/aces_sdl/explicitness.py", "claim": "Current explicitness analysis."}]
+      "evidence": [{"kind": "implementation", "path": "implementations/python/packages/raes/explicitness.py", "claim": "Current explicitness analysis."}]
     },
     {
       "concern_id": "parameter-typing", "status": "implemented", "limitation": "SDL variables instantiate scenario values; they do not define an experimental factor design.",
       "evidence": [
-        {"kind": "implementation", "path": "implementations/python/packages/aces_sdl/instantiate.py", "claim": "Typed variable binding and instantiation."},
+        {"kind": "implementation", "path": "implementations/python/packages/raes/instantiate.py", "claim": "Typed variable binding and instantiation."},
         {"kind": "test", "path": "implementations/python/tests/test_sdl_phase_contracts.py", "claim": "Instantiation and closed-phase coverage."}
       ]
     },
@@ -77,28 +77,28 @@
     {
       "concern_id": "propositions", "status": "implemented", "limitation": "The model defines claims and truth domains; it does not guarantee a backend can decide them.",
       "evidence": [
-        {"kind": "implementation", "path": "implementations/python/packages/aces_sdl/propositions.py", "claim": "Typed proposition model."},
+        {"kind": "implementation", "path": "implementations/python/packages/raes/propositions.py", "claim": "Typed proposition model."},
         {"kind": "test", "path": "implementations/python/tests/test_proposition_semantics.py", "claim": "Predicate, subject, and truth-composition coverage."}
       ]
     },
     {
       "concern_id": "assertions", "status": "implemented", "limitation": "Assertion composition is not evaluator lifecycle success or graded scoring.",
       "evidence": [
-        {"kind": "implementation", "path": "implementations/python/packages/aces_sdl/propositions.py", "claim": "Role-constrained assertion model."},
+        {"kind": "implementation", "path": "implementations/python/packages/raes/propositions.py", "claim": "Role-constrained assertion model."},
         {"kind": "test", "path": "implementations/python/tests/test_truth_result_contracts.py", "claim": "Assertion truth-result integrity coverage."}
       ]
     },
     {
       "concern_id": "condition-probe-binding", "status": "implemented", "limitation": "Conditions are probe realizations and cannot substitute command success for truth.",
       "evidence": [
-        {"kind": "implementation", "path": "implementations/python/packages/aces_sdl/conditions.py", "claim": "Explicit condition-to-proposition binding."},
+        {"kind": "implementation", "path": "implementations/python/packages/raes/conditions.py", "claim": "Explicit condition-to-proposition binding."},
         {"kind": "test", "path": "implementations/python/tests/test_proposition_capabilities.py", "claim": "Backend binding capability and rejection coverage."}
       ]
     },
     {
       "concern_id": "workflow-compensation", "status": "implemented", "limitation": "Compensation is bounded workflow behavior, not universal resource rollback.",
       "evidence": [
-        {"kind": "implementation", "path": "implementations/python/packages/aces_sdl/orchestration.py", "claim": "Workflow compensation surface."},
+        {"kind": "implementation", "path": "implementations/python/packages/raes/orchestration.py", "claim": "Workflow compensation surface."},
         {"kind": "test", "path": "implementations/python/tests/test_fm2_semantics.py", "claim": "Workflow semantic invariants."}
       ]
     },
@@ -123,7 +123,7 @@
     },
     {
       "concern_id": "deadlines-and-windows", "status": "partial", "limitation": "Objective windows exist, but a complete time-domain-bound deadline surface is not published.", "issue_refs": ["#285", "#288"],
-      "evidence": [{"kind": "implementation", "path": "implementations/python/packages/aces_sdl/semantics/objectives.py", "claim": "Current objective-window analysis."}]
+      "evidence": [{"kind": "implementation", "path": "implementations/python/packages/raes/semantics/objectives.py", "claim": "Current objective-window analysis."}]
     },
     {
       "concern_id": "pacing-and-synchronization", "status": "partial", "limitation": "Participant time-management records exist; general advancement and synchronization semantics remain open.", "issue_refs": ["#284", "#287", "#290"],
@@ -132,13 +132,13 @@
     {
       "concern_id": "participant-declaration", "status": "implemented", "limitation": "Participant declaration does not prove that an implementation respects every authority or observation boundary.",
       "evidence": [
-        {"kind": "implementation", "path": "implementations/python/packages/aces_sdl/agents.py", "claim": "Participant identity, scope, and boundary references."},
+        {"kind": "implementation", "path": "implementations/python/packages/raes/agents.py", "claim": "Participant identity, scope, and boundary references."},
         {"kind": "test", "path": "implementations/python/tests/test_sem_208_participant_behavior.py", "claim": "Participant semantic validation coverage."}
       ]
     },
     {
       "concern_id": "participant-action-observation", "status": "partial", "limitation": "Action contracts and observation boundaries exist, but participant-relative information-flow admission is not complete.", "issue_refs": ["#747"],
-      "evidence": [{"kind": "implementation", "path": "implementations/python/packages/aces_sdl/participant_behavior.py", "claim": "Current action-contract and observation-boundary models."}]
+      "evidence": [{"kind": "implementation", "path": "implementations/python/packages/raes/participant_behavior.py", "claim": "Current action-contract and observation-boundary models."}]
     },
     {
       "concern_id": "participant-episode-reset", "status": "partial", "limitation": "Runtime episode lifecycle is implemented, while complete authored episode/reset semantics and conformance remain open.", "issue_refs": ["#305", "#307", "#311", "#314"],
@@ -172,7 +172,7 @@
     },
     {
       "concern_id": "credential-intent", "status": "partial", "limitation": "Account and runtime-value posture exists, but authored credential-bearing setup remains unresolved.", "issue_refs": ["#673", "#708"],
-      "evidence": [{"kind": "implementation", "path": "implementations/python/packages/aces_sdl/accounts.py", "claim": "Current account and credential-posture authoring."}]
+      "evidence": [{"kind": "implementation", "path": "implementations/python/packages/raes/accounts.py", "claim": "Current account and credential-posture authoring."}]
     },
     {
       "concern_id": "credential-materialization", "status": "missing", "limitation": "No complete portable binding materializes authored credential-bearing accounts while preserving secret boundaries.", "issue_refs": ["#708"], "evidence": []
@@ -191,7 +191,7 @@
     {
       "concern_id": "vulnerability-inventory", "status": "implemented", "limitation": "A declared vulnerability is not proof of reachability, exploitability, or observation.",
       "evidence": [
-        {"kind": "implementation", "path": "implementations/python/packages/aces_sdl/vulnerabilities.py", "claim": "Typed vulnerability inventory."},
+        {"kind": "implementation", "path": "implementations/python/packages/raes/vulnerabilities.py", "claim": "Typed vulnerability inventory."},
         {"kind": "test", "path": "implementations/python/tests/test_sdl_models.py", "claim": "Vulnerability model validation coverage."}
       ]
     },
@@ -201,11 +201,11 @@
     },
     {
       "concern_id": "flexible-step-tooling", "status": "partial", "limitation": "Scripts and workflows exist, but portable tool selection and affordance binding remain incomplete.", "issue_refs": ["#653"],
-      "evidence": [{"kind": "implementation", "path": "implementations/python/packages/aces_sdl/orchestration.py", "claim": "Current script and workflow step surfaces."}]
+      "evidence": [{"kind": "implementation", "path": "implementations/python/packages/raes/orchestration.py", "claim": "Current script and workflow step surfaces."}]
     },
     {
       "concern_id": "portable-behavior-contracts", "status": "partial", "limitation": "Behavior specifications and action contracts exist, but portable participant affordance and realization coverage is incomplete.", "issue_refs": ["#653"],
-      "evidence": [{"kind": "implementation", "path": "implementations/python/packages/aces_sdl/participant_behavior_specification.py", "claim": "Current behavior specification surface."}]
+      "evidence": [{"kind": "implementation", "path": "implementations/python/packages/raes/participant_behavior_specification.py", "claim": "Current behavior specification surface."}]
     },
     {
       "concern_id": "behavioral-relation-taxonomy", "status": "implemented", "limitation": "The revisioned taxonomy, bindings, finite-evidence gate, and counterexamples are implemented; universal simulation, refinement, equivalence, bisimulation, epistemic, strategic, probabilistic, timed, and partial-order proofs remain deliberately unproved or future.", "issue_refs": [],