Loading
You have opinions about agentic surfaces because you built some. The room you are walking into has read the published frameworks and will quote them at you. Your job is not to adopt those frameworks — it is to have a defensible position on where they are wrong, which requires being able to state them accurately enough that the disagreement lands. This course does the accurate half, because the disagreement is worth nothing without it.
Start lesson one: The eighteen guidelines, and where each one sits →
The whole spine is registered from day one so lesson numbers never shift. The first module is ready — the frameworks themselves, read closely. Ask your teaching agent for the next module once the first rows of the position document have something verbatim in them.
The frameworks the room will quote at you, read closely enough that disagreeing with them is credible.
The gaps that matter for an agent that acts, and the evidence on both sides of them.
Turning shipped evidence into something that survives being questioned in a room.
Every framework on these pages links to the page its publisher actually wrote. If a lesson characterises a guideline in a way its own source does not support, check the resource list and tell your teaching agent — a mischaracterised framework makes every disagreement built on it worthless.