spec: INTENT-1 — single-branch groups degenerate not malformed, structural adjacency check, timeless scoping

[JarbasAl]

Internal-purity refinement of OVOS-INTENT-1.

Changes

• Single-branch group (§3.2, §3.6): (word) moves from malformed to degenerate — loaders MUST accept it, SHOULD warn, and MUST treat it as exactly the bare branch ((word) ≡ word). The folding is semantically lossless: a construct with one unambiguous meaning is a stylistic slip, not an error. Only the empty () remains malformed (a group expresses a choice between branches; with no branch there is nothing to choose). §3.2 and §3.6 state the same rule consistently.
• Structural adjacent-slot detection (§3.6): the adjacent-slots check is defined over the expanded sample set, which can be expensive (§4.3). A tool MAY detect adjacency structurally, pre-expansion — two slots are adjacent iff every token between them can reduce to nothing — as a conformant alternative when it accepts and rejects exactly the same templates as the full-expansion check.
• Timeless scoping (§2, §5.3): "a future specification will define…" and "deferred to a future, separate specification" replaced with out-of-scope statements; "this draft" replaced with "this specification". §7's planned machine-checkable conformance-corpus sentence removed.
• Citation hygiene: §4.2 whitespace-normalization step number corrected (step 4); See-also corrected to six OVOS-INTENT-2 resource roles, five of which carry this grammar.

CHANGELOG entry appended under the spec's current class. Version field unchanged: per VERSIONING.md it is a V1/V2 compatibility class, and these refinements do not change class.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

[coderabbitai]

Warning

Review limit reached

@JarbasAl, you've reached your PR review limit, so we couldn't start this review.

Next review available in: 52 minutes

Enable usage-based reviews in Billing to review now. Otherwise, wait until the next included review is available.
You're only billed for reviews past your plan's rate limits ($0.25/file).

How can I continue?

After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the @coderabbitai review command as a PR comment. Alternatively, push new commits to this PR.

To avoid repeated limits, reduce automatic review volume by pausing incremental auto-reviews earlier, using label-based review opt-in, excluding WIP or generated PR titles, or requesting reviews manually when the PR is ready. If your team needs uninterrupted high-volume reviews, an organization admin can enable usage-based reviews.

How do review limits work?

CodeRabbit enforces per-developer PR review limits for each organization. Most developers receive the normal plan review availability.

For paid Pro and Pro+ PR reviews, CodeRabbit uses adaptive limits for sustained high-volume activity. When a developer's recent PR review activity reaches the 95th percentile or higher among CodeRabbit users, additional reviews become available more gradually as earlier reviews age out of the rolling window.

Please refer docs for additional details.

Review details

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: defaults

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 617b377a-a42e-42cc-8e9a-3a43cb8756c9

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 9003dcd and 7f500ce.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)

• CHANGELOG.md
• intent-1.md

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Commit unit tests in branch spec/intent-1

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.}