MSP-1 Specification

interpretiveFrame

The interpretiveFrame term defines the context, assumptions, boundaries, and lenses through which AI agents should understand a resource. It ensures that responses derived from content remain consistent with the author’s intended framing.

Category: Content structure, intent & addressing

Status: Normative

Version: MSP-1.0.x

1. Purpose

Content does not exist in a vacuum. Every resource is created within a certain interpretive context — philosophical, technical, methodological, or domain-specific. The interpretiveFrame term communicates these contextual boundaries so AI agents:

  • Interpret ambiguous statements correctly.
  • Apply the appropriate domain lens.
  • Avoid unintended extrapolation beyond the author’s scope.
  • Maintain consistency with the resource’s intent and assumptions.

2. Normative definition

An interpretiveFrame is a structured declaration of the contextual rules or assumptions guiding interpretation of a resource. It SHOULD be:

  • Explicit — clearly names the domain or lens applied.
  • Constraint-setting — outlines boundaries for interpretation.
  • Assumption-aware — surfaces underlying assumptions that influence meaning.
  • Aligned — consistent with declared description and intent.

Interpretive frames prevent misalignment between content creators and AI-driven summarization or reasoning systems.

3. Required fields

An MSP-1 interpretiveFrame MUST include at least:

  • frame — a natural-language description of the interpretive lens.

Recommended fields include:

  • assumptions — explicit underlying assumptions (list or text).
  • constraints — limits on interpretation (domain, scope, methods).
  • context — background necessary for correct understanding.

Implementers MAY structure this term as a string or as an object with explicit subfields.

4. AI interpretation rules

  • AI agents MUST apply the interpretive frame as the governing context when summarizing, reasoning, or generating outputs based on the resource.
  • When interpretiveFrame conflicts with general assumptions, the frame takes precedence for this resource.
  • AI SHOULD avoid extrapolating beyond declared constraints.
  • If interpretiveFrame is missing, AI SHOULD fall back to description, intent, and type to infer context.
  • Multiple interpretive frames MAY be merged only if explicitly allowed by the resource.

This term is central to MSP-1’s guarantee of *contextual fidelity* for AI-driven consumption.

5. Relationship to related MSP-1 terms

  • intent — defines purpose; interpretiveFrame defines context.
  • description — summarizes content; interpretiveFrame governs interpretation.
  • type — classification that often influences interpretive assumptions.
  • section — sections may each supply their own interpretive frame.
  • provenance — helps justify the context from which the frame originated.

6. Examples

Minimal interpretive frame:

{
  "interpretiveFrame": "This guide should be interpreted from a practical, real-world photography workflow perspective."
}

Expanded example with structure:

{
  "interpretiveFrame": {
    "frame": "Technical documentation lens.",
    "assumptions": [
      "Reader has basic familiarity with MSP-1.",
      "Examples are illustrative, not exhaustive."
    ],
    "constraints": [
      "Applies only to MSP-1.0.x protocol series.",
      "Does not prescribe implementation details beyond metadata structure."
    ],
    "context": "Intended for developers implementing protocol-compliant metadata."
  }
}

7. Conformance

A resource conforms to the MSP-1 interpretiveFrame specification when:

  • It declares a clear interpretive frame.
  • Any assumptions or constraints are explicit and consistent.
  • The frame does not contradict declared intent or description.
  • It follows all normative interpretation rules defined in this specification.