# START HERE — Claude Code kickoff > **Note (current state):** the module is fully built (Steps 1–14) and its technical > name is now **`activeblue_familylaw_v2`** (renamed from `activeblue_familylaw` to > coexist with a different legacy module of that name already in production). The > design docs below still say `activeblue_familylaw` — that's the historical narrative; > the live module folder/name is `activeblue_familylaw_v2`. See `BUILD_STATUS.md`. You are picking up an in-progress build. Read in this order, then start the task at the bottom. Do **not** re-derive the design — it exists; follow it. ## Read order (do this first) 1. **`CLAUDE.md`** — the operational brief and single source of truth. Read it fully. Pay special attention to: - §1 — the governing rule + the two gates + Claude's role as the quality-elevation layer. - §2 — the 15 capabilities, grouped by RISK (what's safe now vs. attorney-gated). - §4 — locked decisions (apply them; do not re-litigate). - §5 — the verifiable-step method + the test harness rules. - §8 — **STEP 2, your immediate task.** - §10 — the audit fixes already applied (esp. fix 2, the `familylaw.proceeding` model). - §11 — the non-code success gaps (context for why some steps are gated). 2. **`BUILD_PLAN.md`** — the step contract and the run/test commands. 3. **The design docs `00`–`11`** (in the separate design package) — *why/detail* behind each step. Read the relevant doc(s) before each step, not all at once. For Step 2: docs 02 (domain) and 03 (data model). ## Current state - **Step 1 is DONE and validated** — `activeblue_familylaw` module: the `familylaw.case` spine, the lifecycle state machine, attorney-only gates, security groups, views, and 10 passing tests (tag `familylaw_step1`). Module layout is in `CLAUDE.md §6`. - The code is Odoo 18 (uses `` not ``; direct attributes, no `attrs`/`states`). - Nothing else is built yet. Steps 2–14 are designed, not implemented. ## Hard rules (from CLAUDE.md — do not violate) - **One verifiable step at a time.** Don't scaffold ahead. Each step = installable code + a UI walkthrough + tagged unit tests + a done-when. Get green before advancing. - **The two gates are sacred:** no code path lets AI output be filed/sent/signed without attorney approval, or lets an unverified citation into a filing. If a request would breach this, flag it — don't build it. - **Mock all external APIs in tests** (Claude, DocuSeal, CourtListener). Never hit the network from a test. Test date math with fixed dates. - **No outcome/success-percentage prediction.** The decision graph compares strength of support, never a "% chance of winning" (CLAUDE.md §2 EXCLUDED). - **Tier 3 (capabilities 8–9, Steps 6–7–9) is gated** behind licensed-attorney validation of the legal logic. You may build the *structure/scaffolding* but flag that the legal content is unvalidated; do not present legal reasoning as authoritative. ## Your first task: STEP 2 Build exactly what `CLAUDE.md §8` specifies: - Models: `familylaw.party`, `familylaw.child`, `familylaw.issue`, **`familylaw.proceeding`**. - Add indexed, searchable `case_number` to `familylaw.case`; open an initial proceeding on case creation. - **Automated conflict screening** — a local DB search over `familylaw.party` across all cases that surfaces potential conflicts for the attorney to clear (never auto-clears, never auto-blocks; the Step 1 `conflict_check_cleared` attorney gate remains). - Extend case search to find by party name, child name, and `case_number`. - **Intake questionnaire** (native models; creates a draft case): triage-first with the urgency screen, **conditional strictness** (standard = strict; emergency = fast-path on minimum facts), branching into the **child-support modification** question set, runs conflict screening on completion. Captures facts only — never answers "do I have a good case?" (logs it as an attorney question). - Tests tagged `familylaw_step2` covering everything in §8's test list. - **Done-when:** `familylaw_step2` green + the four-part walkthrough in §8. Work in the module, keep Step 1's tests green, and deliver Step 2 as one reviewable, tested slice. Then stop and report before starting Step 3.