Decision: adopt a Code of Conduct and enforcement path

[LaloLalo1999]

Decision

Decide whether the Playbook should adopt a formal Code of Conduct for public contributors and designate a private enforcement channel.

Why this is separate

The governance documentation in PR #6 defines contribution, support, and security routes, but a Code of Conduct requires an explicit enforcement responsibility and a private contact path. Neither should be invented in a public repository.

Recommended next step

Adopt Contributor Covenant 2.1 if Agentic Engineering intends to invite ongoing community contributions, after naming:

• the organization role or team responsible for enforcement;
• a private reporting channel that is not a public issue;
• the scope of spaces covered by the policy;
• the response and escalation process the organization can actually operate.

If the repository remains primarily an organization-published documentation surface with occasional corrections, document that a formal Code of Conduct is intentionally deferred and revisit when community contribution volume justifies it.

Acceptance criteria

• Confirm whether ongoing external community contribution is an explicit goal.
• Name the enforcement owner and private reporting channel.
• Choose the policy text and covered community spaces.
• Add the policy and link it from CONTRIBUTING.md.
• Confirm GitHub’s community profile detects the file.

[blocksorg]

Mention Blocks like a regular teammate with your question or request:

@blocks can you add technical details to this issue?
@blocks make the following changes ...
@blocks create an issue from what was mentioned in the following comment ...
@blocks explain the following code ...
@blocks are there any security or performance concerns?

Run @blocks /help for more information.

Workspace settings | Disable this message