Actually, I’d tweak your model. The, so to speak, skeletal kerygma is proposed, yes. But then things bubble up, like Paul’s teaching and eating with the nations. Then, when there’s a controversy a council or a pope decides which of the teachings or practices is okay and which not.
E.g.: Paul gives us a son of man + son of God terminology.But finally we need an Ephesus and Chalcedon to nail down a framework for understanding what Paul said.
Is that tweak okay?
Sounds good to me.