Four questions, two bundles, one run each, in a scratch project outside this
repository with a generated skill per bundle. All four passed, and zero numbers
or identifiers appeared in any answer that were not in the delivered set or in
the payload's own identities (62, 45 and 35 unique numeric tokens checked).
The skill triggered WITHOUT being named in the prompt and selected the right one
of two installed skills from the question alone, so no special invocation syntax
is needed: the generated `description`, which carries the bundle id, the concept
count and the ref, is enough to route on.
One defect the runs found, and it was in the prose rather than the payload. The
citation guidance listed the four locator keys this library writes, so on the
270-concept third-party bundle the model reported "no page locator, the address
is at document level" while the excerpt in front of it carried
`source_element_id` - that bundle's own locator, correctly delivered by the
prefix rule. The guidance now tells the reader to cite whichever `source_*` keys
are present. On the re-run the same question returned the element id. Two runs
of one question, the second measuring a changed artefact and not retrying the
first.
One finding that is not a defect in this chain: the first attempt at a
known-negative was not one. The bundle covers water and frost protection on 17
of its 270 concepts and the ranker put none of them in the cut. The consumer
behaved exactly as the contract asks - refused, named its denominator, reported
its own zero as unmeasured because `withheld` entries carry no titles, and did
not go around the cut. Recorded as a retrieval miss rather than replaced, and
it is the same shape as the open fusion finding.
A correction to this session's own measurement is in the record too: a first
sweep used `grep -rhoE "^source_[a-z_]+:"`, whose character class excludes
digits, and so missed `source_sha256` on 270 of 270 concepts. A pattern that
cannot match what it is looking for returns a zero that reads like a fact.
README gains "Consume in Claude Code": folder to answer in three commands, every
one of them run in this session. A test holds that the recipe invokes only
scripts this repository ships, at the paths it names.
Suite 1373 (1339 at the session baseline), ruff clean, mypy src clean. No
version bump, no tag, no push.
Co-Authored-By: Claude <claude-opus-5>
The pre-pass delivered the right concept and the answer could not name it.
Measured by portfolio-optimiser 2026-09-08 over three paid arms: the gold
concept came back at rank 1 of 8 on 3 of 3 bundles, and the model answered
correctly on 1 of 3, because a delivered excerpt carried `concept_id`, body
text and nothing the document is known by. The previous session measured the
same gap from the other side: the provenance it had just written into every
concept did not reach the payload at all.
`excerpt_for` now carries `title` unconditionally, and `req_number`, the SPEC
5.1 address `sources` and each locator key (`source_pages`, `source_sheet`,
`source_rows`, `source_lines`, `source_offset`) when the concept has them. A key
the producer did not write stays absent: an empty value would assert that they
wrote an empty one, which is the contract's 6.4 failure.
`sources` is read in BOTH YAML forms, on a measurement rather than a taste. K2
writes the flow form on 629 of 629 concepts; the largest N-bundle writes the
block form on 270 of 270 and carries no locator key at all, so a flow-only
reader delivers that bundle with no address whatsoever. Reading the block form
is not a licence to write it - the emission rule is untouched, because the
line-oriented parser still cannot round-trip a block list. A `sources` value
this reader cannot decode is named (`sources_unreadable`), never dropped into
the same silence as an absent one.
Contract 8 gains the requirement and the checker gains its code
(`excerpt_unnamed`, 15 rules now, was 14): an excerpt a reader cannot name is
one an answer cannot cite, whatever its rank. `req_number`, `sources` and the
locators are SHOULD, not MUST - they are conditional on the producer, and a
bundle whose concepts carry no identifier cannot deliver one.
K2 controls, same question and same k, before against a frozen copy of the tool
at b6a8c8b: the RANKING does not move - the same 8 concept ids in the same
order, identical `text_sha256`, identical `withheld`, identical denominators
(629 = 621 + 8). The FIELD is what moved: payload 108 877 -> 111 744 B
(+2.63 %), budget spent 18 606 -> 20 907 (+287.6 B per excerpt), excerpt
members 9 -> 15, 83 changed lines. The contract document's own bytes moved with
8, so the budget instrument's known-positive moves with it: 10 349 -> 12 049
measured, 10 060 -> 11 719 raw, delta 289 -> 330.
New fixture `tests/fixtures/consume-provenance`: the two address forms and a
concept carrying neither address nor identifier. Purpose-built, because the two
real bundles are complementary and neither exercises both forms.
Suite 1347 (1339 before), ruff clean, mypy src clean.
Co-Authored-By: Claude <claude-opus-5>
A per-corpus skill copies this directory and fills every <PLACEHOLDER>. None of
them has a default: a corpus's budget, instrument, profile name and conditional
fields are facts about that corpus, and a default would be this repository
asserting one it has not measured.
The section headings are fixed because the checker in the next commit reads
them by name. references/example-payload.json is the known-positive that keeps
a refuse-everything checker from passing.
