P15 (order 20260912T220951Z). okf._frontmatter_from_text was linewise
last-write-wins over EVERY line regardless of indentation, so a curated
concept's own top-level `title:` got silently overwritten by the nested
`sources:\n - title: ...` block's title. Fix: a top-level (unindented)
key always wins over an indented one of the same name; a nested line
with no top-level counterpart is still preserved (SPEC §4).
Red-before/green-after: new test
test_parse_frontmatter_top_level_title_survives_nested_sources_title
(tests/test_okf.py) failed on 45edbf5 (fm["title"] == "N500:2024",
expected the concept's own), green after the fix.
Re-measured on all four vegnormal-okf bases (concept files / distinct
titles): n100-2023 446/446 (was 1) - n200-2024 1133/1133 (was 1) -
n500-2024 270/270 (was 1) - r761-2025 2756/2407 (genuine repeated
process names, not a collapse). directory_listing on krav/N500:
269 documents / 269 distinct titles (was 1).
tests/test_context_sets_loadbearing.py:
- The P14 tripwire test (asserting parse_frontmatter DID collapse
titles) is INVERTED, not deleted, per the order: it now asserts the
fix holds, as a live regression guard.
- own_frontmatter() stays (not replaced by parse_frontmatter): measured
29,500 field reads (type/title/req_number/prosessnr, all four bases)
agree exactly except for quote-stripping (2,728/29,500, zero value
mismatches) - own_frontmatter unquotes for fasit comparison,
parse_frontmatter deliberately doesn't (D1/(a)/(i): unquote_scalar is
the ONE unquoting rule).
docs/2026-09-12-p14-kontekstsett.md Part B correction: the "22 of 22
cost words absent from n100/n200/n500" claim was false - n500-2024
carries `kroner` as a false positive (substring match inside
"borkroner", drill bits, not money). The original 22-word list was
never persisted, so only ~9 of the 22 survive named. Replaced with a
newly named, persisted 22-word list and the actual re-measured count:
n100 22/22 absent - n200 22/22 - n500 21/22 (kroner via borkroner) -
r761 18/22 (4 genuine cost words). No gate touched (no fasit anchor is
`kroner`).
Verification: full suite 1643 passed / 5 skipped (was 1642/5 on
45edbf5, +1 new test, 0 removed) - `uv run pytest -q`. ruff check +
ruff format --check clean on the three changed source/test files.
Golden transcripts byte-unchanged: shasum -a 1
tests/golden/demo-transcript.stdout = ea8c534773acdbe41ae68f2c55724d69aaf8be4f,
demo-transcript.stderr = ede3e2f685ce6a14ad9888e9de421d1a66f6c611.
No version bump, no push (both forbidden by the order).
Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
P14 valg (a): en bundle per kjoering, fire kjoeringer. Ingen modellkall, ingen
Azure, ingen produksjonskode roert -- leveransen er fire datasett, en gate og
maalingen bak dem.
FORMEN: contexts/<prosjekt>/ med mandate.json (Mandate ordrett), bundle.txt
(symbolsk basenavn + erklaert bundle_id -- aldri en absolutt sti, som ville
pinnet settet til en maskin og ridd ut i `git archive HEAD`), fasit.json og en
TOM docs/. Fasiten er EN maskinlesbar fil, ikke fasit.md + en tvilling: to
kopier av ett faktum er ko-(p), saa prosaen bor INNI JSON-en.
REGEL U (den maalbare formen for "basen kan ikke svare"): hvert ubesvarbart
spoersmaal erklaerer >=1 anchor, og admitteres iff HVER anchor er fravaerende
fra HELE teksten i HVERT konsept. Ikke "deler ingen noekkelord med noen tittel"
-- et tunnelspoersmaal deler "tunnel" med hundrevis av titler og det beviser
ingenting. Skanningen baerer alltid NEVNER; null konsepter er ROEDT.
MAALT, og verdt hele ordren: 22 av 22 proevde kostnadsord er FRAVAERENDE fra
n100/n200/n500 (r761 baerer 4). po sitt oppdrag er aa finne kostnadsbesparelser,
og tre av fire baser inneholder ikke ett pengeord.
FUNN, maalt og IKKE fikset (egen ordre): okf.parse_frontmatter er linjeorientert
last-write-wins, saa sources-blokkens innrykkede title overskriver konseptets
egen -- directory_listing paa krav/N500 returnerer 269 dokumenter, ALLE med
"title": "N500:2024". Navigasjonsstigens rung 2/3 skiller dem kun med et
UUID-filnavn og et tegnantall. En fasit-assert mot den tittelen ville vaert
VAKUOES, saa gaten leser toppnivaa-noekler og baerer en TRIPWIRE som asserterer
at kollapsen fortsatt finnes.
Load-bearing MAALT (36 armer), seks mutasjoner alle roede paa sin egen arm +
groenn kontroll 1642/5 (fra 1606/5, supersett, 0 fjernet) og golden BYTE-UENDRET
(shasum -a 1 av INNHOLDET = ea8c534773acdbe41ae68f2c55724d69aaf8be4f). Gaten var
ROED foer settene fantes.
AErlighets-grenser: de fire prosjektene er OPPDIKTET (hvert sett sier i sitt eget
honesty-felt hva jeg konstruerte); Regel U beviser at ORDET mangler, ikke at
spoersmaalet er ubesvarbart; de bundle-krevende armene SKIPPER uten basene; og
INGEN kjoering er gjort -- dette er maaleoppsettet, ikke maalingen. (c) er ikke
bygget: motoren finnes ferdig, det som mangler er ett nytt flagg, en run_id-
myntingsregel operatoeren maa ta, og tre partisjons-rader.
Ordre: 20260912T202210Z-7590723260-from-.claude
Maaling: docs/2026-09-12-p14-kontekstsett.md
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
P13 measured this lift and REFUSED it, because okf >=0.8.5 emits the ownership
stamp as the V1 flow mapping `generated: { by: process:okf-ingest, at: ... }`
where 0.3.2 emitted `true`, and `_carries_complete_ingest_stamp` read the new
form as NOT a stamp -- write_concept_file's forgery refusal would have shipped
DISARMED with the whole fail-closed suite green. That blocker is closed first,
red-first, and then the pin moves.
ROW 1, THE SECURITY HALF. `_claims_ingest_ownership` widens the predicate from
"reads as boolean True" to "claims ingest ownership", of which the boolean is
the pre-V1 spelling. The recogniser for the new half is `decode_flow_value` --
the module's ONE flow decoder, the same argument write_concept_file already
makes for `verified`: the writer refuses exactly what the reader can read. A
value the decoder REFUSES is therefore not an ownership claim and writes
through, which is what keeps this from collapsing into "any non-empty
generated". Two arms red before the fix; no YAML library introduced.
THE PIN. okf v0.3.2 -> v0.8.5, guard v0.3.4 -> v1.4.0 spelled `tag =`, not
`rev =`, and not the declared floor 1.2.0 -- both P13 premises hold and the
reason now lives next to the pin in pyproject.toml. The ":40" comment is
corrected: okf has ONE runtime dependency, the guard, and that is what binds
the two lines together. 27/27 imported names resolve across five modules.
THE GOLDENS, REGENERATED AS A DECISION. Seven concept files across four
examples/ingest-golden-* bundles, one line each. Two were regenerated by the
REAL materializer; the other five are derived (http/sql/mcp cannot materialize
outside the tests' stubs) and then MEASURED -- all four golden suites compare
byte for byte against what the stubs produce, and all four are green. The four
`generated == "true"` asserts now read ONE source, conftest.
expected_generated_stamp: four literals for one emitter fact are four places a
later release can leave half-corrected, which is exactly how the pre-V1 form
survived until P13 measured it. tests/test_okf.py keeps its literal on purpose
-- that one round-trips a CURATED half-stamp through our own writer.
THE BLOCK READER. Measured with the full denominator: all four delivered
knowledge bases write `sources` as a BLOCK sequence and none in flow form
(n100 446/446, n200 1133/1133, n500 270/270, r761 2756/2756 = 4605/4605), and
`evidence_for` reported `unreadable` on 4605 of 4605 -- the falsification layer
had no address for any document in any base. `okf.decode_block_mappings` is the
second CARRIER of one grammar, never a second grammar: colon-SPACE separator,
unquote_scalar, duplicate keys refused, SPEC 5.2's actor rule applied. okf's
consume.read_sources was READ for the form and not called; po calls no okf
reader, which is measured and deliberate. After: 4605 present / 4605 entries.
Reading is not a licence to WRITE -- the emitter is untouched and both writers
still refuse what decode_flow_value refuses.
THREE FINDINGS. (1) The first block reader INVENTED data on `- { k: v }` items
-- SPEC-canonical, and the shape tests/golden/block-form-provenance writes for
`verified` -- decoding it as `{'{ id': '...'}`. No arm caught it: the 5.2 actor
rule shielded the fixture by accident. Closed with a flow-decoder branch and
four new arms. (2) One of my own arms was VACUOUS, found by my own mutation M5:
it claimed to prove the colon-SPACE rule and stayed green under first-colon,
because the two rules agree on every delivered value. Renamed, labelled, and
the claim moved to the arm that actually witnesses it. (3) OPEN, and it needs
the operator: the commons-owned worked example declares its second concept
`unreadable`/`block-sequence`, which is now false for po. `shared/` is
pull-only, so closing it needs a commons amendment; the test asserts the
divergence instead of skipping it, keeping the discriminating half (the example
says two entries were seen and the reader returns exactly two).
NINE EXISTING ARMS REWRITTEN, NONE WEAKENED. All nine pinned "the block form is
unreadable" -- the behaviour this order changes. Each keeps its claim on a
specimen that is still unreadable for a reason of its own (5.2: an entry naming
no actor), or pins the REVERSED direction where the old arm stood so the change
cannot be silent. Two got STRONGER: multi-verified.md was authored for "a reader
keeping the last entry reports machine-confirmed for a concept a human signed",
and that could not be tested while the form was unreadable. Three node ids were
renamed; nothing was removed in substance.
Suite 1582 -> 1606 passed / 5 skipped. Both demo goldens byte-unchanged
(ea8c534... / ede3e2f..., shasum -a 1 of the CONTENT, never the git blob id).
ruff check / ruff format / mypy green. shared/ untouched.
Six mutations, all red against the WHOLE suite, each with its own signature:
row 1 detached (2) / block reader detached (17) / flow-item branch detached (7)
/ a stray indented line folds into an INVENTED entry (4) / separator becomes the
first colon (1 -- and that is finding 2) / the stamp expectation reverts to
"true" (4).
Order: 20260912T195112Z-995611104-from-.claude
Record: docs/2026-09-12-p13b-okf-bump.md
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
The lift to llm-ingestion-okf v0.8.5 (which forces llm-ingestion-guard to
v1.4.0) was built and run in a worktree, never in the tracked tree. It is not
green, and the reason that decides it is not the red tests.
MEASURED. 27/27 imported names still resolve across five modules. Both demo
goldens stay byte-identical (ea8c534... / ede3e2f...), ruff check passes and
mypy clears 37 files. The suite goes 1579/3/5 (control) -> 1573/9/5. Eight of
the nine reds have ONE cause: the emitter moved from `generated: true` to the
V1 flow mapping `generated: { by: process:okf-ingest, at: ... }`, one line per
generated concept, seven files across four examples/ingest-golden-* bundles --
and 0 under shared/, so a future lift does not touch the pull-only subtree.
THE FINDING. okf._carries_complete_ingest_stamp reads the new form as NOT a
stamp (measured: True on the literal, False on the flow mapping), so
write_concept_file's IngestStampError refusal would land DISARMED -- and
test_ingest_stamp_fail_closed_loadbearing stayed GREEN through the whole bump
run. That is exactly the trap the _YAML_TRUE_LITERALS invariant row was written
for, arriving by a spelling it did not anticipate. A gate that stops gating is
not a row to name; it is a blocker.
TWO PREMISES FELLED before anything was built on them. Guard v1.2.0 -- the
lowest 1.x satisfying okf's declared >=1.2,<2.0 -- is NOT choosable: okf v0.8.5
pins the guard itself via [tool.uv.sources] tag = "v1.4.0" and uv refuses the
consumer's lower pin as conflicting URLs. And `rev = "v1.4.0"` is a DIFFERENT
url to uv than `tag = "v1.4.0"` even at the same value; only the tag= spelling
resolves.
DELIVERED. tests/test_okf_version_guard.py pins what is measured-green
(0.3.2 / 0.3.4) in two halves -- the installed distribution and pyproject --
with the refusal messages NAMING the eight-row cost of the lift, so the next
session cannot lift the pin without re-measuring. Iron Law: written red against
the v0.8.5/v1.2.0 target first (3 failed / 2 passed). Four mutations, each with
its own signature, all red: the okf assert never raises (1) / always raises (1)
/ the guard assert never raises (1) / the pin constant drifts to 0.3.3 (2 --
both halves, so the derivation is live and not two literals).
Also in the assessment: R761 navigated free for the first time (po had 0
references to it) -- 8.58/6.89/7.11 s, 131 MB max RSS, 5514 files -> 2756
concepts, 0 skipped links, against n100-2023's 0.21 s / 111 MB / 450 -> 446 /
0; and what the CLI can and cannot do with four bundles today.
Suite 1582 passed / 5 skipped (from 1577/5, strict superset, 0 removed).
Goldens byte-unchanged. Two coord messages closed; two STATE claims corrected
against measurement (upushed 3 -> 0, inbox "empty" -> 2).
Order: 20260912T190444Z-8080128610-from-.claude
Record: docs/2026-09-12-p13-okf-pin-r761.md
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
The F15 report's shape repeated: result table, denominator discipline, one
command per claim. What the measurement changed against the order's own
framing:
- orchestrations CANNOT be lifted (1.1.1 is still the head on PyPI), so F15's
"the two floors are lifted together, there is no partial bump" is measurably
weaker after F16 -- and eight of the nineteen probe checks live in that
unmoved package, which is a property of the denominator, not a strength of
the probe.
- foundry/openai were NOT forced up; the coupling the order read belongs to the
LATEST releases, not the pinned 1.8.2. They were lifted for a measured reason
instead (two BREAKING bullets name core AND foundry in the same line).
- ONE of the order's transcriptions deviated from the source: #8219 lazy
loading is foundry/foundry-hosting/openai -- NOT core. Consequence, not
pedantry: had the floors stayed at 1.8.2, the change the order named as the
prime suspect for golden stderr would never have reached po at all.
- (a) touches NO U row. The wall-clock timeout is B4's own sketch word and G1;
and the primitive is `max_duration_seconds` degrading gracefully via
`budget_state["truncated"]` + a log line -- NOT a typed stop reason, so it
does not satisfy B4's "every breach -> a structured event, never a silent
stop". Recommendation: do not adopt it as B4's half. STATE's prohibition
stands, untouched.
- (b) does not move U13: `approval_mode` is 0 in src/ and 0 in tests/ (102 in
the venv). #7988 hardens the cooperative-marker path G4 already refused.
- (c) does not break: po's own parameters are typed `Sequence[Any] | None` and
all seven callsites pass lists, so sequence-only inputs are the only form po
can produce. 74 passed across the five middleware-bearing suites; no fix was
needed and none was made.
My own probe was WRONG FIRST and that is written down: five checks read
CHANGED/MISSING in BOTH versions because my queries sliced a Protocol stub,
counted `self`, and demanded two names be adjacent. Running it against BOTH
versions is what made the instrument failure visible.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
core 1.16.0 -> 1.18.0 turns the red guard green. The other three floors are
set to what `uv sync` actually installs, measured after the sync:
core 1.16.0 -> 1.18.0 (latest, 2026-09-10)
foundry 1.8.2 -> 1.13.0 (latest, 2026-09-10)
openai 1.8.2 -> 1.14.3 (latest, 2026-09-10)
orchestrations 1.1.1 -> 1.1.1 UNCHANGED -- 1.1.1 is still the latest release
TWO of the order's premises were felled by measurement, and the measurement
wins:
(1) `orchestrations` cannot be lifted -- there is nothing to lift it to
(1.1.1, 2026-08-21, is still the head on PyPI). F15's comment "the two
floors are lifted TOGETHER -- there is no partial bump" was true of F15's
bump; after F16 it is measurably weaker, and the comment now says so.
(2) foundry/openai were NOT forced up. The order read their coupling off the
LATEST releases (both require core>=1.17.0), but the PINNED 1.8.2 requires
only core<2,>=1.9.0 -- so the resolver kept 1.8.2 against core 1.18.0 and
resolved cleanly. They are lifted anyway, for a different and measured
reason: two of the 1.17/1.18 BREAKING items name core AND foundry in the
SAME bullet (#7918 sequence-only middleware inputs, #8127 SecretString), so
a 1.9.0-era foundry against a 1.18.0 core is half of a coordinated change
-- exactly the "still imports, semantics moved silently" class F15 measured.
Config A (core 1.18.0 + foundry/openai 1.8.2) was measured green on the
guard, the 19 async-plan-review tests and the golden transcript, and that
is stated as the measured alternative rather than hidden.
Full suite 1577 passed / 5 skipped -- identical to the pre-bump baseline
measured on this HEAD, 0 tests lost or added. Both goldens BYTE-UNCHANGED
(stdout ea8c534773acdbe41ae68f2c55724d69aaf8be4f, stderr
ede3e2f685ce6a14ad9888e9de421d1a66f6c611); #8219's lazy Foundry/OpenAI loading
did NOT move stderr, which stays two lines through the UNCHANGED normaliser.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Iron Law, F15's procedure repeated: the guard moves BEFORE the pin, and the
move is measured (2 failed / 2 passed against the installed 1.16.0) rather
than asserted. The floor still lives in ONE constant and the pyproject assert
still DERIVES its expected string from it; a second literal would reintroduce
the drift F15 removed.
The stale arm gains 1.16.0 and 1.17.0, and its docstring is corrected rather
than left behind: 1.17.0 is rejected even though agent-framework-foundry
1.13.0 and agent-framework-openai 1.14.3 only require core>=1.17.0 -- a
dependency's own floor is not our floor.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Re-measured all 19 rows of the prior-art register 15.1 against ce22b0e with the
review's grep-then-read-the-call-site method (37 modules / 17 747 lines). No row
moved in either direction over the 109 commits since 29.08; in-row changes (debate
got four Function Tools and an observing FunctionMiddleware, da5f10f) move no
status. Of the six "ja" only U3 is on the default CLI path. SkillsProvider is no
longer @experimental in installed core 1.16.0 and MAF's own FileSkillsSource loads
po's two skills 2/2, so one of three reasons behind "SkillsProvider AVVIST" is dead.
okf 0.8.3: 5 rows tried, 0 moved. A/B/C formulated, not decided. src untouched, NOK 0.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
P11 (order 20260910T225652Z), NOK 0, no push. PATH okf is 0.8.1 (uv tool list,
__version__, --help flags). src/ untouched.
(ix) on 0.8.1 shipped: 629/623/6 and 629/620/9 - PM's predicted denominators,
now measured. --no-source-quota alone gives back 629/621/8 and 629/617/12 in
both arms; the exact numbers are an interaction with tie-shared-rank (both
arms) and stem-prefix (open arm). --title-covered never fires here (byte-
identical payload). 0.8.1 with the three new rules off reproduces the 0.7.0
payloads' delivered lists and budgets.
P10 section 6 diagnosed: a bisect over okf's own history (known-positive at
both ends) puts the price schedule's loss at okf 38104b7, whose only consume
code change is DOCUMENT_PRIOR_EXPONENT 1.0 -> 0.5; putting that one constant
back in a copy returns the old payload byte for byte. tie-shared-rank is ruled
out; known_positive 10349 -> 12563 is a version marker, not the mechanism. On
0.8.1 the schedule is over_budget_after_knapsack, not below_k.
okf check on 0.8.1 has 15 rules, not 16: rule 16 (bundle_mismatch) is on okf
main 7cca9e0, in no tag. Run from an export of 7cca9e0 the K3-15 pair is rc 1
and the right pair rc 0 - a real cross-corpus mismatch, not an okf defect.
Offer rows on four corpora: identifiers unchanged (65/50, 435, 982, 272).
The P10 doc gets dated additions in sections 4 and 6; the old sentences stand.
Test docstring: +2 lines naming the 0.8.1 rule count, no behaviour change.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
GREEN for order 20260910T051343Z (P10). `unnamed_excerpts` reports every
delivered excerpt carrying no `title`, BY CONCEPT ID and in payload order --
ids, never a count, because "3 of 4 are unnamed" cannot be taken back to a
producer and "these three concepts are" can (ko-(y), one level down). It is
carried on `PrepassDeclaration` (DEFAULTED -- the `skipped_links` half, since
an empty trace here is an honest POSITIVE statement) and into
`{run_id}-prepass.json`, where a reader already looks for the denominators.
Absence ALONE, mirroring okf's `excerpt_unnamed` exactly: `title: ""` is a
name the producer chose badly, and reclassifying it would be repair.
Load-bearing MEASURED, five mutations all red against the WHOLE suite, green
control 1577 passed / 5 skipped (from 1570/5, superset, 0 removed), golden
demo-transcript.stdout BYTE-UNCHANGED (shasum -a 1 of the CONTENT =
ea8c534773acdbe41ae68f2c55724d69aaf8be4f): M1 the rule finds nothing (3 red) .
M2 it flags every excerpt (4, incl. the known-positive control) . M3 an empty
title counts as an absence (1 -- that arm ALONE) . M4 it never reaches the
declaration (2) . M5 it stops at the dataclass (1 -- the artefact arm ALONE).
Replay measured in the same session: both K2 payloads re-cut with okf consume
(PATH okf 0.7.0) into scratchpad/p10/, old files untouched. `okf check` goes
rc 1 / 8 and 12 findings -> rc 0 / 0 findings on both, 15 rules, known-negative
{} still rc 1 / 9. DIVERGENCE from the order's premise (ix): the denominators
did NOT move (629/621/8 and 629/617/12) because PATH okf 0.7.0 carries neither
--stem-prefix nor --source-quota. UNORDERED FINDING: the cut's CONTENT is a
different one -- the open arm no longer delivers the price schedule, delivered
text 141 470 -> 76 824 chars. Observed, not diagnosed.
docs/2026-09-10-p10-konform-k2-payload.md
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
RED. P9 measured `okf check` (0.7.0, 15 rules) rc 1 on both K2 payloads with 20
findings, every one of them `excerpt_unnamed`. On po's side the same absence is
SILENT: `_excerpt_header` appends `title:` only `if excerpt.title is not None`.
F1 (reporting) over F2 (refusing), and F2's price is a NUMBER: of the 20 payload
files in this repository 10 carry a `title` on every excerpt and 10 on none, and
among the ten F2 would refuse is the ONE git-tracked payload fixture
(tests/fixtures/prepass/bygg-energi-mikro-fixture.payload.json, 4 excerpts,
0 titled). F2 would need a tracked fixture rewritten to make its own rule green,
and would reverse PrepassExcerpt's written "a required field would refuse every
payload written before today".
6 failed, 1 passed. The one green is `test_no_existing_payload_is_refused` --
F1's promise, true before the rule and required to stay true through it.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
P8's grounding-offer measurement repeated on the okf v0.7.0 bundles, free, NOK 0.
N100/N200/N500 reproduce P8 EXACTLY (446/1133/270 concepts, 462041/1500962/408220
chars, 435/982/272 identifiers, 0 cost lines, derive REFUSED) - as predicted, because
vegnormal never went through okf's pandoc converter. K2 on the pinned v0.7.0 build
(453 concepts / 865 md) offers 65 identifiers against P8's 50: no row got worse
(0 lost, 15 new, derive REFUSED on both builds with a byte-identical message).
The cause is MEASURED, not guessed: CONTENT, not the concept rename. Concept NAMES
contribute 0 of 50 identifiers in the old build and 0 of 65 in the new one, because
the identifier forms require an uppercase head and a concept slug is lowercase - so
the rename cannot move the count at all. The 15 new tokens come from three documents
present under the SAME name in both builds with different bodies (snitt-e.md
28 -> 11029 chars, generell-orientering.md 1662 -> 47503); 102 of 414 shared concept
names differ in body length.
okf check (0.7.0, --skill/--payload): 15 rules; payload-n100 rc 0 with 0 findings;
the two K2 payloads rc 1 with 12 and 8 findings, all excerpt_unnamed - payload AGE
(recorded before the title field existed), not a v0.7.0 regression; known-negative
{} rc 1 with 9 findings, reproducing V3's figure, so the check can fail.
Two docstrings corrected to the new concept id, each naming the build its numbers
were measured on. src/ carries 0 occurrences of the old form. The recorder-test
string label and the two *-SYNTETISK fixtures are left untouched with the reason
stated: the label is arbitrary and looked up nowhere, and the fixtures simulate
converter output as it was.
No new seam, no new function, no contract change against okf. _ground_against_input
is untouched. No paid run.
Suite 1570 passed / 5 skipped, golden demo-transcript.stdout content sha1 unchanged.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Pure formatting, no behaviour change. ruff 0.15.18 reported
"3 files would be reformatted, 195 files already formatted" on HEAD 455d611;
after this commit "198 files already formatted". Suite 1570 passed / 5 skipped
before and after, golden demo-transcript.stdout content sha1 unchanged
(ea8c534773acdbe41ae68f2c55724d69aaf8be4f).
Two of the three came from P7 (277bb95), one from P8 (455d611).
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
P7 is right and landed, but re-measuring it exposed a consequence no row stated: with the gate
live, 29 of 29 cost codes in 13 of 13 delivered proposals fall across the three free recordings
(PM's denominator; 14 of 14 in 8 proposals on the PARSEABLE one -- the five blobs that separate
the numbers are refused by pydantic's `claimed <= total` and never reach stage 0b). All 29 were
invented, so the gate is right; but a gate that always refuses is as useless as one that never
does.
The cause is that the PROMPT asks for something the input cannot supply. `_build_messages`
requires each affected_item to "restate a cost line as the project's price schedule already
carries it", while K2's delivered input carries 9 occurrences / 2 distinct code-shaped tokens --
`SHA-01`/`SHA-10`, both document numbers off a page footer -- and `derive_cost_baseline` refuses
the base outright. There is no cost line in it to restate.
`GroundingOffer(chars, identifiers, cost_lines)` reports it. The PAIR is the diagnosis: "50
identifiers, 0 cost lines" says what neither number says alone. A REPORT, never a gate -- it
blocks nothing, because a blocking requirement IS `--require-cost-baseline` (F4/D-3, opt-in,
untouched), and `_ground_against_input` is untouched.
The callsite is MEASURED, not chosen: `generate.py` composes the grounding per attempt, after
`await _fetch_parsed`, so a report there could only speak once an attempt had been paid for;
`run.py` binds both halves above the `--live-dry-run` cut and before the first `debate.run`, so
the FREE trip says it. `delivered` is bound ONCE and the same variable feeds the report and
`_evaluate`; the report composes THROUGH `_grounding_text`, the gate's own composer.
A pattern is admissible here and not in the gate, and that is the difference between a report and
a falsifier: an unknown form is a token left uncounted -- an under-count, never a false rejection.
The forms are transcribed from the measurement; bare numbers are excluded with the number
(46 394 / 2 117 in K2). `grounding_offer_notice` is the ONE renderer and is silent when the run
CAN anchor -- omission, never an empty row.
Load-bearing MEASURED (tests/test_grounding_offer_loadbearing.py, 12 arms), nine mutations all
red against the WHOLE suite + green control 1570/5 (from 1558/5, strict superset, 0 removed) and
the golden byte-unchanged (shasum -a 1 of the CONTENT = ea8c534773acdbe41ae68f2c55724d69aaf8be4f).
Measurement: docs/2026-09-09-p8-forankringstilbudet.md
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
P6 (økt 108) ended in ValidatedProposal (verdict 5fd6272e3725fe68) on two cost
codes -- M-04-01 / M-04-03 -- that appear in NO prompt of that run. Measured
here first, verbatim: validate_proposal(p, baseline=None) validates it; the same
proposal against any non-empty CostBaseline is rejected naming both codes.
So the hole was never "fabrication goes uncaught" -- _reconcile_against_baseline
exists and is right -- but that the falsifier is reached only through
`if baseline is not None`. The input always exists; the baseline does not.
New stage 0b (_ground_against_input), OUTSIDE the baseline branch, after stage 0
so an anchored run's message is byte-identical to before. ONE Rejection, the
validator's own type, naming EVERY ungrounded identifier "; "-joined in the
proposal's own order (økt 94's completeness reason).
The rule has NO pattern -- `code in grounding`, exact substring -- and that is a
measurement: over the delivered corpora (K2 1108 files / 2 005 561 chars, the
three N payloads 8 excerpts each) the identifier forms are heterogeneous, and a
pattern chosen to cover them would be a rule about shapes. Bare numerals are the
one inert class (46 394 occurrences / 2 117 distinct in K2); the rule fails OPEN
there, never closed.
Evidence is three non-model-authored sources: what run_project DELIVERED (the
rendered cut/pointer/chunks plus the base's context_files -- never files, which
would make the type: verdict layer evidence), the project's own cost lines, and
the baseline's codes when anchored. The rendered PROMPT is deliberately NOT
evidence, on two measurements: gen_context IS the debate output on the S2c path,
and from attempt 2 the prompt carries the previous Rejection.reason verbatim --
which for this stage QUOTES the identifier it just refused. Grounding in the
prompt would let the gate's own refusal disarm it on its second round.
Prose scanning was chosen against WITH THE NUMBERS: a typed gate catches 2/2
(P6) and 2/2 (S7c) -- 100% of what reached a verdict. What stays uncaught, said
plainly: an ungrounded identifier that lives only in agent/debate prose and never
becomes an affected_item code (2 of 4 P6, 2 of 4 S7c, 1 of 2 P4).
Iron Law: 9 red / 2 green before the rule existed. Ten mutations all red against
the whole suite, green control 1558 passed / 5 skipped (from 1543/5, superset,
0 removed), golden demo-transcript.stdout BYTE-UNCHANGED (shasum -a 1 of the
CONTENT = ea8c534773acdbe41ae68f2c55724d69aaf8be4f).
Three existing fixtures changed, no gate weakened -- most of all
test_pre_amendment_bundle_runs_unchanged, which sent the SAME FABRICATED code and
asserted it validated: the økt-108 hole written down as an expectation.
No paid run. Order 20260909T113641Z-38938691-from-.claude.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
P6 repeats S7c arm Aopen on HEAD with the payload BYTE-IDENTICAL, so the only
variable is `collapse_padding` (finding 5, session 107).
(a) NO. `5647500` reaches the model -- 6 occurrences in 2 of 5 prompts, label
and amount on the same line -- and appears in 0 of 5 replies. The control
against S7c's own recording reproduces its published 6-in-2-of-11 / 0-in-11
exactly, so the null is a measurement, not a broken query.
(b) 1 of 12 delivered excerpts is named at all (the general technical
requirements, cited verbatim by concept_id); the price schedule never is.
(c) 4 of 4 code-shaped tokens in the replies are invented -- the ENGRAVE_MARK
class -- and the two amounts with them.
The fix duty does NOT fire, because cause (ii) is falsified by two
measurements: everything the collapse removed is whitespace (48 714 characters,
per-line non-whitespace sequence IDENTICAL on the real prompts), and the named
candidate -- the Post/SUM cell boundary -- was INTACT in S7c, which produced the
same null. A property present when the outcome was null cannot be the cause of
the null. The null is older than the collapse.
Pre-flight also measured what the row already implied but nobody had checked:
-72.4 % CHARACTERS is -1.8 % TOKENS (26 936 -> 26 447). A run of 887 spaces is
nearly free in BPE, so the collapse is legibility, never price.
The blind spot has moved on again: ranking (S7c) -> reading (finding 5) ->
the CHOICE of document.
Cost NOK 0.321 of a NOK 0.40 ceiling, 0 retries. Suite 1543/5, ruff and mypy
clean, golden byte-unchanged. No source file touched.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Order 20260908T195801Z. Findings 4 and 5 from the S7 acid test, then the two things
finding 99 measured and deliberately did not fix (D3, D2).
No user-facing surface changes: no new flag, no new command, no changed output
contract. Both seams are internal (the pre-pass rendering, and the shape a tool
answers a model with), so [skip-docs] rather than a README edit that would describe
nothing an operator can do differently.
FINDING 4 -- MEASURED, NOTHING BUILT. K2's price schedule IS readable without
guessing (8 column spans, 71 of 91 non-blank rows give >= 2 cells, the split stable
for K = 2..64). But 0 of 92 rows name all three of code/quantity/unit_cost -- also
under a looser substring match -- and 0 of 91 data rows carry code + quantity +
amount. The triple is not formatted away; it is not in the document. It is a price
SUMMARY plus nine rate cards whose unit-price columns are empty (pre-award). The
order's binding decision rule therefore falls against building:
--derive-cost-baseline keeps refusing, and MAJOR-4's own honesty limit holds.
FINDING 5 -- BUILT. Measured on the actual rendering path (concept_text, not the
raw file): the delivered excerpt is 104 lines / 67 245 chars, carrying 208 interior
whitespace runs, 117 of them >= 100 and the longest 887 -- 56 806 of 67 245
characters = 84.5 %, over 72 of 104 lines. collapse_padding, called from
_data_blocks (the one renderer both arms share, and therefore AFTER
verify_against_bundle -- collapsing in concept_text would break every payload's own
digest), gives -72.4 %: line count invariant, non-whitespace byte-identical, leading
indentation untouched, no number changed.
F99-D3 -- read_file / read_dir / read_bundle now RETURN their refusal. MAF turns a
tool raise into "Error: Function failed." (_tools.py:1410-1432, :1427) and counts it
against DEFAULT_MAX_CONSECUTIVE_ERRORS_PER_REQUEST = 3, so everything the refusing
arm knows is destroyed on the way out. The gates are unchanged; the property they
exist for -- the reason travels, the bytes never do -- is now asserted explicitly on
the returned value. The arm is keyed on named classes, never bare Exception, because
ExplorationError is itself a RuntimeError subclass.
F99-D2 -- the invariant row, plus one for finding 5 (a stated deviation from "one
row only": finding 5 is a separately built seam and the ledger's standing rule
requires its own row).
19 existing arms rewritten, never deleted and never weakened: where the class
carried a distinction, the refusal KIND carries it now.
13 mutations, all red against the whole suite (W1-W5, M1-M8), each restored from
scratchpad with shasum -c. Control 1543 passed / 5 skipped (from 1529/5, a strict
superset, 0 removed). Golden demo-transcript.stdout unchanged
(shasum -a 1 of the CONTENT = ea8c534773acdbe41ae68f2c55724d69aaf8be4f).
Measurement: docs/2026-09-08-funn-4-5-og-read-nekt.md
Co-Authored-By: Claude <Opus 5>
Funn 99, measured offline against the artefacts the paid Q5=B run left behind — no paid
run here.
ROOT, verbatim from the records: the three failing quick_validate calls all sent
bundle_id="renholdstekniske_funksjonskrav" — a CONCEPT name guessed out of the seeded cut,
while the base's id is k2-trinn1-20260903. Both arguments parsed against the signature, so
it was _resolve_bundle's raise MAF counted, proven by quick_validations being EMPTY while
all three stand in tool_calls. Denominator: 12 tool calls, and those three came BEFORE
list_bundles.
The order's causal chain is FELLED: the quick_validate triple is records 4-6 and the run
continued for 13 more model calls; the triple immediately before the 400 is the navigator's
three read_file refusals on del-ii-bilag-7-prisskjema*. The limit fired TWICE.
(A) ChatClientException is caught on BOTH seams — the exploration dispatch and the full-run
dispatch — because the debate's own model calls go through the same provider. The line is
"run stopped:", not "run refused:" (a stated divergence from the order): the argv was fine
and tokens were already spent, which is the MAJOR-2 arm's own reason, verbatim. Caught
INSIDE the try/finally so the exploration artefact still lands.
(B) quick_validate answers an unknown base id with {"decision": "refused", ...} naming the
configured ids, and records it in the sink. MAF turns a tool raise into the opaque
"Error: Function failed." (_tools.py:1426), so the one thing the refusal knew and the model
did not never reached it — the replies show it guessing at the JSON format instead.
read_file/read_dir/read_bundle still raise: measured, reported, out of scope.
Seven mutations all red against the whole suite, green control 1529/5, golden ea8c534
unchanged. One existing gate REWRITTEN, not deleted; its second half is what keeps (B)
scoped. The test double raises from the reply_selector seam rather than a new
_inner_get_response body, so the S2.5 consolidation guard stays untouched.
Co-Authored-By: Claude <claude-opus-5>
The live N100 arm without --require-cost-baseline lands the model on the
fasit concept: req_number ("Krav 3.3.1--13") is cited verbatim in 6 of 6
replies, and it is the correct concept, not a stray one. N100 reaches
po's own "ferdig" bar for the first time in this measurement series.
[skip-docs]
P2 measured that the producer's payload now carries title/req_number/sources/source_* on
every excerpt (14 members, was 9), but PrepassExcerpt ignored them (extra="ignore") and
_data_blocks rendered only concept_id/adjudication/trust_tier -- so (b') was a po verdict,
never a model verdict. title/req_number/sources are now named fields; source_* locators are
read via model_extra and a prefix scan (measured: the producer treats source_* as an
open-ended family, not a fixed allowlist), so a future producer's new source_foo key reaches
the prompt without a code change here. A P1-form payload renders byte-identical to before.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Order 20260908T134013Z-2103630340 (P2). Re-measures N100/N200/N500 in
hypothesis form against the new excerpt, with --require-cost-baseline, and
judges by the new "done" definition (operator choice 08.09 12:20, D-1: po is
not a lookup tool).
P1's finding 1 was llm-ingestion-okf's and it is CLOSED, verified here: the
excerpt carries 14 members (was 9), among them title, req_number, sources,
source_element_id and source_sha256. Ranking still puts the gold concept at
rank 1 of 8 on all three with the flagless command; contract check exits 0
with 15 rules; the budget instrument's own known-positive moved to 12 563 /
12 227 / 336 and measured == expected on all three.
What remains is po's, and it is two independent losses on one path.
PrepassExcerpt inherits _Permissive (extra="ignore"), so the payload's 14
members become 7 on the object po builds; and _data_blocks renders four
things per excerpt: concept_id, adjudication, trust_tier, text. req_number
is cited 0 times in 18 model replies -- and could not have been. N200's
proposer writes "as per the krav with ID 03418c46-..." because the UUID in
the DATA delimiter is the only identifier it can see.
A first measurement of "did the field reach the prompt" was CONFOUNDED and
was falsified before anything was built on it: a substring search found
req_number in 2 of 6 prompts because the string is part of the QUESTION
line, and source_element_id because it is a substring of concept_id. The
repository's own rule -- never assert on a substring two branches share --
applied to a measurement rather than a test.
D-3 measured: --require-cost-baseline refused all three, rc 1, ZERO model
calls, on the full run path, with an rc-0 control on the same argv without
the flag. --derive-cost-baseline refuses too. There is no anchored form of
an N-bundle run: a road standard is a requirements corpus and carries no
cost lines. Stated deviation: the three paid arms therefore ran WITHOUT the
flag, because with it they cost nothing and measure nothing.
Verdict, new definition: 0 of 3, and the binding row is now (b'), which is a
po verdict rather than a model verdict -- no model could pass it as the code
stands. NOK 0.22 of the 5 cap, 0 x 429. No file under src/ touched.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
The gate (test_package_leaks_no_secret_content) is `git archive HEAD` content-scanned
against the absolute-home-path pattern. It caught two literal /Users/ktg/... paths in
docs/2026-09-08-n-bundlene-konsum.md's command block, introduced in e7ffe9e. Same
shell semantics with ~-form; no other change.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
The live consumption measurement on N100:2023, N200:2024 and N500:2024, ordered
as P1 (20260908T113200Z-46497613). Three paid arms in A-form
(--prepass-payload), one per bundle, NOK 0.21 of a NOK 5 cap, 0 x 429. No file
under src/ touched; no production code in this commit.
ALL FIVE KNOWN-POSITIVES HELD BEFORE ANYTHING WAS PAID FOR. The three
sha256-tree refs reproduce vegnormal-okf's values character for character;
okf.navigate_bundle -- our own code -- reaches exactly 446 / 1133 / 270
concepts with 0 unfollowed links; the pre-pass on okf a37d5ce delivers the gold
concept at RANK 1 of 8 on all three with the flagless default command;
okf_contract_check exits 0 three times; the cheap client probe is green.
okf's three opt-in flags were NOT used: the order allowed them only if the gold
came back below_k, and it never did.
THE VERDICT IS 0 OF 3, and the three reasons are different and separately
owned. Criterion: (a) the model answers with the gold requirement's central
condition AND (b) cites the right concept id AND (c) zero hallucinated values.
(c) is 0 on all three -- the model quoted only what it had. (a) is YES only on
N100, where it reproduced the body sentence verbatim. On N200 and N500, 0 of 6
keywords from each gold body appear in any answer.
THE MAIN FINDING, MEASURED, NOT GUESSED (okf owns it): the payload's excerpt
carries `text` and no `title`/`req_number`, so for N100 and N500 the
requirement number the question is ASKED BY appears nowhere in the model's
context -- not in the gold excerpt, not anywhere in the delivered cut. The
ranking finds the right document ON that number and the delivery then drops it.
Our own read_file returns the whole 774-character file including
`req_number: Krav 3.3.1-13`; the excerpt is 98 characters of body. The declared
cut is strictly less informative than our own navigation on precisely the key
the question uses. This is the structural twin of S7c: there the locks bought
the BYTES and not the STRUCTURE; here the ranking buys the RIGHT DOCUMENT and
not the KEY.
THE SECOND FINDING IS OURS, and the order asked for it by name: po has no
lookup door in A-form. `run.py:1243` is hard-coded (`Find a cost-saving measure
for {project.id}`), none of run_project's 26 parameters carries a question, a
prompt, an objective or a task (measured with inspect.signature), and
`--explore` is refused together with `--prepass-payload` (rc 1, zero model
calls). The question reaches the model only as the pre-pass's declared
`question` line -- verbatim in 2 of 6 / 2 of 5 / 2 of 6 prompts -- while the
task line says something else. On N200 and N500 the model followed the task it
was actually given and used a different delivered concept. That is the form,
not a misconfiguration, and choosing what to do about it is the operator's.
(b) IS SCORED ON THE MODEL'S REFERENCE, NOT ON THE STAMP, and that is a
sharpening of the order's criterion rather than a softening. The stamp cites
the delivered concepts MECHANICALLY: `stamp intersect delivered` is 8 of 8 on
all three and would be 8 of 8 for a run in which the model read nothing. A
measure that can only come out one way is this repository's vacuous-gate class,
so the load-bearing reading is what the model actually named -- and there the
answer is no on all three.
A THIRD FINDING, reported and not fixed: N200's run VALIDATED a proposal whose
cost codes were `03418c46` (a real requirement id used as a cost line) and
`03423b12` (0 matches among the bundle's 1137 files -- invented). It passed
because the run was un-anchored and the validator's stage 0 was skipped: the
first LIVE instance of exactly what --require-cost-baseline (F4, session 100)
refuses. The run said so itself, in plain text, on its own notice line.
TWO THINGS GOT CONFIRMED LIVE ON THREE FRESH CORPORA, neither of them ordered.
`{run_id}-parse-failures.json` is absent from all three outboxes, so the
derived structured-output grammar (Fase 1b finding 1b) was accepted by the live
endpoint on corpora it had never been tested against -- closing one of that
row's stated honesty limits. And Step 5's informed refinement fires: attempts 2
and 3 carry "your previous proposal was REJECTED by the deterministic
validator" verbatim, and the claim falls monotonically (3 000 000 -> 1 500 000
-> 600 000 on N100; 350 000 -> 210 000 -> 90 000 on N500).
S7a-3's slack was paid for here for the first time: all three bases declare
`bundle_id` in the root index while mounted under a different directory name.
Before session 81 that was REFUSED, so none of the three could have been opened
as delivered.
HONESTY LIMITS, stated: one run is one run -- three arms, one question each,
one model, no repetition, so nothing here measures variance. (a) on N100 is not
evidence that the chain answers lookups: that gold requirement is
cost-shaped, so answering the task and answering the question coincide, and the
coincidence is identified rather than hidden. (c) = 0 covers the PROSE; the
structured proposal invents cost codes, which is structurally required with no
baseline. The denominator vocabulary was used 0 times in 17 replies, but no arm
was ever in the position the marker exists for, so that is an unanswered
denominator and not evidence it does not work. None of the three bundles was
reviewed on its subject matter; (a) compares against the concept body only.
Suite after `git add`: 1511 passed / 5 skipped, ruff and mypy clean, golden
demo-transcript.stdout BYTE-UNCHANGED (shasum -a 1 of the CONTENT =
ea8c534773acdbe41ae68f2c55724d69aaf8be4f, never the git blob id). Leak check
after staging: 0 hits for the real host in staged content and in every tracked
file. Verdicts sent FYI to vegnormal-okf (which owns nothing here -- the
bundles are clean) and to llm-ingestion-okf (one field).
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
S7c ran the whole chain on a knowledge base built at llm-ingestion-okf HEAD (6776c37):
raw corpus -> okf build -> pre-pass -> declared cut -> LIVE model -> deterministic
validator -> artefacts. Two paid arms, identical but for the payload. No production
code changed; every table names the command that produced it.
The chain works end to end. The door closes (43 = 39 + 4), all 629 concepts now carry
the stamp --ingested-at asked for (S7 measured 11 of 629, so F1 is really fixed), the
diff against the delivered bundle is ONE line, both contract checks exit 0, both arms
return rc 0 with zero 429s, for NOK 0.63 of the NOK 5 cap.
What it does not do is answer the question it was opened for. The priced table was
delivered at rank 10, its bytes reached 2 of 11 prompts with 5647500 verbatim six
times -- and none of the 11 replies used it. Measured why, not guessed: the excerpt is
a single-column pandoc SIMPLE table with whitespace runs of 887 characters between a
label and its amount, exactly the form F4 measured that derive_cost_baseline must
refuse. Opening both locks buys the BYTES, not the STRUCTURE.
Three premises felled before anything was paid for:
- the order's step-1 command cannot run (okf build requires --bundle-id/--okf-version);
- the order's known-positive was mis-paired: 58 401 is NOT the flagless default but
--cost-vocabulary --k 12 --limit 120000. Both producer numbers reproduce exactly;
the flagless default measures 57 289, so the price of the priced table is +8.5 %
payload / +20.9 % rendered context, not +6.4 %;
- --plan-review is still structurally refused with a payload (rc 1, both combinations).
Recommendation to the operator (the decision is theirs): keep the flags OFF by default
-- measured gain nil, measured cost +20.2 % debate input and +29.6 % NOK on the one
open-cut run, which ended rejected. Keep them as opt-in; they do deliver the document.
Five findings reported, not fixed, two of them cross-repo (log.md is still a navigable
concept for po at 630 while okf considers 629; the priced form is unreadable as
rendered).
Suite 1511 passed / 5 skipped, ruff + mypy clean, golden demo-transcript.stdout
BYTE-UNCHANGED (shasum -a 1 of the CONTENT = ea8c534773acdbe41ae68f2c55724d69aaf8be4f).
Measurement: docs/2026-09-08-syretest-s7c-begge-laaser-k2.md
Order: 20260908T033950Z-4303132405-from-.claude
Co-Authored-By: Claude <Opus 5>
F3 and F4, the two findings the S7 acid test (session 98) reported and left. The order required
both descriptions to be treated as PREMISES. One held; the other was felled before anything was
built on it.
F3 -- premise FELLED, asymmetry real. The order read arm C's two refused calls as "the path names
a document that EXISTS". Measured against the base that ran: its root holds 27 directories named
del-ii-bilag-N-... and 12 documents named inbox-del-ii-bilag-N-....md, and the requested path
matches NEITHER -- it is the directory naming convention applied to a document whose real name
carries an inbox- prefix. So the two live rounds were the UNKNOWN-path class, and this delivery
does NOT recover them (gated). What IS real: read_file on a directory has named read_dir since
session 95, while read_dir on a document named neither the rung nor the path.
okf.DocumentPathRefused closes that one direction -- a ValueError, a SIBLING of BundlePathNotFound
rather than a subclass, built from context_files (never files) and through the same in_dimension
predicate the listing uses, quoting the document's REAL name so what it hands back resolves.
F4 -- premise HELD, option (c) felled by measurement. All four live artefacts stamped
cost_baseline_anchored: False and each arm invented its cost codes. derive_cost_baseline refuses
against the delivered base: K2's price schedule is a pandoc SIMPLE table with ONE column header,
so making --derive-cost-baseline reachable there would mean inventing a rule for an unmeasured
form -- MAJOR-4's own honesty limit. Chose (b) over (a): --require-cost-baseline /
run_project(require_cost_baseline=...), OPT-IN and never default, so every bundle without a
cost-baseline.json runs unchanged. The gate sits where both branches have bound baseline and ABOVE
the dry-run cut, so it fires on the free trip too and, on the paid one, before the first model
call. Three CLI refusals by name, each with an rc-0 control.
12 mutations, all red against the WHOLE suite. Green control 1493/5 -> 1511/5 (+18 node-ids, 0
removed); golden demo-transcript.stdout BYTE-UNCHANGED (shasum -a 1 of the CONTENT =
ea8c534773acdbe41ae68f2c55724d69aaf8be4f). No paid run: both findings measured offline.
Measurement: docs/2026-09-08-f3-f4-nekten-og-forankringen.md
Order: 20260908T020419Z-5837110336-from-portfolio-optimiser
Co-Authored-By: Claude <Opus 5>
Q5 = B, bygget som MAALT OPSJON. --prepass-payload gir DEBATTEN et deklarert
kutt og trekker de fire navigatoerverktoeyene; --prepass-seed gir UTFORSKNINGEN
det samme kuttet som utgangspunkt og BEHOLDER verktoeyene.
Nekten M32/F4 staar ORDRETT. B er et nytt flagg, aldri en loesning av den, og
hjemmelen er konsumkontraktens SS 2.2: en skill maa ikke lese «outside what the
payload delivers or explicitly names as reachable». Andre ledd er hele arm B, og
PrepassDeclaration.rest_reachable er det som gjoer de to lesningene skillbare i
ettertid -- paakrevd uten default av cost_baseline_anchoreds grunn, fordi begge
defaults ville loeyet om hvilken arm som leste kuttet.
Soemmene:
admit_payload er EN opptaks-gate (form -> montert base -> tom-leveranse-nekt)
delt av begge doerer; to kopier ville latt en doer slippe inn det den andre
nekter.
render_seed deler header, regel->ANTALL-foldingen og DATA-blokkene med
render_context. Det eneste som skiller dem er avsnittet som sier hva
leseren kan gjoere videre.
explore(seed_context=...) legger kuttet i TASK-MELDINGEN, aldri i prompt:
_finish bygger Mandate.objective av prompt, og en kommisjon med 22 335
tokens utdrag i objektivet er uleselig for den som skrev den. Tom streng gir
en byte-identisk task-melding.
trace_payload(prepass=...) skriver deklarasjonen fra en finally. MAALT baerende
-- den seedede kjoeringen som doede paa en Azure-400 etterlot likevel kuttet
deklarert.
Fem nekter ved navn. --checkpoint-dir baerer en beslutning: en gjenopptatt
etappe kjoerer i en prosess som aldri saa payloaden og ville overskrevet den
parkerte etappens deklarasjon med prepass: null.
--dimension-config er BEVISST ikke nektet (arm A nekter den): maalt bygger
utforskningen navigator_tools(bundle_dirs) UTEN dimensjon, saa aa skope
seedet ville nektet tekst den samme loekka kan aapne et oeyeblikk senere.
MAALT PAA K2 MED LEVENDE MODELL, og maalingen taler MOT aa gjoere B til default:
like-for-like gratis 4 317 -> 227 675 o200k (x 52,7), og betalt er manageren
x 21 paa samme antall prompter. Viktigere enn prisen: den USEEDETE kontrollen
hentet prisskjemaet i fire steg (del-ii-bilag-7-prisskjema/prissammenstilling-
sheet-1.md), mens BEGGE seedede armer lot vaere -- den ene med null verktoeykall
fordi manageren rutet til hypotesisereren i alle tre runder, den andre ved aa
gjette stier ut av kuttets egne konsept-navn og mynte en base-id som ikke finnes.
Erkjennelsen kom (manageren skrev i hver runde at utdragene ikke rakk),
handlingen ikke. Ingen av de 40 svarene brukte ett eneste av kontraktens fem
literaler. NOK 2,78 av taket 5, 0 x 429. Anbefaling skrevet, beslutning ikke
tatt -- den er operatoerens.
Load-bearing maalt: 26 armer, 16 mutasjoner alle roede mot HELE suiten, groenn
kontroll 1493 passed / 5 skipped (fra 1467/5; +26 node-ider, 0 fjernet), golden
demo-transcript.stdout byte-uendret (shasum -a 1 av innholdet =
ea8c534773acdbe41ae68f2c55724d69aaf8be4f).
To armer var GROENNE AV FEIL GRUNN og ble rettet, ikke droppet: tool_calls alene
kan ikke skille «et verktoey ble kalt» fra «basen var aapen», fordi recorderen
appender FOER call_next; og id-enighets-armen maalte den stale digesten i stedet
for id-gaten. Sonden var dessuten feil foer koden var det -- foerste
diskriminator var norsk, og verktoeysvar serialiseres med \uXXXX-escapes.
Avvik, uttalt: implementasjonen ble skrevet FOER testfila. Roedmaalingen er gjort
etterpaa ved aa reversere src/ til HEAD (16 av 24 armer roede), deretter
restaurert med shasum-verifikasjon. Beviset er ekte, rekkefoelgen var ikke.
Rapportert, ikke fikset: ChatClientException (Azure 400, «No tool call found for
function call output») etter tre quick_validate-nekter paa rad -- den ligger
utenfor main()s nekt-tuppel og forlater CLI-en som traceback.
Azure-konfigurasjonen er uendret; endepunktet utledes inline fra az og er aldri
lagret i fil. Ruff + mypy rene.
Maaling: docs/2026-09-07-prepass-mater-q5b-k2.md
Ordre: 20260907T234344Z-9062321009-from-.claude
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
S7-syretesten med pre-passet, ende-til-ende paa K2 med LEVENDE modell
(gpt-4-1-mini). En MAALING: ingen fil under src/ er roert.
Hovedresultatet er den ene setningen docs/2026-09-07-okf-prepass-i-debatten.md
SS 6 sa ikke var bevist: en levende modell har naa lest et rendret kutt, og den
brukte kontraktens eget [sourced-not-sufficient] ordrett -- 1 forekomst i
renderingen, 1 i svaret, mens `withheld`/`622`/`630` sto i renderingen og i null
svar. Siteringer 8 mot 630. Revise-ordene naadde neste forsoeks prompt ordrett og
KUN der, og validatoren avviste oppfoelgeren: operatoeren ba om halvering,
modellen doblet, kjoeringen endte paa Rejection. Det er MAJOR-2s D6 i levende
form.
Tre premisser ble felt FOER noe ble betalt, og de er rapportert i stedet for
omgaatt:
1. Ordrens steg-3-kommando finnes ikke. --prepass-payload + --explore nektes
ved konstruksjon, og --plan-review krever --explore. Maalingen gikk gjennom
de to doerene som finnes: debatten (kuttet) og --proposal-review (revisen).
Utforskningens eget kutt er dermed fortsatt uerklaert.
2. Steg 6s IR-nekt fyrer ikke lenger. S7b soem 1 gjorde projeksjonen valgfri,
og alle tre armene kjoerte hele loekka uten validator-input.json.
3. S7a SS 4s «adjudication 0/39» gjaldt en eldre, usegmentert base. K2 baerer
noekkelen i 618 av 630 -- men `verified` er 0/630, saa K5 diskonterer
fortsatt hvert konsept. Den kjent-positive kontrollen flipper gaten.
Bundelen er bygget fra raakorpuset paa produsentens fbaac6d. Doera lukker
(merged + coded rejections = 43 = N), 630 konsepter, ref sha256-tree:4ffd750c...
Den er IKKE byte-identisk med K2-bundle-20260903: 619 filer skiller seg, 618 av
dem kun paa ingested_at.
Fire funn, ingen fikset:
F1 (kryss-repo) okf build --ingested-at naar 11 av 629 konsepter; segmenterte
faar 1970-defaulten, saa en bundle ikke kan reproduseres byte-likt fra sitt
eget raakorpus.
F2 (kryss-repo) rot-indeksen lenker naa log.md, som dermed blir et navigerbart
konsept (629 -> 630) og kan siteres i stempelet.
F3 read_dir paa et katalognavn utledet av et konseptNAVN nektes to ganger paa
rad -- STATEs aapne K2-funn 3, naa observert live.
F4 en uforankret kjoering dikter kostkoder. Stage 0 er hoppet over, og alle
tre armene fant paa kostlinjer. S4.0s begrunnelse i drift.
Kuttet holdt tilbake prisskjemaet (below_k) for S7as eget mandat-spoersmaal,
mens fri navigasjon naadde det i fire steg. Kuttet er identisk paa begge
bundlene, saa ingested_at-driften endrer ref, ikke utvalget.
Instrumentet er validert mot en kjent positiv FOER hvert tall: rotlistingen paa
levert K2 = 3 954 tegn / 1 495 o200k-tok over 629 konsepter, assertert i
maaleskriptet. Refen paa levert base reproduseres uavhengig som
sha256-tree:9a4e5561..., ordrett det 07.09-dokumentet publiserte.
Kostnad NOK 1,11 av taket paa 5 (22 %), 0 stk 429, stoerste enkeltkall 23 057
tokens. Azure-konfigurasjonen er uendret; endepunktet utledes inline og er aldri
lagret i fil. Suite 1467 passed / 5 skipped, ruff + mypy rene, golden
demo-transcript.stdout byte-uendret.
Ordre: 20260907T125216Z-9858825824-from-.claude
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Steg 8. Ingen produksjonskode i denne commiten utover de TRE testarmene tre GROENNE
mutasjoner tvang fram.
MAALING (`docs/2026-09-07-okf-prepass-i-debatten.md`), instrumentet validert mot en
kjent-positiv FOER foerste tall (K2 rotlisting = 3 954 tegn / 1 495 o200k-tokens,
S7a-3s publiserte tall eksakt; skriptet asserterer paa det og nekter aa rapportere
ellers):
- KUTTET paa levert K2: 629 = 621 + 8, tre regler navngitt. Payload paa disk 40 425
tok; renderingen debatten ser 5 162 tok -- 87 % av kostnaden er withheld-lista, som
aldri naar prompten.
- FOER/ETTER, tre armer fordi "FOER" ikke er ett tall. Like-for-like (en debatt som
GAAR stigen mot det deklarerte kuttet): 10 prompter / 7 031 tok -> 3 prompter /
10 641 tok. **+51 %, og dokumentet paastaar ikke at dette er en besparelse.** Det som
kjoepes er nevnerne, et re-maalbart `ref`, og at stempelet slutter aa overdrive:
siteringer 629 -> 8.
- SPOERSMAALET BASEN IKKE SVARER PAA: aatte arkitekttegninger, og **5,5x dyrere** enn
det gode spoersmaalet (28 312 mot 5 162 tok). En TOM leveranse er bevis for fravaer;
en FULL er IKKE bevis for tilstedevaerelse -- og med verktoeyene trukket har debatten
ingen vei til aa oppdage det selv. Uttalt som den reelle handelen, ikke oppdaget i
drift.
LOAD-BEARING: 32 mutasjoner, ALLE ROEDE mot HELE suiten, maks en per Bash-kall,
restaurert fra `scratchpad/` med `shasum -c` (aldri `git checkout`). Groenn kontroll
**1467 passed / 5 skipped** (fra 1387/5; **+80 node-ider, 0 fjernet**, maalt med `comm`
mot en baseline tatt foer foerste commit). Golden `shasum -a 1` av INNHOLDET =
ea8c534773acdbe41ae68f2c55724d69aaf8be4f, BYTE-UENDRET. `pyproject.toml` uroert.
TRE MUTASJONER VAR GROENNE FOERST, og alle tre var TESTFEIL -- ikke soemfeil. Ingen ble
droppet:
- M9: injeksjonsarmen satte `text_sha256` fra den INJISERTE teksten, saa
`text_sha256`-grenen fyrte i stedet, og armen matchet paa "text" -- en DELSTRENG av
`text_sha256`. En angriper kontrollerer begge avledede medlemmer, saa fixturen setter
naa `text_sha256` til digesten av den EKTE teksten; da er likhetssjekken det eneste
som staar i veien. Ny parallell arm beviser at de to sjekkene ikke er en sjekk.
- M18: fixturbasen navigerer til fire ikke-verdict-konsepter og payloadet leverer ALLE
fire, saa "siter de leverte" og "siter alt navigerbart" ga SAMME sett. Armen flytter
naa ett utdrag til `withheld` og asserterer `delivered < navigable` FOER den maaler.
- M32: uten raden falt kjoeringen gjennom til "--explore requires --explore-config",
som ogsaa navngir `--explore`. Oekt 57s regel ordrett -- assert aldri paa en
delstreng to nekter deler. Armen bruker naa en argv `--explore` ellers ville blitt
AKSEPTERT paa.
Co-Authored-By: Claude <claude-opus-5>
Steg 6 og 7 av planen. Flagget lastes fail-fast ved siden av `--mandate` (samme
try/except, saa manglende/ugyldig fil lander paa `run refused:` uten traceback) og
traades inn i BEGGE `run_project`-dispatchene -- dry-run og full kjoering. En egen arm
SPIONERER paa argumentet, ikke paa exit-koden: et flagg som parses, valideres og
droppes er F4-klassen, og de to utfallene er samme rc.
SEKS NEKTER, hver ved NAVN, hver med en rc-0-kontroll paa en argv som ellers ville
blitt AKSEPTERT:
- `report_forbidden` -- report-modus returnerer OVER hver dispatch, saa en utelatelse
er et stille DROPP. Kontrollen bruker en JSON-ARRAY-ledger; et objekt ville gjort
armen roed av feil grunn (maalt i oekt 89).
- `single_only` -- navngir `--portfolio`, ALDRI det delte `--prepass-payload`-tokenet:
en droppet rad faller gjennom til `--bundle-dir`-kravet, hvis melding ogsaa navngir
flagget, saa en arm paa det delte tokenet ville staatt groenn mot sin egen mutasjon.
- krever `--bundle-dir`; nektet med `--proposals-from-mandate` (returnerer over
debatten, saa flagget ville vaert stille inert), med `--dimension-config` (pre-passet
kuttet uten aa kjenne dimensjoner, saa aa aere skopet ville droppe utdrag
deklarasjonen teller som LEVERT -- da er nevnerne feil for kjoeringen som publiserte
dem) og med `--explore` (utforskningen leser HELE basen med de fire verktoeyene
payloadet trekker, saa kjoeringen som helhet ville lest langt utenfor kuttet den
erklaerer).
Blokka ligger paa FUNKSJONS-nivaa etter mode-dispatchen, aldri nestet under en annen
grens -- under en av dem ville en bar kombinasjon falt rett gjennom.
`hosting.py` er BEVISST URØRT (briefens non-goal, MAJOR-4/S7b-presedensen): feltet
kommer inn i ingen av de tre settene, saa den generiske `unknown field(s)`-400-en
svarer alt, og Fase 4es to halvdeler staar. Gatet av en testarm i stedet for en
redigering -- inkludert den negative halvdelen (hvert videresendt felt ER en
`run_project`-parameter, hvert konsumert er det ikke).
README-blokka navngir alle seks partnerne, uttrykker seg i kundevendt terminologi
(aldri "OKF bundle") og sier BEGGE aerlighets-grensene hoeyt: dette kjoeper et
DEKLARERT kutt, ikke en billigere kjoering; og en TOM leveranse er bevis for fravaer
mens en FULL ikke er bevis for tilstedevaerelse. Uttrekkeren tar BLOKKA (ikke en
delstreng over hele fila -- `--portfolio` og `--report` staar overalt), med
`--plan-review`-blokka som kjent-positiv kontroll.
1466 passed / 5 skipped (fra 1446/5, +20, 0 fjernet). ruff + mypy rene. Golden
`shasum -a 1` av INNHOLDET = ea8c534773acdbe41ae68f2c55724d69aaf8be4f, BYTE-UENDRET.
Co-Authored-By: Claude <claude-opus-5>
[skip-docs]: CLI-flagget og README-blokka kommer i neste commit.
`prepass_notice` er ENESTE renderer, tar den ALT OPPLOESTE deklarasjonen (aldri en
payload-sti -- en renderer som leste fila paa nytt ville vaert en andre oppløsning fri
til aa vaere uenig med kjoeringen den beskriver), og returnerer `None` uten payload.
Omisjonen er entydig her paa en maate `proposal_review_notice`s bevisst ikke er: en
kjoering sier ingenting om et kutt fordi operatoeren ikke ga noe, og det finnes
noeyaktig EN maate aa gi et paa. Golden-transkriptet er det uavhengige, eksisterende
vitnet for den halvdelen. To kallsteder: dry-run og full kjoering.
`outbox.write_prepass` skriver `{run_id}-prepass.json` IFF et payload ble gitt --
`write_proposal_reviews`-regelen, og her gjoer den en andre jobb: siden et payload
TREKKER navigatoerverktoeyene er `{run_id}-debate.json`s `tool_calls` tom ved
konstruksjon paa denne stien, og DEN fila skrives ubetinget nettopp fordi et tomt spor
ER S2c-regresjonen. Uten dette artefaktet ved siden av ville "trukket med vilje" og
"regrert" lest likt. TILSTEDEVAERELSEN er det som skiller dem, og en egen arm
observerer BEGGE filene paa SAMME kjoering.
Skrevet fra `finally` (`write_parse_failures`-presedensen) ved et DIREKTE kall, ikke
via `_write_or_report`: den helperens paakrevde `in_flight` bindes foerst inne i
genererings-blokka, og `None` der ville latt en `OSError` fortrenge en `BudgetExceeded`
i luften -- noeyaktig defekten helperen finnes for. En egen arm driver et budsjettstopp
midt i debatten og krever at deklarasjonen likevel ligger der.
Regel -> ANTALL i baade rendereren og artefaktet; en arm beviser at 20 tilbakeholdte
konsept-ider naar HVERKEN stdout eller artefaktet mens antallet gjoer det.
1446 passed / 5 skipped (fra 1440/5, +6, 0 fjernet). ruff + mypy rene. Golden
`shasum -a 1` av INNHOLDET = ea8c534773acdbe41ae68f2c55724d69aaf8be4f, BYTE-UENDRET.
Co-Authored-By: Claude <claude-opus-5>
[skip-docs]: CLI-flagget og README-blokka kommer i steg 6/7; `prepass_payload` er
foreloepig bare naabar for en bibliotek-kaller.
`run_project(prepass_payload=...)` forgrener bundle-armen. UTEN payload er hver linje
uendret -- pekeren, de fire verktoeyene, siteringer over hele den navigerte basen. MED
et payload faar debatten et DEKLARERT KUTT og verktoeyene trekkes (SS 2.2: kontekst
pre-passet holdt tilbake ble holdt tilbake med vilje; en debatt som holder BEGGE er fri
til aa gaa rundt kuttet den nettopp erklaerte).
Nekten PROPAGERER, aldri en stille degradering tilbake til pekeren -- `load_mandate`s
regel. Maalt paa NULL modellkall, ikke paa exit-koden.
`delivered == 0` nektes ved NAVN foer debatten, med nevnerne, spoersmaalet og ref-en
sitert: maalt er den tilstanden bare naabar naar hvert konsept feilet leksikalsk (den
andre tomme saken nekter produsenten selv), altsaa bevis for FRAVAER. Uten den falt
kjoeringen gjennom til `run.py`s siteringsvakt, hvis melding navngir `docs_dir` -- som
er `None` paa denne stien.
`bundle_excerpt_citations` (datasource) siterer de LEVERTE konseptene alene: et stempel
som siterer hele korpuset for et forslag som saa fire, gjenoppfinner den uerklaerte
paastanden sømmen finnes for. Kroppen tas fra den NAVIGERTE `BundleFile`, ikke fra
payloadets `text` -- den leverte teksten er NFC-normalisert med strippet hale, saa en
locator over den ville ikke indeksert fila den navngir. Deler dermed ogsaa
`bundle_citations`' verdict-eksklusjon i stedet for aa gjenta den.
MCP-appenden ligger BEVISST under forgreningen: dette trekker navigatoerverktoeyene,
ikke verktoeylista. Maalt: en tom liste naar traaden som `tools: None`, saa ingen
uproevd tom-array-form innfoeres.
`RunResult.prepass` og `DryRunReport.prepass` DEFAULTER (`skipped_links`-halvdelen:
`None` er det sanne utsagnet "ingen payload ble gitt"), bundet i BEGGE grener saa ingen
`NameError` venter paa veg-stien. `ProvenanceStamp` er BEVISST urørt -- stempelet
beskriver gaten som doemte EN kandidat, dette er et RUN-nivaa-faktum om hva kjoeringen
i det hele tatt fikk lese.
Tilbaketrekkingen asserteres paa `fresh_workflow(tools=...)`, ALDRI paa
`debate_tool_calls`: maalt er det sporet allerede tomt MED alle fire verktoeyene, fordi
en `ScriptedChatClient` aldri emitterer et verktoeykall. En arm skrevet paa det kan
ikke skille de to implementasjonene. GATE, IKKE VEGG: en egen arm beviser at den gatede
ExpeL-folden fortsatt naar hypotese-prompten (0.82) under et payload.
1440 passed / 5 skipped (fra 1425/5, +15, 0 fjernet). ruff + mypy rene. Golden
`shasum -a 1` av INNHOLDET = ea8c534773acdbe41ae68f2c55724d69aaf8be4f, BYTE-UENDRET.
Co-Authored-By: Claude <claude-opus-5>
[skip-docs]: fortsatt ingen brukervendt flate -- CLI-flagget kommer i steg 6/7.
`render_context` er hva debatten faar I STEDET FOR pekeren: de leverte utdragene, de
tre nevnerne, spoersmaalet kuttet ble regnet for, og de tilbakeholdte konseptene som
REGEL -> ANTALL. Ids-ene baeres aldri -- maalt paa et 629-konsepts korpus er
withheld-lista alene 34 451 o200k-tokens, og et regelnavn er faktumet en leser kan
handle paa mens en liste over ids de ikke kan aapne er kostnad uten informasjon.
Avslutningslinja er ikke pynt: maalt LIVE gir et spoersmaal basen ikke svarer paa
fortsatt aatte utdrag, og med verktoeyene trukket har debatten ingen vei til aa
oppdage det selv. Renderingen sier derfor at et levert utdrag er et LEKSIKALSK treff
og ikke et svar, og navngir `[sourced-not-sufficient]` fra SS 4s markoer-sett.
`adjudication`/`trust_tier` merkes som PRODUSENTENS erklaering, ikke vaar: B4 slo fast
at en tillitsgrad utledes lokalt fra dokumentets eget `verified`, og repoets egne baser
baerer ingen -- saa en lokal utledning ville rapportert `unverified` for alt og sagt
ingenting. Aa adoptere produsentens verdi i stillhet ville vaert det gale svaret.
TAKET BINDER OVERHEADET, IKKE TOTALEN, og det er hele poenget: den leverte teksten er
alt bundet av produsentens eget budsjett (SS 7.3), saa et absolutt tak ville enten
nektet et legitimt stort kutt eller vaert saa loest at det fanget ingenting. Det po maa
garantere er KOSTNADSFORMEN -- O(levert tekst) + O(1), aldri O(korpus) -- som er
noeyaktig det som regrerer hvis withheld-lista sniker seg tilbake. Taket bor i TESTEN
(`_CATALOGUE_EXCERPT_CHARS`-regelen), med en korpus-skala kontroll paa 620
tilbakeholdte og en flat kontroll paa at den lista alene er >5x taket.
TO ARMER BLE SKREVET OM UNDER MAALINGEN, begge repoets vakuositets-klasse:
- Et absolutt tak paa 8 000 tegn var roedt paa fixturen (11 183) og ville uansett vaert
meningsloest paa K2 -- det maalte ikke egenskapen, det maalte fixturstoerrelsen.
- `entry.concept_id not in rendering` var roed FORDI et levert konsept SITERER det
tilbakeholdte. Asserten gjelder naa HEADEREN po selv forfatter; en delstreng-assert
over hele renderingen kan ikke skille "vi lekket lista" fra "basen er kryss-lenket".
1425 passed / 5 skipped (fra 1413/5, +12, 0 fjernet). ruff + mypy rene. Golden
`shasum -a 1` av INNHOLDET = ea8c534773acdbe41ae68f2c55724d69aaf8be4f, BYTE-UENDRET.
Co-Authored-By: Claude <claude-opus-5>
[skip-docs]: ingen brukervendt flate ennaa -- CLI-flagget kommer i steg 6/7 med
README-blokka, og CLAUDE.md-raden i steg 8. Modulen er ikke naabar utenfra i denne
commiten.
Steg 1 og 2 av planen, committet sammen fordi begge armene bor i samme testfil og
ble skrevet mot samme ekte produsent-payload.
`prepass.py` konsumerer et OKF-konsumkontrakt-SS-8-payload som INPUT-fil (SS 2.4:
transporten er ikke del av kontrakten). po produserer ingen payload og vendrer ingen
produsent -- en subprosess mot produsentens checkout ville bundet pakka til en sti paa
en maskin og doedd i `git archive HEAD`, og en kopi ville vaert kø-(p)-driften.
`check_payload_shape` -- seks nekter, hver ved navn: ukjent revisjon (`==`, aldri
prefiks), nevnere som ikke lukker (SS 5.2, med DEKLARERT og OBSERVERT som to tall),
`len(excerpts)` og `len(withheld)` mot sine tellere (SS 8.1s to halvdeler), `spent >
limit` (SS 7.3) og en kjent-positiv som ikke ble reprodusert (SS 7.4). De to siste er
DEFENSIVE og uvitnet: produsenten nekter dem selv foer den emitterer.
`verify_against_bundle` -- fem sjekker mot den MONTERTE basen: erklaert id (aldri
mountet, S7a-3), joinen gjennom `safe_resolve` med `PathSecurityError` re-reist som
nekt, filas `sha256`, og -- baerende -- at `text` er RE-UTLEDBAR fra det monterte
dokumentet. Den siste lukker injeksjonsflaten: et payload kan ikke levere bytes basen
ikke holder. De to gatene som bodde i det tilbaketrukne `read_file` er reist paa nytt
her paa DOKUMENTET (verdict-laget og SS 4.1a), aldri delegert til produsentens egne
regler.
MAALT foer bygging, ikke antatt:
- Pre-passet nekter ALLE tre av repoets leverte baser ("declares no bundle_id") --
S7a-3s egen maaling sett fra produsentsiden. `shared/` er pull-only, saa fixturen er
bygget paa en KOPI med erklaert id, som ogsaa gir S7a-3s slakk-tilfelle gratis.
- `concept_id + ".md"`, `sha256` = HELE fila, og tekst-utledningen (frontmatter delt
paa `splitlines()`, NFC, per-linje rstrip) holder for alle fire utdrag i et EKTE
produsent-payload. En naiv `split("\n")` er UENIG med produsenten -- derfor er
regelen transkribert fra kilden og gatet av fixturen, aldri gjettet.
Fixturen `tests/fixtures/prepass/` er produsentens output ORDRETT (okf `54a0bc2`), saa
ingen arm er groenn mot en form ingen pre-pass emitterer.
TO TEST-FIXTURER VAR FEIL, funnet ved aa kjoere roedt: excerpt/withheld-armene brakk
ogsaa nevnerne, saa lukke-sjekken fyrte foerst; og dimensjons-armen kjoerte mot et
umerket dokument, der `in_dimension` aldri dropper uskopet kunnskap. Begge armene ville
staatt groenne mot en implementasjon uten sjekken de er skrevet for.
1413 passed / 5 skipped (fra 1387/5, +26, 0 fjernet). ruff + mypy rene.
Co-Authored-By: Claude <claude-opus-5>
Ny § 4b i docs/2026-09-06-major2-levende-k2.md. Én betalt kjøring, samme
harness som § 4 (revise-armen, PACE_SECONDS=2, capacity 100).
AVVIK fra ordren, uttalt: ordren sier «fiksturene fra § 4 rad 6». Rad 6s BASE
er brukt (K2-priset-SYNTETISK-C), men rad 3/4s MANUS - rad 6s eget manus oppgir
kostlinja i mandatets begrunnelse, saa stage 0 fyrer aldri der og spoersmaalet
kunne ikke besvares. Alt annet er uendret.
Instrumentet validert mot en kjent positiv FOER bruk: rotnivaa-listingen paa
levert K2 = 3 954 tegn / 1 495 o200k-tokens over 629 konseptfiler (S7a-3s
publiserte tall, eksakt).
MAALT: forsoek 1 gir 1000/500 og avvises med BEGGE felt navngitt i én melding;
forsoek 2 svarer 1250/850 og VALIDERES, med ett forsoek til gode. Oekt 94 brukte
alle tre paa aa veksle mellom feltene og konvergerte aldri. Modellen trengte
aldri to runder for to felt - den trengte aa faa vite om begge.
Sluttdommen er likevel REJECTED, og det er D6 - ikke stage 0: ekspertens revise
ba om aa HALVERE anslaget, og forsoek 3 OEKTE det (150 000 -> 250 000) og brakk
begge feltene paa nytt. Validatorens siste dom vinner. § 5/§ 8s
etterlevelses-funn reprodusert uendret.
own-proposal er nå MAALT mot gaten (§ 4 kunne bare si «umaalt mot doera»): tre
forsoek, tre oppdiktede kostkoder, hver avvist med den UENDREDE
én-setnings-formen for ukjent kode.
Sidefunn: funn (c)s DirectoryPathRefused fyrte LIVE tre ganger med peker til
read_dir, der ab747bc var stod en IsADirectoryError paa krasj-kanalen.
Kostnad: estimat FOER NOK 0,54; faktisk 42 946 input + 1 606 output =
NOK 0,1843 = 3,7 % av taket paa 5. 0 stk. 429. Takene URØRT.
Ingen ekte Azure-vert i sporet fil (<resource>-maskering; lekkasjesjekk kjoert
etter git add). 1387/5, ruff+mypy rene, golden BYTE-UENDRET
(shasum -a 1 av INNHOLDET = ea8c534773acdbe41ae68f2c55724d69aaf8be4f).
Co-Authored-By: Claude <claude-opus-5>
K2-funn (b), maalt live i oekt 94 (docs/2026-09-06-major2-levende-k2.md § 4,
kjoering 3, max_attempts=3):
1000/500 -> "quantity 1000 ... baseline 1250" -> 1188/350
-> "unit_cost 350 ... baseline 850" -> 1000/850 -> forsoekene brukt opp
Steg 5 mater avvisningsgrunnen ORDRETT inn i neste forsoeks prompt, saa en
melding som navngir ETT felt leses som en instruks om aa rette det feltet.
Modellen fant hver riktig verdi og aldri begge samtidig: den rettet feltet
avvisningen navnga og brakk det andre. Loekka oscillerte i stedet for aa
konvergere.
Endringen gjelder KUN meldingens fullstendighet. D6 er uendret: en hvilken som
helst overtredelse avviser fortsatt, i samme stage, foer loeseren.
max_attempts heves IKKE og eksponeres IKKE.
Hver overtredelse beholder dagens setning ORDRETT, sammenfoeyd med "; ", saa
NOEYAKTIG EN overtredelse rendres byte-identisk med foer - det er dette som
holder de eksisterende delstreng-assertene i S4.0-, reserve- og
levert-bundle-gatene staaende. Skilletegnet er valgt framfor linjeskift fordi
Rejection.reason ogsaa lander i outbox-JSON, de hostede payloadene og
terminal-notisene.
Rekkefoelgen er FORSLAGETS egen (linjer i oppgitt rekkefoelge, quantity foer
unit_cost i en linje), saa to identiske forsoek gir to identiske prompter. En
ukjent kostkode bidrar med sin ENE setning og ingen magnitude-setninger: det
finnes ingen baseline-linje aa avvike fra, og en sammenligning mot ingenting er
nettopp den fabrikasjonen dette steget finnes for.
Load-bearing MAALT (tests/test_stage0_all_violations_loadbearing.py, 6 armer),
seks mutasjoner ALLE ROEDE mot HELE suiten + groenn kontroll 1387/5 (fra
1381/5; +6, 0 fjernet - strengt supersett) og golden demo-transcript.stdout
BYTE-UENDRET (shasum -a 1 av INNHOLDET = ea8c534773acdbe41ae68f2c55724d69aaf8be4f):
returner ved foerste overtredelse (4 roede) - rapporter kun den siste (4) -
ustabil rekkefoelge i linja (1) - over-rapporter et felt som er INNENFOR
toleransen (28) - drift enkelt-overtredelsens form (1) - la en ukjent kode
ogsaa emittere magnitude-setninger (19).
Co-Authored-By: Claude <claude-opus-5>
Funn (c) fra oekt 94s levende K2-maaling (docs/2026-09-06-major2-levende-k2.md
§ 3/§ 4): en levende modell gikk stigen list_bundles -> read_bundle -> read_dir
-> read_file, naadde et nivaa med underkataloger (30-1, 30-7, 521-001 ...) og
kalte read_file paa en av dem. Tre slike kall i EN kjoering.
SJEKKET FOERST, som ordren ber om: ordren aapner for to aarsaker. Det er den
ANDRE. En listing SKILLER allerede de to slagene strukturelt - hver
directory_listing-payload svarer med "directories" (oppfoeringer noeklet "path",
med subtre-telling) og "documents" (noeklet "name", med type/title/chars) som TO
distinkte noekler, og en katalog opptrer aldri blant dokumentene. Arm (4) pinner
det, fordi det er en egenskap denne fila naa HVILER paa. Derfor ingen
trailing-/-markoer: formen sier allerede hva som er hva, og aa endre payloaden
ville flyttet en listing tre eldre gates maaler byte for byte.
Det som MANGLET var den andre halvdelen. MAALT foer arbeidet, paa den shippede
nestede eksempelbasen:
read_file(id, "a") -> IsADirectoryError: [Errno 21] Is a directory: <abs sti>
En OSError, altsaa krasj-kanalen i stedet for CLI-ens nekt-tuppel og hostings
400-arm, og den navnga verken hva stien VAR eller hvilken sprosse kalleren
skulle brukt. DirectoryPathRefused (ValueError, BundlePathNotFound- og
DimensionScopeRefused-presedensen) navngir begge. Regelen bor i VERKTOEYET, saa
den gjelder begge kallere (utforskningen, og siden S2c debatten) - samme
plassering som verdict-gaten, og FOER den: declares_verdict_type leser stiens
frontmatter, saa paa en katalog ville den reist noeyaktig den OSError-en denne
grenen finnes for aa erstatte.
MAALT, RAPPORTERT, IKKE FIKSET (utenfor ordren): det levende kallet var
read_file(".../30-7.md") - modellen la .md paa et katalogNAVN, som resolverer
til en sti som ikke finnes i det hele tatt, ikke til katalogen. Maalt paa samme
base gir den FileNotFoundError, altsaa samme form (OSError paa krasj-kanalen der
en navngitt nekt hoerer hjemme). Denne ordren fikser katalog-tilfellet; arm (5)
pinner maalingen av naboen, saa gapet er et faktum i suiten og ikke en setning i
en rapport.
RoedT foerst: import-feil paa DirectoryPathRefused (klassen fantes ikke).
Ingen endring i prompter.
Suite 1381 passed / 5 skipped (fra 1368/5; +13, 0 fjernet - strengt supersett).
ruff + mypy rene. Golden demo-transcript.stdout BYTE-UENDRET,
shasum -a 1 av INNHOLDET = ea8c534773acdbe41ae68f2c55724d69aaf8be4f.
Ordre 20260906T212735Z-2448754-from-.claude, funn (c).
Co-Authored-By: Claude <claude-opus-5>
Funn (a) fra oekt 94s levende K2-maaling (docs/2026-09-06-major2-levende-k2.md
§ 4, rad 3-4). Genererings-prompten beskrev feltet som
affected_items (list of {code, quantity, unit_cost})
og sa ingenting om HVEM sine tall det er. Stage 0 (S4.0) avstemmer hver linje
mot prosjektets egen kostbaseline, saa de eneste tallene som kan passere er
prisskjemaets EGNE - men en modell som blir bedt om aa halvere et volum leser
quantity som feltet tiltaket sitt hoerer i, fyller inn den REDUSERTE verdien
(1000 der baselinen sier 1250) og avvises. Den levende kjoeringen hadde lest det
prisede skjemaet TO ganger gjennom navigasjonsstigen og gjettet likevel: tallene
var tilgjengelige, KONTRAKTEN for feltet var ikke uttalt.
Besparelsen har sitt eget felt, og prompten sier det i samme aandedrag - "dette
er baseline-tallene" uten "og reduksjonen din hoerer der" etterlater modellen med
en verdi den er fortalt aa ikke putte noe sted.
Blokka rir paa BASE-prompten, ikke paa en gren, og det er hva arm (3) finnes for:
defekten ble maalt paa et REVIDERT forsoek, saa en instruksjon som bare naadde
forsoek 1 ville vaert fravaerende fra noeyaktig den prompten den ble maalt i.
prior_rejection / prior_feedback / approach appendes ETTER basen, saa hver
komposisjon baerer den fortsatt.
RoedT foerst: 6 av 7 armer roede (kontrollen groenn - den asserterer at
referanseprosjektet faktisk HAR kostlinjer, saa gaten ikke beskriver noe
imaginaert). Ingen endring i skjema, validator eller stage 0.
Suite 1381 passed / 5 skipped (fra 1368/5; +13, 0 fjernet - strengt supersett).
ruff + mypy rene. Golden demo-transcript.stdout BYTE-UENDRET,
shasum -a 1 av INNHOLDET = ea8c534773acdbe41ae68f2c55724d69aaf8be4f.
Ordre 20260906T212735Z-2448754-from-.claude, funn (a).
Co-Authored-By: Claude <claude-opus-5>
Ordre 20260906T050506Z, gjenopptatt etter at operatoeren satte deployment-
capacity 10 -> 100. Veggen fra returen er MAALT borte foer noen arm ble
startet (3 742 og 5 475 tokens passerer isolert der 3 000 foer ble avvist);
0 stk. 429 i ni betalte kjoeringer.
Hovedfunn: MAJOR-2-doera virker mekanisk i hvert ledd - ekspertens ord naar
prompten ordrett (2 av 6 genererings-prompter, samme nevner som skriptet),
forsoeket kjoepes og hentes (honoured: true, attempts remaining 2 -> 0),
forslaget endrer seg og artefaktet baerer alt - men modellen gjorde det
MOTSATTE av instruksjonen: bedt om aa halvere, oekte den 25 % (212 500 ->
265 625 NOK). Forsoek 2 ba om 531 250 (= 50 % av kostlinja); det var
VALIDATOREN som stoppet det, og Steg 5 matet avvisningen tilbake. D6 er
dermed maalt i praksis: validatorens siste dom vinner, aldri revieweren sin.
Tre funn i src/ RAPPORTERT, IKKE RETTET (ordrens gjerde): genererings-
prompten sier ikke at affected_items skal baere BASELINE-linja; stage 0
navngir kun foerste overtredelse, saa Steg-5-loekka oscillerer innenfor
max_attempts=3; modellen leser katalog-oppfoeringer som filnavn.
Retter ogsaa dokumentets az-kommando: `deployment update` finnes ikke i
CLI-en (kun create|delete|list|show, maalt mot --help) - riktig verb er
`create` med samme modell/versjon/sku, siden ARM-PUT oppdaterer.
Kostnadsgaten: estimat NOK 2,01, brukt NOK 2,15, tak 50. Overskridelsen er
navngitt (ordren forutsatte to armer; seks kjoeringer naadde ikke doera).
Takene max_rounds/max_tokens/max_attempts UROERT. src/ og tests/ UROERT.
1368 passed / 5 skipped, golden shasum -a 1 (INNHOLD) ea8c534..., ruff+mypy
rene. Ingen ekte Azure-vert i sporet innhold - verifisert ETTER git add.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
docs/2026-09-06-major2-levende-k2.md baerte den ekte Foundry-verten og
ressursgruppen, som lekket gjennom handover-pakken
(test_package_leaks_no_secret_content roed). Erstattet med
placeholder-formen (<resource>/<resource-group>) som
docs/2026-08-14-fase1b-forste-levende-kjoring.md alt bruker; malingen
selv er uendret.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Ordre 20260906T050506Z ba om en LEVENDE maaling av SC1/SC4/SC8/SC13 bak en
kostnadsgate. Gaten er oppfylt med margin, stigen er groenn t.o.m. dry-run, og
det foerste betalte kallet passerte. Kjoeringen doede likevel foer det foerste
forslaget, paa 429 rate_limit_exceeded.
Diagnosen er maalt, ikke resonnert. Pacing ble falsifisert (12 s, 20 s, 8 forsoek
a 30 s backoff -- samme 429). Den avgjoerende proeven isolerer EN forespoersel
etter et helt stille vindu: 2 342 tokens passerer, 3 000 tokens avvises etter
150 s uten trafikk. Det er et tak PER FORESPOERSEL, som ingen backoff kan vente
seg forbi -- og K2-debatten produserer 4 075 tokens i det oeyeblikket den aapner
prisskjemaet, altsaa naar den gjoer jobben sin.
To ting maalingen leverte likevel:
1. S2c-grensen "ingen levende modell har navigert" ER LUKKET. Debattens levende
proposer fikk kun pekeren (110 tokens) og de fire verktoeyene, og fant
prisskjemaet i tre navigasjonssteg blant 630 konseptdokumenter. Det er
SUKSESSEN som felte kjoeringen.
2. Kostnadsgaten med kilde: listepris fra Azure Retail Prices API 06.09
(inn NOK 0,003734/1K, ut 0,014936/1K), estimat NOK 2,01 mot tak 50, faktisk
brukt NOK 0,069.
To korreksjoner av mitt eget instrument staar i dokumentet, fordi begge saa ut
som fakta: UsageDetails er en dict-subklasse (getattr ga None der .get gir tall),
og et soek paa "gpt-4.1" i kvotelista gir null rader fordi raden heter
"gpt4.1-mini" -- kvoten har 500x hodrom, den ser bare fravaerende ut for feil
spoerring.
SC1/SC4/SC8/SC13 staar fortsatt umaalt. Ordren returneres: det som mangler er en
Azure-konfigurasjonsendring (deployment capacity 10 -> 100), som ordrens gjerde
og STATE-ens "IKKE ROER AZURE" holder utenfor denne oekten. Auth feilet aldri.
Ingen fil under src/ er roert; hele maalingen ligger i scratchpad/major2-live/
gjennom run._default_factory. 1368 passed / 5 skipped, golden byte-uendret.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
MAJOR-2 review, fokuspunkt 4: `_REFUSED_BY_NAME = ("proposal_review",)` was
documented as the tuple the door reads, but the `if "proposal_review" in
payload` refusal never consulted it — two copies of one fact, free to drift.
Måling FØR bygging: `grep -rn 'no terminal to answer' tests/` gave 0 treff,
men `grep -rn proposal_review tests/ | grep -i hosting` fant
`test_proposal_review_loop_loadbearing.py:1677` (T21) — so half of the fact
(refusing `proposal_review` itself, with the exact CLI-pointing message) WAS
already pinned. The unpinned half was the second name: any OTHER entry added
to `_REFUSED_BY_NAME` fell through to the generic `unknown field(s)` check
instead of being refused by name before it.
Fix: `_run_kwargs` now iterates `_REFUSED_BY_NAME`; `proposal_review` keeps
its verbatim message, any other name gets a message naming the field.
New test `test_the_named_refusal_reads_the_constant_not_a_literal`
(tests/test_hosting_loadbearing.py) is unit-level against `_run_kwargs`
directly: confirms an unlisted name is refused generically (control), then
monkeypatches `_REFUSED_BY_NAME` wider and confirms the SAME payload is now
refused by name, before the generic check.
Mutation check (done and reverted): setting `_REFUSED_BY_NAME = ()`
temporarily turns the EXISTING T21 test red — proving the constant is now
load-bearing. Verified against pre-fix code that the same mutation left T21
green (the old literal-based `if` never consulted the constant at all), so
the fix closes the exact drift the review flagged.
Suite: 1368 passed / 5 skipped (was 1367/5 on 17998af), 0 regressions.
ruff + mypy clean. Golden demo-transcript.stdout byte-unchanged
(shasum -a 1 = ea8c534773acdbe41ae68f2c55724d69aaf8be4f).
Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Funn 02159d21 navnga TRE flater som påsto en komposisjon som ikke fantes:
run.py-helpen, README.md:546 og denne raden. `c81a90c` gjorde påstanden sann i
koden; uten denne linja ville raden vært sann ved uhell, og en senere revert av
`and args.resume is None` ville ikke møtt noe i hovedboka.
Raden sier nå hva halvdelen gjør (nekt en PARK, aldri et LØFT), hvorfor den bare
vakten var feil (--resume krever selv --checkpoint-dir), og at vitnet var vakuøst
før økt 91.
Verifisert: README.md:546 og --proposal-review-helpen står uendret og er nå sanne.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Tallene foer/etter, ett commit per funn, og mutasjonssignaturene - der
reviewen selv bor, saa de to kan ikke drive fra hverandre.
1364 passed / 5 skipped -> 1367 / 5 (collect 1369 -> 1372, strengt supersett,
0 fjernet). mypy + ruff rene. Golden BYTE-UENDRET (shasum -a 1 av INNHOLDET =
ea8c534773acdbe41ae68f2c55724d69aaf8be4f).
Header-notatet er justert: artefaktet er fortsatt byte-identisk, footeren
ligger UNDER det og er repoets egen.
Uttalt i footeren, ikke stilltiende: reviewens fokuspunkt 4 (hosting.py:144
literal vs `_REFUSED_BY_NAME` - verifisert fortsatt sann ved HEAD) er UTENFOR
ordren og staar som kandidat, det samme gjoer de tre restene under fokuspunkt
1. Og hvert kriterium reviewen kalte UMAALT mot levende modell (SC1s
utfall-halvdel, SC4, SC8, SC13-premisset) er fortsatt umaalt - ingenting her
er kjoert mot en modell.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Funn d71a5d72 (MINOR, MISSING_ERROR_HANDLING, run.py:1202). Begge
finally-skriverne ligger i propageringsstien til nettopp det unntaket de er
bevis for: en OSError fra mkdir/write_text mens BudgetExceeded eller
ProposalReviewInputError er i flukt ERSTATTER den - og hverken
`except ProposalReviewInputError` (:3404) eller nekt-tuppelen (:3412) fanger
OSError, saa operatoeren fikk traceback og grunnen til at kjoeringen stoppet var
borte. Review-skriveren gaar paa HVER kjoering med reviewer; parse-skriveren
har samme form.
`_write_or_report` er EN kopi for begge kallstedene (koe-(p)): en regel om hva
en skriver faar gjoere med et unntak i flukt, kopiert, blir en regel anvendt paa
bare det ene. Vakten er BETINGET, aldri en blanket except - uten noe i flukt
finnes ingen stoppgrunn aa beskytte, og en kjoering som ikke fikk skrevet
utboksen maa si fra ved aa feile. Feilen SIES uansett, fordi et fravaerende
artefakt ellers leses som en kjoering uten noe aa registrere (T10/T11).
`in_flight` fanges eksplisitt (`except BaseException as stop: ... raise`), ikke
via `sys.exc_info()`, som ville lest et ytre except-lag hos en bibliotekkaller
som en flukt her.
MAALT mot HELE suiten, to mutasjoner, hver med sin egen signatur, kontroll
1367 passed / 5 skipped og golden `demo-transcript.stdout` BYTE-UENDRET
(`shasum -a 1` av INNHOLDET = ea8c534773acdbe41ae68f2c55724d69aaf8be4f):
MC vakten detached (2 roede - de to in-flight-armene) - MD svelg ubetinget
(1 roed - KONTROLL-armen alene, altsaa er betingelsen selv gatet).
Iron Law: begge in-flight-armene skrevet FOERST og maalt roede mot uendret
run.py; kontroll-armen var groenn foer fiksen, som er nettopp
diskrimineringen.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Funn 5935d942 (MISSING_TEST, tests/...:820). Briefens SC1 gjorde paringen til
vakten mot aa telle en debatt-tur som en genereringsprompt - og ingen arm i
fila asserterte debattens turantall mellom treated og control (grep «debate»
traff bare en kommentar og et filnavn).
`_debate_entries` er KOMPLEMENTET av `_GENERATION_MARK`, ikke en positiv
debatt-markoer: paastanden som gates er nettopp «ingenting som IKKE er
generering flyttet seg», og en positiv markoer ville latt en tur klassifisereren
ikke kjenner drive usett.
- T5-run: de tre genereringstellingene paret med likhet paa debatt-oppfoeringene.
- T8: fikk sink + en control-kjoering (alltid-godkjenn reviewer) - dens
attempt-indekser [0,1] per kandidat ER en genereringstelling.
- Begge har en VAKUITETSVAKT (debatt-lista maa vaere ikke-tom): to tomme lister
er like gratis.
- T13: record-indeksene er DOKUMENTERT som SC4s telle-proxy ved den doera -
barnet kjoerer i egen interpreter og `--scripted-replies` har ingen
sink-dump, saa prompt-nivaaet maales in-process (T1 for verbatim, T5-run/T8
for paringen). Reviewens andre alternativ.
MAALT mot HELE suiten, to mutasjoner, begge roede paa NOEYAKTIG de to parede
armene og paa ingen andre: MA klassifisereren returnerer konstant tom liste
(2 roede - vakuitetsvakten) og MB filteret droppet, saa generering telles som
debatt (2 roede). Kontroll 1364 passed / 5 skipped.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
To funn, ETT commit, fordi de deler vitnet ved konstruksjon: 02159d21
(run.py:2738, PLAN_EXECUTE_DRIFT) er vakten, da485928
(tests/...:1344, MISSING_TEST) er armen som skulle sett den. AA dele dem ville
krevd en kastbar duplikattest.
VAKTEN: `if args.checkpoint_dir is not None` nektet --proposal-review for HVER
argv med en checkpoint-katalog - men --resume KREVER --checkpoint-dir
(run.py:2776), saa komposisjonen nekten selv anbefaler («pass --proposal-review
at --resume instead») var unaabar, og run.py:2218-helpen, README.md:546 og
MAJOR-2-raden beskrev en sti ingen argv kunne ta. Vakten nekter naa en PARK
(en etappe som returnerer foer noen kandidat finnes), aldri et LOEFT.
ARMEN: `test_the_door_composes_with_resume` sendte hverken --resume,
--checkpoint-dir eller --review-inbox - den var en vanlig enkeltkjoering T13
allerede dekket, altsaa groenn mot nettopp den defekten den var navngitt for.
Den driver naa en EKTE resume: dag 1 parkerer en ekte plan-review gjennom
run.main, ekspertens svar legges i en ekte innboks, og dag N sender
--resume ... --checkpoint-dir ... --review-inbox ... --proposal-review med
run_project innspilt og _refuse_model som kontroll paa null modellkall.
MAALT, i denne rekkefoelgen (Iron Law): armen skrevet FOERST og kjoert mot
uendret vakt -> ROED med nettopp nektlinja i stderr («pass --proposal-review at
--resume instead»), calls == []. Etter vakt-fiksen: 49 passed i fila, og
park-nekten (test_the_door_and_a_parked_exploration_contradict, M39) staar
groenn - den sender --explore uten --resume.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Reviewens BLOCKER ada5f264 (SC5): proposal_review.py:196-200 paastod at
avviket fra announce-regelens null-er-stillhet "er stated in the invariant
row" - raden nevnte hverken announce-regelen, «offered, never consulted»
eller null-tilfellet. Eneste spor var mutasjonsetiketten M33, som navngir en
mutasjon, ikke beslutningen. Repoets Fase-3-klasse: en paastand flaten gjoer
om SEG SELV uten dekning.
Raden sier det naa: rendereren SIER fra paa null reviews naar en reviewer ble
gitt, hvorfor stillhet er tvetydig her og ikke i cost_baseline_notice /
skipped_links_notice / unkeyed_verdicts_notice (alle tre verifisert aa finnes
i run.py), at omisjonen er beholdt der den er entydig (ingen reviewer), og at
gaten er M33 + M37.
Verifisert: grep innenfor radens egne linjer (1842..1969) finner naa
«announce», «offered, never consulted», M33 og M37.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Voyage /trekreview over bcf3337..c66dddb (de tolv MAJOR-2-commitene; mtime-fallbacken
ga da5f10f og ble innsnevret fordi de tre mellomliggende commitene er verdict-gaten).
review.md ligger local-only i .claude/projects/2026-09-04-major2-proposal-review-door/
(gitignored som brief/plan); denne fila er en byte-identisk sporet kopi.
Funn: BLOCKER CLAUDE.md:1843 (SC5 - announce-avviket paastaas uttalt i invariantraden,
raden sier det ikke) · MAJOR run.py:2738 (--proposal-review nektes med --checkpoint-dir,
men --resume krever --checkpoint-dir, saa stien nekten peker paa er unaabar) · MAJOR
tests:1344 (compose-with-resume-armen sender aldri --resume) · MAJOR tests:820
(debatt-tellingen briefen krever paret med hver genereringstelling mangler) · MINOR
run.py:1202 (OSError fra finally-skriveren fortrenger stopp-unntaket).
M29/last_ruling: begge reviewere - riktig som det er, unaabar ved konstruksjon.
Umaalt mot levende modell: SC1 (utfall-halvdelen), SC4, SC8, SC13-premisset.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com>
To feil i raden som ble committet i 4a3655f. (1) M28 sto mellom M33 og M34;
alle 41 oppfoeringene var der og korrekt nummerert, men raden ER hovedboka, saa
den maa leses i rekkefoelge. (2) Raden oppga groenn kontroll 1364/5 for
mutasjonsmaalingen. Feil: hver mutasjon kjoerte mot 1363/5 - README-armen fantes
ikke foer steg 10. Maaledokumentet hadde begge tallene riktig hele tiden; raden
baerer naa de samme to.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
CLAUDE.md: en invariantrad etter verdict-gate-raden, i husets skjelett - nevneren
(grep "prior_" finner EN soem, maskinens egen), D6 og hvorfor alternativet ble
forkastet, den ledger-bevisste attempts_remaining, honoured = "hentet faktisk",
kanalvalget begrunnet av tre maalinger, den kaller-eide sinken, skriv-iff-reviewer,
de fem nektene ved navn og den hostede pre-whitelist-sjekken. Load-bearing-blokka
lister M1-M40 med roedtall, M29 staar som et FUNN (uvitnet baerer), og de to
armene som var groenne av feil grunn i steg 1-8 er skrevet ned som repoets
vakuoes-gate-klasse, sekstende og syttende gang. Aerlighets-grensene til slutt.
README.md: --proposal-review i enkeltprosjekt-flagglista og en prosablokk etter
--plan-review/--checkpoint-dir-paret, i samme form - hva operatoeren ser og
skriver, at en revise KJOEPER ett forsoek til under de eksisterende takene, at
approve ikke er en ekspertdom, og alle fem nektene navngitt (--checkpoint-dir-en
peker paa --resume, doera som VIRKER). Kundevendt vokabular.
Ny arm: test_the_readme_block_names_every_flag_the_cli_refuses_the_door_with,
Fase-3-formen (raa tekst, uttrukket blokk, kontroll paa at uttrekkeren finner noe
som finnes). Intet M-nummer - lista lukket ved M40 - saa den ble drevet ROED TO
ganger: mot README-en foer blokka fantes, og med blokka paa plass men
--checkpoint-dir omskrevet til aa beskrive nekten uten aa navngi flagget.
1364 passed / 5 skipped. Golden demo-transcript.stdout BYTE-UENDRET
(shasum -a 1 av INNHOLDET = ea8c534773acdbe41ae68f2c55724d69aaf8be4f). Node-ID-ene
er et strengt supersett: 1319 -> 1369, 0 fjernet. mypy og ruff rene.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
