B's premise applied to the three steps that DECIDE a proposal: a proposal authored outside po --
by a human, or by an agent that is not po -- now meets the blocking deterministic gate, mints the
learning key, and is captured as a Verdict, all without a chat client on the way.
Three thin adapters, no second implementation. The reason is the one the first four doors were
built on, but it bites harder here: the refusal SENTENCE is fed back verbatim into the next
attempt by step 5, so a door that reworded it would break the repair loop while still looking
correct. The probes assert the sentence, not a substring two stages share.
One measurement decided a design detail. The IR writes whole magnitudes as JSON integers
(30000), the run path carries the pydantic float, and verdicts._mint_id hashes the raw value --
so minting from the undeclared JSON would hand out a DIFFERENT verdict id than the debate does
for the same proposal. The door therefore reads the proposal through SavingsProposal and feeds
model_dump() to the public features_from_ir; the probe pins both forms and asserts they differ,
so the shortcut cannot come back silently.
A blocked proposal exits 3, carrying the verdict rather than an exception envelope. "You asked
right and the answer is no" is the same fact whether a file was missing or a claim was
infeasible, and a caller that only reads the exit code must not see a blocked proposal as a
cleared one.
Fasit outside the door in every arm: the base's own checked-in golden suite (written before the
toolbox existed, so it cannot have been fitted to it), a cost baseline authored in the test, a
method cap computed by hand from the fixture, and the public minting rule. Each refusal arm has
an rc-0 control on an argv that would otherwise be accepted.
STATED LIMIT: the input-grounding stage (P7, stage 0b) has no flag here. It falsifies a proposal
against the rendered prompt the model received, and an outside caller has no such prompt.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
B-gate row 1's premise, made callable. Every path through the framework CLI constructs a chat
client, so an outside caller -- a human at a terminal, or an agent that is NOT po -- could not
reach a single run-path step without paying for a model. These four steps need no model at all.
One CLI, four subcommands, one core call each:
navigate-bundle --bundle-dir -> okf.navigate_bundle
cost-baseline --bundle-dir --project-id -> okf.derive_cost_baseline
retrieve-chunks --query --docs-dir [--top-k] -> datasource.retrieve_chunks
prepass-admit --payload --bundle-dir [--dimension] -> prepass.admit_payload
Each handler is a thin adapter: strings in, the SAME function the run path calls, JSON on stdout,
and an exit code that says what happened (0 ran, 2 malformed call, 3 the step refused, named).
A handler that computed anything of its own would be a second implementation of a run-path step,
and the outside caller would stop getting what the debate gets.
Dispatch is an explicit branch per command, not argparse's `set_defaults(handler=...)`: the table
hides the one thing a reader wants to see, and B-gate row 1 asks the same question of the source
(it walks the call graph from `main` down to the step's symbol), where a callable in a Namespace
is a hop neither can follow.
Probes (`tests/test_toolbox_doors.py`, 10 arms): each starts the door as a SUBPROCESS with the
subcommand in argv and asserts on what it wrote -- never by importing the core function, which is
the whole difference the gate exists to measure. The yardstick is outside the door in every arm:
the filesystem (navigate-bundle, including the one deliberate outside-bundle link), a table
transcribed from the priced fixture (cost-baseline), the in-process seam it must equal byte for
byte (retrieve-chunks), and the producer's own checked-in payload (prepass-admit). Every refusal
arm has an rc-0 control beside it.
`portfolio-optimiser-toolbox` is the THIRD console script, and the pin test now says why: it is
the door the other two cannot be used for. README and CLAUDE.md updated with the command and the
reason it exists; every documented invocation was run.
Row 1: 1 -> 5 of 17 (four subcommands + `gate`, which the class fix in e47be68 stopped rejecting
on a name technicality). No other row moved; exit 1.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
