[FIX] Land the skill-harvest FIX lane and apply its first batch (REVIEWED-85)

REVIEWED-85 was placed by the steward at 10:41 today; the wake flagged at 10:44
that /wrap-up SKILL.md was still untouched since 2026-07-07. Landing it.

Precondition discharged first. The ruling states its own verification limit: the
jurist could not read the skill files, so the /wrap-up §1.6 and /wake-up §2.a
quotes underpinning Part III's "contradicts itself" claim were affirmed on
timeline evidence rather than checked. Required before landing was mechanical
containment-with-positive-control verification of exactly those quotes. Run:
7/7 contained verbatim against the live skills, 5/5 controls absent, instrument
verified.

§1.6 now carries the two-clause disjunctive test (the executor's own narrower
single-clause alternative declined at the gate as less safe), the hard floor with
its catch-all sharpened per Q4 and tied to the measured failure rather than left
as open judgment, and all three instruments as mandatory. The lane is provisional
pending the steward-jurist check-in.

The §Important-constraints line still stated the blanket rule the ruling narrowed.
Left alone it would have been a second live version of a governance rule inside
the file that forbids exactly that. Reconciled, with a note saying why.

First batch applied -- the four class-(i) proposals the steward raised 2026-07-29
and which REVIEWED-85 itself dispositions as batch 1, so their classification was
ruled rather than self-assessed: a `## What held` ledger section (the ledger could
previously only record debits), a `prevention` KG predicate capturing transfer
between failure classes, one wake line surfacing it, and the retirement of the
standing question's self-report framing in favour of the checkable form -- the
last on the grounds contamination-problem.md gives, that direct self-report is
the most contaminated form of inquiry.

The FIX-lane index is created and carries all four. It records explicitly what is
NOT in it: the §1.6 edit itself, which changed what the executor may do without
asking and was therefore PROPOSAL by its own test. A lane cannot authorize its
own construction.

Register rows 174-177 marked applied.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01WuMjg3ipEVa3n8CoSzoyvc

claude/memory/skill-harvest-fix-lane-index.md

@@ -0,0 +1,34 @@
+# Skill-harvest FIX-lane index
+
+**Append-only.** One line per skill change applied under the `/wrap-up` §1.6 FIX lane. This
+is the record the steward–jurist check-in reads; a FIX applied without a line here is a
+governance failure, not a shortcut.
+
+**Authority:** PENDING-88 → jurist design gate PASSED with conditions → REVIEWED-85
+(steward-placed 2026-08-02). The lane is **PROVISIONAL** until that check-in — after the
+first batch or one month, whichever comes first.
+
+**A change belongs in the lane only if** it clears the two-clause test (*does this change
+what the executor may do without asking, or what a governed artifact asserts?* — either
+clause yes → PROPOSAL) **and** the hard floor. When in doubt, propose.
+
+| # | Skill | What changed | Date | Batch |
+|---|---|---|---|---|
+| 1 | `symmetria` §4 (ledger template) | Added a standing `## What held` section — instruments that fired prospectively, lessons that transferred to a failure class they were not built for. Entry format: *banked-lesson → what it caught → what it would have cost*. Without it the ledger can only record debits; six hand-added `## Progress` headings were the practice compensating for the schema gap. | 2026-08-02 | 1 |
+| 2 | `/wrap-up` §5 (KG append) | Added a `prevention` predicate — `{subject: <banked lesson>, predicate: "prevention", object: <the failure it stopped, and where>}`. Distinct from `drift-pattern-good-direction`: that records a good move, this records **transfer**, which the schema could not previously capture. | 2026-08-02 | 1 |
+| 3 | `/wake-up` §2.b.2 | Surface one `prevention` alongside the drift-patterns, one line each way. The wake previously grepped only `drift-pattern`, so every session opened by re-reading what went wrong and never what compounded. | 2026-08-02 | 1 |
+| 4 | `/wrap-up` §1 (literal question) | Retired the self-report framing of the standing question. `contamination-problem.md` names direct self-report the most contaminated form of inquiry; the guidance now prefers the checkable form the same evidence answers — *does a lesson banked from one failure prevent a different failure later?* | 2026-08-02 | 1 |
+
+## Batch 1 — classification note
+
+All four were raised by the steward on 2026-07-29 and dispositioned as the first FIX-lane
+batch by REVIEWED-85 itself, so their classification was ruled rather than self-assessed.
+Each is class (i) — a change to what a skill **records**, not to what it **permits or
+requires**. None touches an authorization boundary, gate criteria, Constraint 1, or the
+escalate list. None removes, defers, or narrows the visibility of an open item; #3 and the
+`prevention` predicate *widen* what reaches the steward.
+
+**Not in this index, deliberately:** the §1.6 edit that created the lane. That change altered
+what the executor may do without asking, so it was `[PROPOSAL]` by its own test — filed as
+PENDING-88, design-gated by the jurist, authorized by the steward as REVIEWED-85. A lane
+cannot authorize its own construction.