David/dotfiles
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

session 2026-08-08 night: REVIEWED-99/100/101 placed; PENDING-117 amended + PENDING-118 filed; harvest #192 collision -> #194, #195 filed

Browse Source 
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01A35wiD55yRHj5U1ECZAX4t
This commit is contained in:
David F Glidden
2026-08-08 15:11:29 +02:00
co-authored by Claude Opus 5
parent c86b82512b
commit ac4745b599
8 changed files with 444 additions and 16 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files
claude/memory/skill-harvest-register.md
+28 -7
View File
@@ -1,13 +1,12 @@
---
name: skill-harvest-register-proposed-skills-awaiting-steward-authorization
description: Standing register of skill create/patch/retire proposals surfaced by
/wrap-up §1.6, awaiting steward authorization. The governed analog of PENDING.md,
turned on our own tooling — propose → authorize → build → record. Surfaced every
wake via this MEMORY entry.
metadata:
description: "Standing register of skill create/patch/retire proposals surfaced by /wrap-up §1.6, awaiting steward authorization. The governed analog of PENDING.md, turned on our own tooling — propose → authorize → build → record. Surfaced every wake via this MEMORY entry."
metadata:
node_type: memory
permalink: claude-memory/skill-harvest-register
type: reference
permalink: claude-memory/skill-harvest-register
originSessionId: 932b538a-4624-4ce7-8826-ecbd6b8d079f
modified: 2026-08-08T11:53:32.970Z
---
# Skill-harvest register
@@ -290,8 +289,30 @@ is evidence about the home, not about the lesson.
### 2026-08-08 wrap — one proposal, firing moment declared per the REVIEWED-95 gate
> **⚠ RENUMBERED 192 → 194, 2026-08-08.** This row was filed as `#192`, which was already
> held by the cited-vs-placed governance check filed the previous night (`#192`, above);
> `#193` was likewise taken, so the next free number is **194**. The collision was live, not
> cosmetic: **PENDING-116 cited "skill-harvest register #192"** meaning *this* row, and that
> citation resolved to the wrong entry — the exact failure PENDING-110 names, where a number
> pointing at two things entrenches a false expectation. The **later** filing was renumbered
> so the earlier claimant keeps its number; PENDING-116's `Related:` line was corrected to
> `#194` in the same pass. Recorded rather than silently fixed, because a renumbered
> proposal is the kind of change a reader must be able to trace.
| # | Target | Kind | Content | Firing moment | Evidence | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 192 | `studium-engine/.git/hooks/pre-commit` (+ chamber-library's) | **extend an existing hook** — NOT a new skill | When a commit touches `corpus/` or `corpus/sidecars/`, run the test fleet and refuse on red. The hook already exists and already runs ("Pre-commit checks passed!"); it does not run the suites. | **Mechanical, and should always fire** — the top row of the routing table. Requires no executor recall, which is the whole point: the knowledge was already banked and still did not fire. | 2026-08-08. `118f411` split the Mauss `body` section into `body-01..13`, breaking `test_navigate.py`'s hardcoded node id. The fleet sat **202/203 red for a full day**, through **two separate rounds of correction to that very commit** (REVIEWED-96's findings, then the L850 discovery), and surfaced only because the steward asked an unrelated question about instrument base-rate. A sidecar edit is a *corpus* change that silently invalidates *engine* fixtures — the cross-repo binding surface studium-engine's own CLAUDE.md names as a re-anchor trap. | PROPOSED |
| 194 | ⚠ *filed as* `studium-engine/.git/hooks/pre-commit` — **wrong, and corrected by PENDING-116 on reading the substrate:** the hook is global at `~/dotfiles/git/hooks/pre-commit` via `core.hooksPath`, so the trigger had to become **repo-declared** (`.precommit-triggers`) rather than baked in | **extend an existing hook** — NOT a new skill | When a commit touches `corpus/` or `corpus/sidecars/`, run the test fleet and refuse on red. The hook already exists and already runs ("Pre-commit checks passed!"); it does not run the suites. | **Mechanical, and should always fire** — the top row of the routing table. Requires no executor recall, which is the whole point: the knowledge was already banked and still did not fire. | 2026-08-08. `118f411` split the Mauss `body` section into `body-01..13`, breaking `test_navigate.py`'s hardcoded node id. The fleet sat **202/203 red for a full day**, through **two separate rounds of correction to that very commit** (REVIEWED-96's findings, then the L850 discovery), and surfaced only because the steward asked an unrelated question about instrument base-rate. A sidecar edit is a *corpus* change that silently invalidates *engine* fixtures — the cross-repo binding surface studium-engine's own CLAUDE.md names as a re-anchor trap. | **BUILT 2026-08-08** — routed through the register to `PENDING-116` → **REVIEWED-100** (authorized option (b), repo-declared trigger). Landed `088a171` (`.precommit-triggers` + `scripts/run-fleet.sh`) and `c86b825` (dotfiles, generic hook block); prerequisite green fleet `eef81fa`. Acceptance proven **both directions**. ⚠ Closes the **same-repo** half only — cross-repo filed as **PENDING-117**. |
**Deliberately NOT proposed, and the reason is the finding.** The obvious second candidate — *"any one-shot script carries a positive control derived from the property, run before its output is read"* — **is already banked**, at `reference-verification-ladder.md` §Gate design: *"Derive fixtures from the property; draw them from real artifacts."* It is what diagnosed **both** of today's proxy-control failures. Filing it again would be duplication dressed as diligence. **The gap is the firing moment, not the knowledge** — which is PENDING-112's thesis, and this session is a third data point for the ladder-ritual trial rather than a reason to write a fourth copy of the rule.
### 2026-08-08 night wrap — one new proposal, one extension; firing moments declared per the REVIEWED-95 gate
**#195 — ladder patch: widen two existing entries from *checks that ship* to *any check whose result is stated*.** This is a **scope correction on banked rules, not a new rule** — and that distinction is the finding. `reference-verification-ladder.md` §Gate design already carries *"Every check states, in its own output, what it did NOT establish… A check that cannot name its gap **does not ship**"* and *"A check must discriminate between two REAL artifacts."* Both read as governing **built gates**. All five of this session's errors were checks that *didn't* ship — a `grep -c`, a `tail -2`, an inferred arithmetic, a probe anchor, a mention-census — and that exemption is precisely where they lived. Proposed additions: (i) the scope sentence, and (ii) the mechanical formulation that covers all five and is stated nowhere — ***every one of them reduced the output before looking at it; a reduction cannot show its own miscalibration.*** Inverse twin of the banked *"Count first, then look."*
**Firing moment: on a condition the executor must notice** — the weakest row, and **declared as such rather than dressed up**. There is no mechanical detector for *"you are about to trust a check you just typed."* Routed to the ladder because it is the correct home for the two entries it amends, and the ladder **now has a wake trigger** (REVIEWED-95's trial sentence). **Recorded estimate: unknown, pending the 20-session trial.** ⚠ The steward has already **adopted the practical half** — *state the check's vocabulary alongside its result* — which works by making a miscalibration catchable by a **differently-positioned reader** rather than by the author; that half needs no retrieval because it happens while composing a sentence already being written. This filing is for the ladder's record, not for the practice's operation.
**Classification: `[PROPOSAL]`** — it changes what the executor must do before asserting (latitude clause). **Status: PROPOSED.**
**Extension to #192 (NOT a new number) — add placed-record *well-formedness* to the cited-vs-placed check.** #192 proposes asserting that every cited `REVIEWED-N` is **occupied**. Rule of three fired today: I hand-typed a placement verification **three times** (REVIEWED-99, -100, -101) — heading uniqueness · the four structural parts present · a double-header canary. That is the same instrument written three times, which is the banked violation, and its natural home is #192's checker rather than a fourth copy. **Deliberately filed as an extension so the two are ruled and built together**, per the steward's standing preference to keep the open-thread count low.
**Firing moment: mechanical, should always fire → `governance-drift-check.py`**, already named in a `/wake-up` step (the measured 83% home class) and already performing register-integrity checks. **Three real positives available**, not synthetic: today's three placements, plus the historical REVIEWED-87 amendment-overwrite and the malformed `## REVIEWED-95## REVIEWED-95` header #192 already cites.
**Status: PROPOSED**, to be ruled with #192.
**No FIX-lane changes were applied this session.** All skill/tooling edits this session were either governed records (`PENDING.md`, the register, memory files) or authorized builds under REVIEWED-100 — none were self-tending edits to a skill.