David F GliddenandClaude Opus 5
6eff2056f9
REVIEWED-85's provisional review, 30 days overdue and gating PENDING-173's build and PENDING-177's typography gate, was held by steward and jurist today. Outcome recorded in the index; the deferral block is discharged with `resolved:` rather than deleted, and the drift-check now reports 0 COME DUE where it reported 1. Item 1 — EXTENDED PROVISIONAL. The lane has been exercised by the executor exactly once in thirty days, so n=1 settles nothing in either direction. The 2026-08-08 Instruments entry is ratified on the merits as class (i) and its procedure recorded as defective — executor-classified under an authorization already lapsed into overdue-review, against the lane's own instruction. Explicitly not precedent. Item 2 — NOT DISCHARGED, and answered with two fresh failures rather than a confirmation: REVIEWED-67's census and typography gate did not reach the PDF lane in 42 days, at a measured cost of verify_conversion returning 5/5 PASS on word-damaged output. Two things are recorded as gaps rather than closed: - The re-based trigger is only half machine-checkable. The check-in was re-based from time to use precisely because a date trigger fired twice with nothing recorded, but the schema's vocabulary is glob/path-exists/ date/manual and a use count is not expressible. The block carries the backstop date only; the use-count half sits in `discriminator:`. No proxy was invented — a glob over the index's rows would have fired on ruled and steward-instructed entries alike and looked machine-checked while counting the wrong thing, which is the schema's own stated reason for `manual`. - Item 2's remedy is not placed. "What standing rule already governs the class I am about to route?" is a verification-ladder entry by shape, and the ladder is under REVIEWED-123's general freeze. Wrap or wake would accept it but fire at the wrong moment — the failure happens at adoption. Flagged rather than put somewhere it would be decorative. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_017vKkg2EJF1rGwdFdBogwqx
60 lines
8.3 KiB
Markdown
60 lines
8.3 KiB
Markdown
# 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 |
|
||
|
||
## Check-in agenda — what the steward–jurist review must cover
|
||
|
||
Batch 1 is complete, so the check-in is **due**. Two items, the second added by a later ruling:
|
||
|
||
1. **The lane itself** — do the four batch-1 changes hold up as class (i)? Was the two-clause test applied honestly, or rationalised around? Should the lane move from provisional to settled, be narrowed, or be withdrawn?
|
||
|
||
2. **The retrieval obligation** (REVIEWED-86 Q4). The jurist directed this be folded into *this* check-in rather than given a standalone cadence, on the explicit grounds that a new standing review is the shape of thing that produces another unread register. The obligation: **the record is not just written, it is read.** Its evidence is the eighteen-month gap between the steward recording *"May smooth over tensions"* (2025-01-20, in the right words, in a durable indexed file) and it reaching the doctrine that needed it. Recording was not the failure; retrieval was. The check-in should therefore ask *what banked record bears on what we are about to decide, and who reads it* — not merely confirm that things were written down.
|
||
|
||
## 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.
|
||
- 2026-08-02 · ARC `CLAUDE.md` · removed `js/ # JavaScript (theme toggle)` from the asset-structure tree — directory absent, toggle retired Stage M 2026-06-01; replaced with a retirement note. Mechanical freshness; no latitude or assertion change.
|
||
- `/wrap-up` §8 — added standing **Instruments** field (N run · M with a control written before first execution · K duplicating something already banked). Converts the 2026-08-07 one-off literal question into a series, and turns the steward's "do we need so many single-use items?" into a measured K column rather than a standing worry. — 2026-08-08
|
||
- 2026-08-24 · `/wrap-up` §7.5 + `daybook-ensure.py` SKELETON · added a standing `## Corrections` section to the daily-note format, with the rule that an empty Corrections on a working day is itself a claim · **applied on direct steward instruction, reasoning from the jurist (REVIEWED-126)** — recorded here rather than in the lane proper, since it was authorized rather than executor-classified. Changes what the note *records*, not what any party may do.
|
||
|
||
## FIX-LANE CHECK-IN — REVIEWED-85 provisional review, 30 days overdue
|
||
**Date:** 2026-09-01 · **Parties:** steward + jurist · **Discharges:** REVIEWED-85's provisional condition; the `DEFERRED-DECISION: fix-lane-provisional-checkin` block filed at PENDING-168 ADDENDUM 1.
|
||
|
||
**Item 1 — the lane.** EXTENDED PROVISIONAL, not settled and not withdrawn. The lane has been exercised by the executor exactly once in thirty days (the 2026-08-08 `Instruments` field); batch 1 was ruled by REVIEWED-85, the Corrections entry was steward-instructed, the ARC entry is mechanical freshness. **n=1 is not evidence either way.**
|
||
- The 2026-08-08 entry is **RATIFIED on the merits as class (i)**, and its procedure is recorded as **defective**: it was executor-classified under a lapsed authorization, against the lane's own instruction to treat borderline calls as PROPOSAL until review. **Not precedent.**
|
||
- **The trigger is re-based from time to use:** next check-in at **5 executor classifications**, backstop **2026-12-01**, whichever first. The original date trigger fired twice with nothing recorded; a use-count trigger cannot be missed by being busy. Filed as a `DEFERRED-DECISION` block in the same act. ⚠ **The use-count half is not expressible in the current schema and carries no machine check** — see the note beside the block in `PENDING.md`. No proxy was invented.
|
||
- **Boundary flagged, not reopened:** batch-1 #4 changed the standing wrap question, which is what the executor must **inquire into**, not what a skill **records**. It was ruled class (i) by REVIEWED-85 and stands. It marks where class (i) ends, and the next hard classification should be measured against it rather than against #1–#3.
|
||
|
||
**Item 2 — the retrieval obligation (REVIEWED-86 Q4).** **NOT DISCHARGED.** Answered with two fresh instances rather than a confirmation: REVIEWED-67's Q4 census and its unconditioned per-conversion typography gate did not reach the PDF lane in 42 days, and PENDING-177 AMENDMENT 1 records it as the identical PENDING-56 failure in a second format class. The cost is measured — `verify_conversion` returning **5/5 PASS on word-damaged output**.
|
||
- **The machinery is not missing; the question is.** Batch-1 #2 and #3 built `prevention` and put it in the wake for this purpose. What has no surface is the **class-level question at the point of adoption**: *what standing rule already governs the class I am about to route?*
|
||
- Directed to the wrap/wake surface, deliberately **not** as a new instrument and **not** as a new item. It is one question in an existing skill. ⚠ **Placement is unresolved and is flagged rather than guessed** — see the executor note below.
|
||
|
||
**⚠ EXECUTOR NOTE — item 2's natural home is frozen.** "What standing rule already governs this class?" is a verification-ladder entry by shape, and the ladder is under a **general freeze** (REVIEWED-123, 2026-08-17: no additions, rewordings, removals or reorderings from any source until the trial is graded). Placing it in `/wrap-up` or `/wake-up` instead is available but fires at the wrong moment — the failure it addresses happens **at adoption**, not at wake or wrap. **Not placed. Awaiting direction on where it goes.** Recording the mismatch rather than putting it somewhere it will be decorative.
|