David F GliddenandClaude Opus 5
62b92bd425
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
35 lines
3.0 KiB
Markdown
35 lines
3.0 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 |
|
||
|
||
## 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.
|