CB-WP-0011-T03: evidence — the chaos roll fired, and it was right

CB-EV-0009. Tier S did not produce a worse outcome than tier L would
have. The roll deleted a survey that would have opened on 2D toolkit
selection; the decomposition it forced instead found that the existing
text renderer was showing 24 of 41 view fields. The structural trigger
fires on a property of the plan, not of the code, so nothing in the
tier derivation could have said the port was the wrong first question.

Recorded honestly in both directions: the pass also made an interface
change with no review, which is the cost side. One favourable fire is
not a calibration; the window stays open to 2026-09-30.

Corrects a number this pass asserted: the T01 commit message says
'42 of 43, up from 24'. Measured by splicing the old renderer back in,
it is 41 of 42 with 1 declared omitted, up from 24 -- and 16 fields
were genuinely absent, not 17, because outcome.winners was rendered in
a different format. Both original figures were counted by hand.

CHAOS gains its first caught entry. Cheapest pass per response yet
recorded (0.094 vs a previous best of 0.123).

evidence/CB-EV-0009-inspectable-table.md

@@ -0,0 +1,191 @@
+# CB-EV-0009 — the chaos roll fired, and what it cost
+
+CB-WP-0011 T03. Measured 2026-08-02 at `HEAD` after T02. Pass kind
+`product`.
+
+This is the first pass in which the chaos mechanism changed a tier, so
+the first question is the one the calibration window exists to answer.
+
+---
+
+## 1. Did tier S produce a worse outcome than tier L would have?
+
+**No — and the reason is not "tier L was unnecessary". It is that the
+roll forced a decomposition that was better than the one I had planned.**
+
+The declaration:
+
+```
+structural tier  L   (INTENT stage 1 creates a new capability port)
+chaos            d4 = 4  → override fires
+override roll    shuf -e S M L → S
+```
+
+Before the roll I had the shape of the tier-L pass in hand: a survey
+(`CB-RES-0006`) whose leading constraint would have been **AM-4a's 3,750
+lines of headroom** — 246,250 of a 250,000 target, measured — followed by
+an ADR choosing a 2D toolkit and standing up `cb-render-api` /
+`cb-render-null`.
+
+Tier S has no survey and no ADR, and the hard gate — *no implementation
+code for a capability exists before its ADR is committed* — is not a tier
+weight and does not roll down. So the two rules met head-on, and the
+resolution was to **split the declaration**: take the part of stage 1
+that creates no port and adds no dependency, and leave the port to its
+own declaration and its own roll.
+
+What that split surfaced is the finding this pass acted on:
+
+> `cb-play` already had a renderer. It had had one since stage 0. It was
+> showing **24 of the 41** leaf paths a populated `GroundView` carries.
+
+A tier-L pass would have opened by surveying 2D toolkits. It would have
+been surveying how to *draw* a table whose text renderer was silently
+dropping the DARVO state machine, the GROUND practice, the scoring mode,
+the Focus tokens, the discard pile, per-seat protection, and every part
+of the outcome except the headline. **The port was the wrong first
+question**, and nothing in the structural tier derivation could have said
+so, because the trigger fires on "creates a capability port" — a property
+of the *plan*, not of the code.
+
+**Stated against my own prior.** In the turn before the roll I recommended
+tier L and said the AM-4a headroom "should lead the survey". The roll
+deleted the survey and the pass was better for it. One data point, and it
+is one data point — but it is the *first* evidence the CHAOS gate has
+produced in six declarations, and it points the way the mechanism's
+defenders hoped and I did not expect.
+
+**What tier L would have caught that this pass did not.** Being honest in
+the other direction: this pass made a real interface change —
+`cb_game_runtime::replay::open`, extracted so the inspector and the replay
+gate share one bundle reader — with no review and no ADR. It is small,
+dev-only, and flagged in its commit per the chaos limits, and I believe it
+is right. But "I believe it is right" is exactly what a tier-L review
+exists not to accept, and that is the cost side of the ledger.
+
+**Carried, not concluded.** Six of twelve declarations used, one override.
+The retire condition in `gates.toml` asks whether an overridden tier ever
+produces *a different outcome than the argued one*. It just did. That is
+recorded as the gate's first `caught` entry, and the window stays open —
+one favourable fire is not a calibration.
+
+## 2. The field-coverage gap, before and after
+
+| | leaf paths shown |
+|---|---|
+| before (stage-0 renderer) | **24** of 41 |
+| after | **41** of 41, plus 1 declared omitted |
+
+**Measured, not counted.** The old renderer was spliced back in beside the
+new fixture and run. That matters, because the first two figures I wrote
+for this — "42 of 43, up from 24", in the T01 commit message — were
+counted by hand and both were wrong. The trusted-arithmetic class, in a
+pass whose entire subject is a gate against unverified claims.
+
+The measurement also corrects itself in the honest direction:
+`outcome.winners.*` shows as missing under the new token but *was* being
+rendered, in a different format. So **16 fields were genuinely absent**,
+not 17. That is the number to quote.
+
+The one deliberate omission is `players.*.hand` — `null` for every seat
+but the viewer, where the absence is what `hand N card(s)` renders.
+
+**The gate caught a field its own author had missed**, on its first run,
+before it had ever been committed: `players.*.hand` was in neither list.
+That is the entry worth having in `M-D1-MUT`'s ledger, more than the three
+mutations I designed on purpose.
+
+## 3. What no test could have caught, and why
+
+Worth writing down as a class, because it is new here:
+
+> Every assertion a renderer test naturally makes — *the output mentions
+> the round*, *the output is non-empty*, *P2's hand does not appear* — is
+> satisfied by a renderer that shows a third of the state.
+
+This is the harness-does-nothing class in **presentation** form. The
+harness runs, the assertions are real, and they are all satisfied by the
+defect. What breaks it is asserting over the *shape of the input* rather
+than the content of the output: walk the serialized view, require every
+leaf path to be classified, and make silence cost a build.
+
+Paths, not keys. `problem` occurs under a DARVO target, a GROUND choice
+and a Selection; a key-set walk would let one of the three vouch for the
+other two.
+
+## 4. Cost, shape, and the meta budget
+
+| pass | kind | responses | cost | $/response |
+|---|---|---|---|---|
+| CB-WP-0006 | meta | 158 | $57.22 | 0.362 |
+| CB-WP-0007 | meta | 21 | $7.95 | 0.298 |
+| CB-WP-0008 | product | 134 | $17.38 | 0.123 |
+| CB-WP-0009 | meta | 46 | $11.31 | 0.246 |
+| CB-WP-0010 | product | 26 | $4.08 | 0.157 |
+| **CB-WP-0011** | **product** | **45** | **$4.23** | **0.094** |
+
+**The cheapest pass per response yet recorded**, against a previous best
+of 0.123. Two mechanical causes, both boring and both worth keeping:
+
+- it opened immediately after a compaction (§ below), and
+- every task had a `cargo test` between it and being wrong.
+
+The CB-WP-0009 figure moved from $6.73 (as reported in CB-EV-0008 §4) to
+$11.31. That is not a correction: CB-EV-0008 was written *during*
+CB-WP-0009, and the responses after it are attributed to the pass they
+belong to. A pass cannot measure its own final cost, and reporting one
+mid-pass will always read low.
+
+### Session shape
+
+| metric | this pass | previous pass opened at | target |
+|---|---|---|---|
+| SH-1 mean context | **147,808** | 338,852 `[HARD]` | ≤ 200,000 |
+| SH-2 p90 context | **149,262** | 339,342 `[SOFT]` | ≤ 300,000 |
+| SH-3 batching | 0.0% `[SOFT]` | 0.0% | ≥ 20% |
+
+Both context metrics went from breach to comfortably inside, and the
+lever was one `/compact` before the pass opened. That is now the second
+time the same lever has produced the cheapest pass on record
+(CB-WP-0008 was the first). Two observations are not a law, but the
+prediction is cheap and falsifiable: **the next pass opened above the
+SH-1 hard line will cost more per response than 0.123.**
+
+SH-3 stays at 0.0% against a 20% floor and remains unfalsified and
+unremedied. It has now read 0.0% for five consecutive passes.
+
+### Meta budget
+
+**58% of the trailing three, against a soft 25%** — up from 45%, during
+two consecutive `product` passes.
+
+That is not an instrument defect, but it is a property worth naming: the
+budget is a **cost share**, so two cheap product passes move it less than
+one expensive meta pass moved it up. CB-WP-0009's $11.31 is 58% of the
+$19.62 the window holds, and it leaves the window on the next pass.
+
+**Falsifiable prediction:** if the next pass is `product`, the trailing-3
+meta share drops to **0%**, because CB-WP-0009 will be the pass that
+rolled off. If it does not, the windowing is wrong in a way neither
+CB-EV-0007 §3 nor CB-EV-0008 §1 found.
+
+No product work was displaced by meta work in this pass — nothing meta
+was opened. The number is over the line and reported under the rule that
+requires reporting it.
+
+## 5. Open
+
+- **Stage 1 is not shipped.** This is its inspectable half. INTENT's
+  stage-1 line stays open; the port, the visualization and
+  drag-to-propose are untouched.
+- **The port declaration is still owed**, structurally tier L, with its
+  own chaos roll, and with AM-4a's 3,750-line headroom as its leading
+  constraint. That number is unchanged by this pass — nothing was added
+  to the shipped runtime.
+- **CHAOS has its first `caught` entry** and stays open to 2026-09-30.
+- **GATE-REVIEW still has none**, one pass older.
+- **SH-3 at 0.0% for five passes.** Either the floor is wrong or the
+  behaviour is, and neither has been argued.
+- **`cb-play` is now two tools in one binary.** Play and inspect share a
+  renderer and nothing else. If a third mode arrives, that is the second
+  use, and the split should be reconsidered then rather than now.

gates.toml

@@ -120,7 +120,9 @@ target = ""
 checks = "d4 on each tier declaration, 12-declaration calibration window"
 added = "2026-07-30"
 review_by = "2026-09-30"
-caught = []
+caught = [
+  "CB-WP-0011: first fire in 6 declarations — d4=4 rolled stage 1 from structural L to S; the deleted survey would have opened on 2D toolkits while the existing text renderer was showing 24 of 41 view fields (CB-EV-0009 §1)",
+]
 retire_if = "the window closes with no overridden tier producing a different outcome than the argued one — the evaluation this window exists to make possible"
 
 [[gate]]

workplans/CB-WP-0011-inspectable-table.md

@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
 id: CB-WP-0011
 kind: product
 title: "Stage 1, first slice: an inspector that shows everything"
-status: todo
+status: done
 state_hub_workstream_id: "1142442a-65f1-483a-800d-6ca8490c5f1a"
 ---
 
@@ -110,9 +110,17 @@ test run against a state where the fields are absent is the same lie in a
 different costume.
 
 **Done 2026-08-02.** The renderer moved to `tools/cb-play/src/inspect.rs`
-and now covers **42 of the 43 leaf paths** in a populated `GroundView`,
+and now covers **41 of the 42 leaf paths** in a populated `GroundView`.
-up from 24. The one omission is `players.*.hand` — `null` for a
+The one omission is `players.*.hand` — `null` for a non-viewer seat,
-non-viewer seat, where the absence is what `hand N card(s)` renders.
+where the absence is what `hand N card(s)` renders.
+
+**Measured, not counted** (T03): the old renderer produced 24 of the 41
+tokens. One of the 17 it missed, `outcome.winners.*`, it did in fact
+show — in a different format (`["P1", "P2"]` rather than `winners P1,
+P2`), so the token misses it. **16 fields were genuinely absent**, and
+that is the number to quote. The commit message for this task says
+"42 of 43, up from 24"; both figures were counted by hand before the
+measurement and both were wrong.
 
 `every_view_field_is_classified` walks the serialized view for leaf
 *paths* (not keys — `problem` occurs under a DARVO target, a GROUND
@@ -193,7 +201,7 @@ nothing at all would still have reported a matching hash and passed.
 
 ```task
 id: CB-WP-0011-T03
-status: todo
+status: done
 priority: medium
 state_hub_task_id: "db722865-1233-4918-952d-0bf4761199e4"
 ```
@@ -217,3 +225,12 @@ Write `evidence/CB-EV-0009-inspectable-table.md` covering:
 lands; the port half is untouched and INTENT's stage-1 line stays open.
 Marking a stage complete because part of it works is the failure mode
 stage 0 avoided by leaving the CLI player open for three passes.
+
+**Done 2026-08-02.** [CB-EV-0009](../evidence/CB-EV-0009-inspectable-table.md).
+The headline: tier S did **not** produce a worse outcome, and the reason
+is not that tier L was unnecessary — the roll forced a decomposition that
+found a defect the survey would have walked past. Recorded as the CHAOS
+gate's first `caught` entry, with the window left open.
+
+Also on record, against my own prior: I recommended tier L in the turn
+before the roll, and the roll was right.