diff --git a/workplans/CB-WP-0022-the-design-instrument.md b/workplans/CB-WP-0022-the-design-instrument.md
index 90325b6..c1ba327 100644
--- a/workplans/CB-WP-0022-the-design-instrument.md
+++ b/workplans/CB-WP-0022-the-design-instrument.md
@@ -60,17 +60,13 @@ contradiction, a recorded game the reader can replay, or a named test.
 *"This feels unbalanced"* is a note, not a finding. **The SOLVE inertness
 is admissible because a recorded session shows three no-ops.**
 
-> **The example that stood here was GR-E01, and the adversarial review
-> killed it (C1, 2026-08-05).** *"4/6/9 against 5/7/9 is a computation
-> anyone can rerun"* was a computation that had already been rerun:
-> `2da19a4` measured **6/9/12 against 5/7/9** and renamed the scenario
-> `-unreachable-` → `-reachable-`. The finding's conclusion inverted, and
-> it was one of the two findings that **passed** this rule.
->
-> So existence is not the property that was missing — three wrong premises
-> have now reached `ground-game`, and the third satisfied an existence
-> test. T03 must adopt the shape requirement as part of the rule, plus a
-> clause the survey never contemplated: **a reproduction must be able to
+> **The example that stood here was GR-E01, and the review killed it
+> (C1).** *"4/6/9 against 5/7/9 is a computation anyone can rerun"* had
+> already been rerun: `2da19a4` measured **6/9/12**, and the scenario was
+> renamed `-unreachable-` → `-reachable-`. The conclusion inverted — and
+> it was one of the two findings that **passed** this rule. So existence
+> is not what was missing. See [ADR-0012](../decisions/ADR-0012-the-design-instrument.md)
+> D3: the rule gains **shape**, and **a reproduction must be able to
 > fail.** Ours went green and stayed admissible.
 
 This is what would make clay-borg a design tool rather than a suggestion
@@ -200,30 +196,22 @@ commit — quoted the dead number twice.
 **Seven challenges: four conceded, two conceded in part, one answered.**
 
 - **C1 lands hardest and changed the design.** The rule's showcase finding
-  was false and had *passed* the rule. Existence is not the missing
-  property; **shape** and **falsifiability** are. Folded into §The
-  load-bearing rule above, and it is T03's to settle.
-- **C1 also caught a defect in flight** — T06's payload, `todo`, still
-  named the dead number. Withdrawn above before sending.
-- **C2 withdrew the baseline's precision.** `tools/design-baseline.py` is a
-  hand-maintained dict counting itself (`:16-36`, `:89`); `has_reproduction`
-  (`:38-43`) never checks the file exists, so the self-test's YES-control
-  (`:63`) is green against a path `2da19a4` deleted. `Makefile:127` runs
-  only `--self-test`, so the reporting path has no CI. The direction
-  stands — 11 files, no index, 0 of 10 ruled are all checkable without the
-  tool — but **33% is not a measured rate and T05 must not build on it.**
-- **C3**: "six provisional defaults" is five, and GR-E01 is double-counted
-  in the `2/6`. No corrected rate is quoted here; the instrument that would
-  produce it is the one C2 withdrew.
-- **C4**: `§Underdetermined` was never evaluated as a candidate, and it
-  already delivers four of five benchmarks including the Oracle property
-  the survey went to Magic to find. **T03's burden flips: argue why it is
-  extended, not replaced.**
+  was false and had *passed* the rule, so existence is not the missing
+  property — **shape** and **falsifiability** are. It also **caught a
+  defect in flight**: T06's payload, `todo`, still named the dead number.
+  Both folded in above.
+- **C2 withdrew the baseline's precision.** `design-baseline.py` counts
+  itself, its reproduction check never stats the file, and `Makefile:127`
+  runs only `--self-test`. Direction stands; **33% is not a measured rate.**
+- **C3**: "six provisional defaults" is five; GR-E01 is double-counted.
+- **C4**: `§Underdetermined` was never evaluated as a candidate and already
+  delivers four of five benchmarks. **T03's burden flips: argue extension,
+  not replacement.**
 - **C5**: the engine-evolution "third thing" is visible in
   `specs/InnerLoopReference.md` and `history/`'s retrospectives, neither of
-  which my redundancy inventory named. Conclusion narrowed, not settled.
-- **Survived**: the reproduction rule's *affordability*, and §4's reuse of
-  the provisional machinery. Both with stated falsifiers.
+  which my inventory named. Narrowed, not settled.
+- **Survived**: the rule's *affordability*, and reuse of the provisional
+  machinery — both with stated falsifiers.
 
 ## Task: decide
 
@@ -252,36 +240,27 @@ state_hub_task_id: "a2e85810-e949-4ea0-81fc-36b912af326c"
 
 **Done 2026-08-05.**
 [ADR-0012](../decisions/ADR-0012-the-design-instrument.md), nine
-decisions. The two that were not on this list are the two the review
-forced:
+decisions. The two not on this list are the two the review forced:
 
 - **D2 — `§Underdetermined` *is* the register; nothing parallel is built.**
-  C4's point, checked and conceded: against the survey's own five
-  benchmarks the incumbent already delivers four, including the Oracle
-  property the survey went to Magic to find and we had written down
-  ourselves eight days earlier (`GroundRules.md:231-233`). What it lacks
-  is reproductions. So the pass **extends** a section instead of building a
-  register — no new file, no new schema.
-- **D3 — admissibility is three clauses, not one.** Exists, has the ruled
-  shape (row-level table, never a sum), **and can fail.** The third is
-  C1's: GR-E01's artifact went green when the edition landed and the
-  finding stayed admissible and stayed queued, because nothing said a
-  passing artifact was a signal. **A green reproduction is an alarm.**
+  Against the survey's own five benchmarks the incumbent already delivers
+  four, including the Oracle property the survey went to Magic to find and
+  we had written ourselves eight days earlier (`GroundRules.md:231-233`).
+  What it lacks is reproductions. So this pass **extends** a section — no
+  new file, no new schema.
+- **D3 — admissibility is three clauses.** Exists, has the ruled shape
+  (row-level table, never a sum), **and can fail.** GR-E01's artifact went
+  green and the finding stayed admissible and stayed queued, because
+  nothing said a passing artifact was a signal. **A green reproduction is
+  an alarm.**
 
-The rest: **D1** INTENT gains property 4, *Instrument* — applied, with the
-falsifier in the text. **D4** five kinds, each forced by an existing
-finding, and a sixth appearing during backfill means the taxonomy was
-invented. **D5** lifecycle with `applied` meaning *the source changed*, the
-queue emptying while the log accumulates, and **withdrawals reported, not
-deleted** — GR-E01 is why. **D6** notes admitted but never reportable, with
-a 30-day expiry on the existing age machinery; refusing them would have
-thrown away the only class of finding the engine cannot produce itself,
-which is CB-WP-0025's entire input. **D7** no engine-evolution register,
-on an inventory C5 corrected — argued and narrowed, not settled. **D8**
-`design-baseline.py` retired, not extended; kept as a dated snapshot
-because deleting it erases the evidence for how 33% got in. **D9** the
-finding and its artifact stay here; ground-game gets a generated file
-under its own workplan, citing the reproduction by path.
+The rest, in one line each: **D1** INTENT gains property 4, *Instrument*,
+applied with its falsifier. **D4** five kinds, each forced by an existing
+finding. **D5** `applied` means the source changed; withdrawals are
+reported, not deleted. **D6** notes admitted but never reportable, 30-day
+expiry. **D7** no engine-evolution register, on an inventory C5 corrected.
+**D8** `design-baseline.py` retired. **D9** the artifact stays here,
+ground-game gets a generated file under its own workplan.
 
 ## Task: specify
 
@@ -331,32 +310,24 @@ and it must cost almost nothing or it will not be done.
 **Done 2026-08-05.** [specs/GameDesign.md](../specs/GameDesign.md) v1.0.
 
 **It is not a register, and says so in its second line** — ADR-0012 D2 put
-the register in `§Underdetermined`, so this spec says what may go in it,
-what a reproduction must *show*, and how a finding dies.
+that in `§Underdetermined`.
 
-**§1.2 had to be written against evidence rather than principle.** A
-finding must now print the rows behind any number it claims, and the spec
-carries the table of what shipped instead: a sum, a green scenario, and a
-condition named without checking which one fired. *"12" was arithmetically
-defensible and still wrong about the game* — that sentence is the whole
-requirement.
+**§1.2 is written against evidence rather than principle**: a finding must
+print the rows behind any number it claims, and the spec carries the table
+of what shipped instead — a sum, a green scenario, and a condition named
+without checking which one fired. *"12" was arithmetically defensible and
+still wrong about the game.*
 
-**§1.3's target is `0` reproductions that have gone green while open.**
-That is the metric GR-E01 would have tripped four days before a human
-caught it.
-
-**No baseline rate is quoted.** C2 withdrew the 33%, and the first honest
-denominator is T05's backfill — quoting a new number from a discredited
-instrument is how the first one got in.
+**§1.3's target is `0` reproductions gone green while open** — what GR-E01
+would have tripped four days before a human caught it. **No baseline rate
+is quoted**; the first honest denominator is T05's backfill.
 
 **The trial protocol costs one flag.** `cb-play --record` already writes a
-finished game as a scenario and `record.rs`'s round trip is its own test,
-so a trial is that plus a sibling `.md` in the player's own words. The
-rule that makes it safe: an observation is a **note** until it has a
-reproduction, and a trial log is where findings are *noticed*, not a
-finding source. The maintainer's *"I felt it was too easy but then we
-lost"* is the case it is shaped around — forcing that into a schema at the
-moment of observation would lose it.
+finished game as a scenario, so a trial is that plus a sibling `.md` in
+the player's own words. An observation is a **note** until it has a
+reproduction — the maintainer's *"I felt it was too easy but then we
+lost"* is the case it is shaped around, and forcing that into a schema at
+the moment of observation would lose it.
 
 ## Task: build it, and backfill what is already known