CB-EV-0020: a gate moved the rule, and the report was wrong

The AM-1 coverage gate failed the build on GR-P05 being uncovered, which
is what showed the rule was in the offer layer rather than in validate.
A rule enforced only by the offer is enforced only for clients that ask
what is legal. The gate did not catch a bug, it caught a design error.

And the reported case was not the one reported. CB-WP-0018, CB-EV-0016
and the message to ground-game all described SOLVE offered on a
face-down Problem; validate already rejected face-down, so it never was.
Problem 1 is the Surface Problem, face-up from the deal, so the three
inert SOLVEs were the HAND case. The ruling covers both so nothing is
invalidated, but a ruling was requested on a wrong description -- the
second time in three passes that a premise reached ground-game
unchecked, after the '12 points available' that voided GR-E01.

Two of two. The pattern is not careless analysis; it is that a claim gets
SENT the moment it is interesting and checked afterwards. Unexecuted
verification, one step further out: not a belief acted on, but a belief
published. CB-WP-0022's reproduction rule would have caught both.

An earlier mutation run reported three survivors and was wrong -- the
replacement strings did not match, so nothing was mutated. It proved
nothing and looked like a result.

Also renames CB-WP-0022-T06B to T07; the hub flagged it as an
unregistered species.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>

WORK-RECORDS.md

@@ -28,6 +28,9 @@
 | workplan | CB-WP-0018 | done | — | workplans/CB-WP-0018-the-browser-is-a-client.md |
 | workplan | CB-WP-0019 | done | — | workplans/CB-WP-0019-the-am4-family.md |
 | workplan | CB-WP-0020 | done | — | workplans/CB-WP-0020-the-table-you-can-read.md |
+| workplan | CB-WP-0021 | ready | — | workplans/CB-WP-0021-import-the-edition.md |
+| workplan | CB-WP-0022 | active | — | workplans/CB-WP-0022-the-design-instrument.md |
+| workplan | CB-WP-0023 | done | — | workplans/CB-WP-0023-solve-legality.md |
 | task | CB-WP-0001-T01 | done | — | workplans/CB-WP-0001-inner-loop.md |
 | task | CB-WP-0001-T02 | done | — | workplans/CB-WP-0001-inner-loop.md |
 | task | CB-WP-0001-T03 | done | — | workplans/CB-WP-0001-inner-loop.md |
@@ -135,3 +138,17 @@
 | task | CB-WP-0020-T04 | done | — | workplans/CB-WP-0020-the-table-you-can-read.md |
 | task | CB-WP-0020-T05 | done | — | workplans/CB-WP-0020-the-table-you-can-read.md |
 | task | CB-WP-0020-T06 | done | — | workplans/CB-WP-0020-the-table-you-can-read.md |
+| task | CB-WP-0021-T01 | todo | — | workplans/CB-WP-0021-import-the-edition.md |
+| task | CB-WP-0021-T02 | todo | — | workplans/CB-WP-0021-import-the-edition.md |
+| task | CB-WP-0021-T03 | todo | — | workplans/CB-WP-0021-import-the-edition.md |
+| task | CB-WP-0021-T04 | todo | — | workplans/CB-WP-0021-import-the-edition.md |
+| task | CB-WP-0022-T01 | done | — | workplans/CB-WP-0022-the-design-instrument.md |
+| task | CB-WP-0022-T02 | todo | — | workplans/CB-WP-0022-the-design-instrument.md |
+| task | CB-WP-0022-T03 | todo | — | workplans/CB-WP-0022-the-design-instrument.md |
+| task | CB-WP-0022-T04 | todo | — | workplans/CB-WP-0022-the-design-instrument.md |
+| task | CB-WP-0022-T05 | todo | — | workplans/CB-WP-0022-the-design-instrument.md |
+| task | CB-WP-0022-T06 | todo | — | workplans/CB-WP-0022-the-design-instrument.md |
+| task | CB-WP-0022-T06B | todo | — | workplans/CB-WP-0022-the-design-instrument.md |
+| task | CB-WP-0023-T01 | done | — | workplans/CB-WP-0023-solve-legality.md |
+| task | CB-WP-0023-T02 | done | — | workplans/CB-WP-0023-solve-legality.md |
+| task | CB-WP-0023-T03 | done | — | workplans/CB-WP-0023-solve-legality.md |

evidence/CB-EV-0020-solve-legality.md

@@ -0,0 +1,113 @@
+# CB-EV-0020 — a gate moved the rule, and the report was wrong
+
+CB-WP-0023 T03. Measured 2026-08-04 at `46c2fb6`+. Pass kind `product`,
+tier **S** (chaos d8 = 6, no override). Declaration 6 of chaos window 2.
+
+---
+
+## 1. How long the inert move survived, and what it cost
+
+SOLVE has been offered where it could do nothing **since `legal_commands`
+was written** — nineteen passes. It cost one maintainer three consecutive
+rounds of a real game, playing the same move and watching nothing happen,
+with no explanation on the page.
+
+It was not found by a test. It was found by a person playing, and then
+only because they said so.
+
+## 2. The rule ended up somewhere other than where I put it
+
+I implemented the ruling in `legal_commands` — the **offer** layer — and
+it worked: SOLVE stopped being offered, four conditions, four tests.
+
+Then the **AM-1 coverage gate failed the build**: 58/59, `GR-P05`
+uncovered. Scenarios are what cover a rule, and scenarios drive
+`validate`, not the offer layer.
+
+That is what showed the rule was in the wrong place. **A rule enforced
+only by the offer is enforced only for clients that ask what is legal.**
+The browser would have been filtered; a scenario file, a bot, or any
+future client that constructs a command directly would have walked
+straight past it.
+
+Once GR-P05 moved into `validate`, every condition in `legal_commands`
+was dead code — and the layering test I had written for a different
+reason said so in exactly those words: *"validate now rejects claimed —
+drop the filter."* The offer layer is back to one arm for Investigate and
+SOLVE together, and it gets the rule for free because it filters
+candidates through `validate` anyway.
+
+**The gate did not catch a bug. It caught a design error**, which is a
+better return than it was built for.
+
+## 3. The reported case was not the one I reported
+
+CB-WP-0018, CB-EV-0016 and **the message to ground-game** all described
+the defect as *SOLVE offered on a face-down Problem*.
+
+Measured: **`validate` already rejected face-down.** It never was offered.
+
+Problem 1 is the Surface Problem and is face-up from the deal (GR-S01), so
+the maintainer's three inert SOLVEs were the **hand** case — holding no
+Clarify for a Clarify Problem. I inferred "face-down" from the play report
+without checking which condition was actually blocking, and then told the
+game's designer.
+
+The ruling covers both sub-cases, so nothing it says is invalidated and no
+re-ruling is needed. **But a ruling was requested on the strength of a
+description that was wrong**, and this is the second time in three passes
+that a premise I supplied reached ground-game unchecked — the first being
+the *"12 points available"* that voided GR-E01.
+
+Two of two. The pattern is not that the analysis is careless; it is that
+**a claim gets sent the moment it is interesting, and checked afterwards.**
+That is the same shape as *unexecuted verification*, one step further out:
+not an unverified belief acted on, but an unverified belief **published**.
+
+CB-WP-0022's *"no finding without its reproduction"* rule would have
+caught both. GD-0001 already carries its reproduction; this pass is the
+argument for making that the standard rather than the exception.
+
+## 4. What the four conditions cost to prove
+
+Each is asserted on its own, because a single *"SOLVE is filtered"* test
+passes with three of four implemented and nobody learns which.
+
+| mutation | result |
+|---|---|
+| drop the claimed check | `solve_is_not_offered_on_an_already_claimed_problem` red |
+| drop the hand check | `solve_is_not_offered_without_a_matching_solution_in_hand` red |
+| invert the layering assertion | `validate_enforces_all_four_solve_conditions` red |
+
+An earlier mutation run reported **three survivors** and was wrong: the
+replacement strings did not match the source, so nothing was mutated. The
+run proved nothing and looked like a result — the harness-does-nothing
+class, in my own hands, caught only by checking that the file changed.
+
+**No scenario encoded the bug.** All 25 passed unchanged; the 26th covers
+GR-P05.
+
+## 5. Cost
+
+| pass | kind | responses | cost | $/response |
+|---|---|---|---|---|
+| **CB-WP-0022** | product | *in flight — T01 only* | | |
+| **CB-WP-0021** | product | 12 | **$5.06** | 0.422 |
+| CB-WP-0023 | product | *provisional — not quoted* | | |
+
+CB-WP-0022 is still `active` and cannot be quoted as settled; CB-WP-0021
+is `ready` with its declaration and correction committed and no
+implementation, which is what $5.06 buys. Read by re-running `make status`
+at the moment of writing.
+
+## 6. Open
+
+- **CB-WP-0021 (the edition import) is unstarted and now partly
+  redundant**: GR-P05's suit check makes the *stand-in's* cycled suits
+  load-bearing, so importing real `required_solution` values changes which
+  Problems each hand can solve. It should be re-read before it is run.
+- **CB-WP-0022 T02 (adversarial review) is next**, and §3 has just handed
+  it a second data point.
+- **GROUND-WP-0004** — GR-E01's ruling reopened on corrected numbers, with
+  the maintainer's unwinnable 3-player games as evidence.
+- **Chaos: 6 of 12 in window 2**, one override, changed nothing.

workplans/CB-WP-0021-import-the-edition.md

@@ -3,6 +3,7 @@ id: CB-WP-0021
 kind: product
 title: "Import the edition: the game plays its own data"
 status: ready
+state_hub_workstream_id: "782b1c37-f3a7-469b-87a3-fa73ebe758d2"
 ---
 
 # Purpose
@@ -91,6 +92,7 @@ alternatives to take, and that is the ADR.
 id: CB-WP-0021-T01
 status: todo
 priority: high
+state_hub_task_id: "68e4fe63-eec6-4fb8-a84f-32c7edee19af"
 ```
 
 Write `decisions/ADR-0011-*.md` (tier M: survey and decision in one).
@@ -131,6 +133,7 @@ replay determinism, is not a data-loading change.
 id: CB-WP-0021-T02
 status: todo
 priority: high
+state_hub_task_id: "28c3ff2c-16ae-47b5-9474-10e754936c60"
 ```
 
 Replace the stand-in. `setup` must build Problems from the edition data:
@@ -154,6 +157,7 @@ Hidden → face down) and `hidden_priority`.
 id: CB-WP-0021-T03
 status: todo
 priority: medium
+state_hub_task_id: "ff3bd923-9066-49ce-aadd-a3552e4964ff"
 ```
 
 `gr-e01-threshold-unreachable-2p` is tagged `provisional: true` with
@@ -175,6 +179,7 @@ improved by deleting the question is not an improvement.*
 id: CB-WP-0021-T04
 status: todo
 priority: high
+state_hub_task_id: "ba76138d-a225-470d-bb2a-3a6881f4ca82"
 ```
 
 `evidence/CB-EV-0019-*.md`.

workplans/CB-WP-0022-the-design-instrument.md

@@ -3,6 +3,7 @@ id: CB-WP-0022
 kind: product
 title: "The design instrument: findings about the game, with their reproductions"
 status: active
+state_hub_workstream_id: "fda16340-0049-4acf-884b-a5cfdbde47c0"
 ---
 
 # Purpose
@@ -90,6 +91,7 @@ tier L exists to surface.
 id: CB-WP-0022-T01
 status: done
 priority: high
+state_hub_task_id: "6b8663b8-4143-4361-ad9e-7df0c4f4a19d"
 ```
 
 `research/CB-RES-0007-*.md`.
@@ -147,6 +149,7 @@ than duplicate.
 id: CB-WP-0022-T02
 status: todo
 priority: high
+state_hub_task_id: "d2597895-fe2e-4f1e-a3db-a5fb8833434c"
 ```
 
 Tier L requires it. Give the reviewer the survey **and** the §judgment
@@ -171,6 +174,7 @@ Record the trail in `history/`, unpolished.
 id: CB-WP-0022-T03
 status: todo
 priority: high
+state_hub_task_id: "a2e85810-e949-4ea0-81fc-36b912af326c"
 ```
 
 `decisions/ADR-0012-*.md`. At minimum:
@@ -195,6 +199,7 @@ priority: high
 id: CB-WP-0022-T04
 status: todo
 priority: high
+state_hub_task_id: "60ddfeab-81b1-45e4-9ec9-91cc8ea7fb72"
 ```
 
 `specs/GameDesign.md`, with metrics, because a spec without them is prose.
@@ -219,6 +224,7 @@ and it must cost almost nothing or it will not be done.
 id: CB-WP-0022-T05
 status: todo
 priority: high
+state_hub_task_id: "469413ba-ed47-4840-a60e-ee7f95dc06ff"
 ```
 
 The register, the tool, and then **the six findings above entered into
@@ -235,6 +241,7 @@ without a reproduction, and those never reported to their owner.
 id: CB-WP-0022-T06
 status: todo
 priority: high
+state_hub_task_id: "c6a659bd-c495-4754-9332-baadad51012a"
 ```
 
 Generate the report and send it. **The message that sat unread for four
@@ -256,9 +263,10 @@ Include the two sharpened findings this pass has already produced:
 ## Task: evidence
 
 ```task
-id: CB-WP-0022-T06B
+id: CB-WP-0022-T07
 status: todo
 priority: high
+state_hub_task_id: "4fb77911-486d-4d9e-a53d-c4e486c74ce2"
 ```
 
 `evidence/CB-EV-0020-*.md`.

workplans/CB-WP-0023-solve-legality.md

@@ -3,6 +3,7 @@ id: CB-WP-0023
 kind: product
 title: "SOLVE is offered only where it can do something"
 status: done
+state_hub_workstream_id: "ae3a1491-4417-4cb2-b490-b694463cc171"
 ---
 
 # Purpose
@@ -45,6 +46,7 @@ exists to stop.
 id: CB-WP-0023-T01
 status: done
 priority: high
+state_hub_task_id: "52637f6f-314f-4715-9d81-5e9bea8ced97"
 ```
 
 SOLVE is offered on problem `p` for seat `s` **iff** `p.face_up`,
@@ -101,6 +103,7 @@ inverting the layering assertion turns `validate_enforces_all_four` red.
 id: CB-WP-0023-T02
 status: done
 priority: medium
+state_hub_task_id: "4a436635-2eff-42b1-957c-fdb8b310f910"
 ```
 
 Update `specs/GroundRules.md` §Underdetermined for the SOLVE items, and
@@ -124,6 +127,7 @@ scenario rather than left as a gap.
 id: CB-WP-0023-T03
 status: done
 priority: high
+state_hub_task_id: "3a05165c-df33-4668-8ca2-2340789b3531"
 ```
 
 `evidence/CB-EV-0020-*.md`. Short.