CB-WP-0007 T01+T03: window the metric, budget it, cap meta at 25%

Scope cut first, on the maintainer's decision after a spend review: the
project is 38% product / 62% loop-meta, cost per response is 2.9x worse
than its best window, and INTENT stage 0 still lacks a CLI player and
bots. CB-WP-0005 and CB-WP-0006 cost ~$74 — 31% of all spend — for zero
measured efficiency gain. T02 and T04 are cancelled unstarted.

T01: SH-1/SH-2/SH-3 now report over the window since the last commit, and
the cumulative figure is retained but labelled "history, NOT the metric".
The prediction held decisively — window 655,744 mean context against
cumulative 255,307, a 2.6x gap against a 20% refutation threshold. A
cumulative mean over 1,094 responses cannot detect a worsening trend
because the history outvotes the present.

T03: `make shape-budget`, modelled on CB-01/CB-02. Soft thresholds are the
existing SessionShape targets; hard is 1.5x, set before the next
measurement per §Step 4. Deliberately not in `make all` — failing the
build on context would block committing, and committing is what closes the
attribution window and is the natural point to compact, so a gate that
blocks the remedy is a trap. It fires HARD on its first run: 656,574
against a 300,000 ceiling.

InnerLoop v1.5 establishes the soft 25% meta budget. Workplans declare
kind: product|meta|mixed and `make status` reports the share; mixed splits
50/50 and says so. Soft on purpose — a task already started may be
finished, because stopping mid-task to satisfy a ratio wastes the work.
What it forbids is opening new meta work above the line. A pass that
exceeds it must say so in its evidence and name the product work
displaced.

First reading: 68% OVER, of $74.22 attributed. Product reads $0.00 because
the only product workplan, CB-WP-0001, predates qualified task ids and its
bare T## labels collide across passes — stated in the output rather than
papered over.

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

workplans/CB-WP-0001-inner-loop.md

@@ -1,5 +1,6 @@
 ---
 id: CB-WP-0001
+kind: product
 title: "Establish the assimilate-and-surpass inner loop via the GROUND game kernel"
 status: done
 state_hub_workstream_id: "a1b434dc-b1c6-46b5-bbd9-80a4e6b7620f"

workplans/CB-WP-0002-cost-accounting.md

@@ -1,5 +1,6 @@
 ---
 id: CB-WP-0002
+kind: meta
 title: "Make agentic cost measurable, so D2 claims are falsifiable"
 status: done
 state_hub_workstream_id: "b7c22f69-fbe9-48df-9619-007db79ae338"

workplans/CB-WP-0003-loop-hardening.md

@@ -1,5 +1,6 @@
 ---
 id: CB-WP-0003
+kind: meta
 title: "Harden the inner loop: executable rules, session economics, dead policy"
 status: done
 state_hub_workstream_id: "39d61dc0-870d-45c1-a595-bcf91f289dce"

workplans/CB-WP-0004-mechanical-work.md

@@ -1,5 +1,6 @@
 ---
 id: CB-WP-0004
+kind: meta
 title: "Move mechanical turns off the token budget, and prove it worked"
 status: done
 state_hub_workstream_id: "6880ac78-d817-41b9-b267-f12ff9deea28"

workplans/CB-WP-0005-assertion-coverage.md

@@ -1,5 +1,6 @@
 ---
 id: CB-WP-0005
+kind: meta
 title: "Make the instruments count assertions, then fix what they expose"
 status: done
 state_hub_workstream_id: "0b95a1e3-7780-43d0-81e9-072ef7978734"

workplans/CB-WP-0006-instrument-the-table.md

@@ -1,5 +1,6 @@
 ---
 id: CB-WP-0006
+kind: mixed
 title: "Instrument the acceptance table, then implement what it exposes"
 status: done
 state_hub_workstream_id: "8a6327cc-fd5c-4e2c-a29b-b437c27d1e71"

workplans/CB-WP-0007-session-shape.md

@@ -1,7 +1,8 @@
 ---
 id: CB-WP-0007
+kind: meta
 title: "Make session shape measurable in the window that matters, then enforce it"
-status: proposed
+status: in_progress
 state_hub_workstream_id: "bee19b76-fb60-4dcf-94d0-9242b43e0e42"
 ---
 
@@ -33,6 +34,24 @@ Per InnerLoop §Step 4, no target moves in the commit that measures it —
 and CB-RES-0005 D3 states that up front, because all three targets are
 currently unmet by wide margins and the temptation is obvious.
 
+## Scope cut, 2026-08-01 (maintainer decision)
+
+A spend review before starting found the project **38% product / 62%
+loop-meta**, with cost per response degraded 2.9× from its best window and
+INTENT stage 0 still missing a CLI player and bots. CB-WP-0005 and
+CB-WP-0006 cost **~$74 — 31% of all spend — for zero measured efficiency
+gain** (their return was correctness of claims, which is real but is not
+optimization).
+
+So this workplan is **cut to T01 and T03**, the two tasks that attack the
+2.9× regression directly. **T02 and T04 are cancelled**, not deferred —
+SH-4 trend reporting and the batching trial are more instrument work, and
+the instrument-failure taxonomy is not converging. T06 becomes the
+project-level retrospective the maintainer asked for.
+
+**A soft 25% meta budget is established here** (T03), because the review's
+finding needs a standing number, not a memory.
+
 ## Phase A — measure the right window
 
 ## Task: window the session-shape metrics
@@ -58,11 +77,16 @@ target compares against.
 **Refuted if** it lands within 20% of the cumulative number, in which case
 the aggregation was not the problem and this pass should re-plan.
 
-## Task: SH-4 — a windowed trend the instrument can see
+## Task: SH-4 — a windowed trend the instrument can see (CANCELLED)
+
+> **Cancelled unstarted 2026-08-01.** More instrument work, against a
+> review finding that instrument work has stopped paying. The ceiling T03
+> adds catches a bad pass; a trend line would catch a slow slide, which is
+> a real gap — recorded as open, not built.
 
 ```task
 id: CB-WP-0007-T02
-status: todo
+status: cancel
 priority: medium
 state_hub_task_id: "1d5a32ef-4086-4021-b874-24ed2160c4dd"
 ```
@@ -119,11 +143,17 @@ Carries `--self-test`. Its positive control is the one this project keeps
 needing: a budget that reports `ok` because it measured nothing must
 abort instead.
 
-## Task: batch deliberately, and report what the rate reaches
+## Task: batch deliberately, and report what the rate reaches (CANCELLED)
+
+> **Cancelled unstarted 2026-08-01.** `SessionShape.md` §4 already puts
+> the ceiling at **$2–4 on a $93 pass** — the cheapest of the three
+> metrics to move and the least valuable. Spending a task on it while
+> stage 0 lacks a CLI player is the misallocation the review found.
+> SH-3 remains measured, unmet at 0.0%, and unfalsified.
 
 ```task
 id: CB-WP-0007-T04
-status: todo
+status: cancel
 priority: medium
 state_hub_task_id: "c284db6f-2e16-40fb-be8b-83ae5391c058"
 ```
@@ -154,7 +184,10 @@ priority: high
 state_hub_task_id: "2f78b272-e1f9-4530-bc8c-3a9d82833546"
 ```
 
-Commit `evidence/CB-EV-0006-session-shape.md`. Four tests, all reported:
+Commit `evidence/CB-EV-0006-session-shape.md`. **Reduced with the scope
+cut** — tests 1, 2 and 4 remain; test 3 (SH-3) is cancelled with T04.
+
+Four tests, all reported:
 
 1. **Does the windowed metric differ from cumulative?** Against T01's
    prediction; refuted if within 20%.