ground-game ruled all ten U-items on 2026-08-03, every one CONFIRMED as
the default clay-borg simulates, and confirmed five of six provisional
scenarios. clay-borg never collected the answers: CB-RES-0007 reported "0
of 10 ruled" the same day, and CB-WP-0022 built the finding register two
days later still recording them as `reported`. make design's first run is
what noticed -- not a human, not the adversarial review that found four
other things.
That is the unread-inbox failure running in the opposite direction, and it
appears nowhere in the declaration, survey, ADR or spec of the pass that
was built entirely around the forward version. It is arguably worse: an
unread message is visible as silence, while a collected-but-unapplied
ruling looks exactly like work in progress.
Ten rulings quoted into §Underdetermined (the three conditional ones
verbatim -- U1's designer note, U2's End-only trigger, U8's
consume-only-if-it-cancels). Five provisional flags lifted, replaced by
ruled/ruled_by/ruled_note so the flag went and the provenance stayed.
Register queue 9 -> 0.
T02's control came back clean: make sim is 26 passed, 59 rules covered,
nothing red. Had a scenario gone red it would have meant we described our
own behaviour incorrectly to ground-game.
I wrote two U-item mappings and both were wrong. gr-a04 -> U1 (it asserts
consent is REQUIRED; U1 asks WHEN the target accepts) and gr-d05 -> U5 (it
exercises the UNREJECTED Reverse; U5 is the rejected one). Both plausible
from covers:, neither survived reading the description. Third and fourth
instance of this defect; the first two reached ground-game. So encodes_u_item
is now a declaration and design.py asserts the file names what it claims --
and that check's own first version grepped for mentions and went red when
two files recorded why they do NOT encode U1 and U5. A mention is not a
claim, which is exactly the looseness that let "six of the ten have
provisional scenarios" stand.
Two positive controls went red for the best possible reason, both broken
the same way -- asserting against live repo data instead of constructing
their condition. rule-coverage.py required at least one provisional item
to EXIST; it now builds a fixture and reports the live count as a
diagnostic, because there is no number of provisional items this project
should have. design-baseline.py pinned "2 of 6" while recomputing one row
from a live glob, so the dated snapshot was never a snapshot; frozen to
its 2026-08-03 list and unwired from self-tests, since per ADR-0012 D8 it
is no longer a reporting tool.
ScenarioFile is deny_unknown_fields and refused the four new fields until
declared -- correct: a corpus accepting unknown metadata would let a typo'd
encodes_u_iem sit there claiming nothing.
DEVIATION: ADR-0012 D2 said "no new file". GroundRules.md crossed the
loadability limit, so the register moved to specs/FindingRegister.md. D2's
substance holds -- one register, same machinery, nothing competing -- but
the literal instruction did not, and it resolves an awkwardness D2 named
itself.
make all: exit 0. loop-lint clean.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
ADR-0011 decided it: vendor the CSV with a checked digest, read it with
a ~50-line reader, and let the hashes move.
The declaration's constraint was measured against the WRONG BUDGET. It
said a CSV crate costs 21,613 against AM-4a's 3,798 of headroom, '5.7x
over, settled by measurement'. But setup and problem_priorities are
cfg(scenarios) and are not in the shipped runtime at all, so AM-4a never
sees them. Against AM-4b, csv costs 17,651 against 19,742 -- it FITS,
with 2,091 to spare. It is refused anyway, on proportion: 89% of the
budget's remaining capacity to read 20 rows. The revisit condition is
stated (nested quoting, embedded newlines, multiple dialects).
GR-S01 now deals Surface + hidden 1..=k as ruled, with edition values and
suits. Measured: 6/9/12 available against thresholds 5/7/9 -- the game is
winnable at every seat count, which is what the maintainer could not do.
gd0001 is INVERTED, not deleted, and now also asserts the 6/9/12 so a
deal that is reachable for the wrong reason still fails.
Blast radius was scenario expectations, exactly as the ADR predicted: no
scenario pinned a hash and no bundle is committed. Six scenarios and two
unit tests updated, each with a note. gr-e01-threshold-unreachable-2p is
RENAMED to -reachable- and rewritten as the non-provisional import check
ground-game asked for by name. gr-e03's setup was restructured, not just
renumbered: with values 2,2,2 its personal-edge test would have tied
three ways and asserted nothing.
BLOCKING: AM-7 fails at median 0.845 against its 0.9 floor. Isolated
across three runs -- 3 problems + stand-in 0.97, 3 problems + edition
0.909, 4 problems + edition 0.845. State is BOUNDED (proven: identical
after 5k and 100k events), so this is not the unbounded-growth defect
AM-7 exists to catch; it is a bigger working set streaming a long log.
Whether AM-7's floor is still right for a larger aggregate is a spec
question and lowering it requires an ADR, so it is not being tuned here.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Implements ground-game's ruling of 2026-08-03. make all exits 0, 26
scenarios, rule coverage 59/59, and no scenario encoded the bug.
The rule ended up somewhere other than where I put it, and a gate moved
it. It went into legal_commands first; the AM-1 coverage gate then
demanded a scenario for the new GR-P05, and scenarios drive validate, not
the offer layer. A rule enforced only by the offer is enforced only for
clients that ask what is legal -- the browser would be filtered and a
scenario file would walk straight past it. Once GR-P05 moved into
validate, every condition in legal_commands was dead code, and the
layering test said so in those words.
And the reported case was not the one I reported. CB-WP-0018 and the
message to ground-game described SOLVE offered on a FACE-DOWN Problem.
Measured: validate already rejected face-down, so it never was offered.
Problem 1 is the Surface Problem, face-up from the deal -- the
maintainer's three inert SOLVEs were the HAND case, holding no Clarify
for a Clarify Problem. The ruling covers both so nothing is invalidated,
but the record was wrong.
Four conditions asserted separately, because one 'SOLVE is filtered' test
would pass with three of four implemented.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
COMMON PROBLEM was the only scoring mode with no scenario — implemented
since CB-WP-0001, referenced by nothing, and would not have failed if
deleted. Five players, where the threshold is reachable at all: every
Problem claimed for a total of 10 against 9, and the winner is decided
by Blame rather than by claimed value — P4 claimed the highest Problem
and loses to P3 because two Blame tokens sit in front of them.
No defect was found on the first execution of that path, which is worth
saying plainly rather than implying the scenario was hard-won.
The assertions were mutation-checked three ways instead of trusted,
because a dot-path expectation that silently fails to resolve would
report PASS: a wrong personal score, a wrong mastery, and removing the
Blame from the fixture each turn it red.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
GR-O01 states 2-6 players; every scenario in the corpus was 3-player.
Now all five counts play to GameEnded under both policies and reproduce
at the same seed, with scenarios at both boundaries and the CLI
transcript run at 2p, 3p and 6p.
Nothing broke — the rules are seat-count-generic. What the boundaries
exposed is arithmetic: with the standard preset's placeholder Problem
values (value = priority), the best total any game can reach is 3 at 2p,
6 at 3-4p, 10 at 5-6p, against GR-E01 thresholds of 5, 7 and 9. Group
success is unreachable below five seats regardless of play, and no
scenario noticed because none had played to scoring with everything
claimed.
GR-S01 calls the fixture a stand-in for scenario Problem data, so this
is evidence the stand-in is not neutral, not that GR-E01 is wrong. It is
pinned by a passing scenario, an arithmetic test, and a provisional
marker owned by ground-game so it ages in `make coverage`. The test
states its own delete-by: it is expected to fail when Problem values
become real data, and that failure is the signal to delete it.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
INTENT design decision 8 of 10, unimplemented for six passes. cb-sim had
no flag parsing at all, so --replay had nowhere to go.
The bundle is manifest + commands.log + initial.snapshot + expected.yaml,
dev-only behind the scenarios feature and charged to AM-4b. The command
stream goes through the K11 framing built in T05, so a truncated bundle is
detected rather than replayed short — the two tasks compose rather than
duplicating.
The reviewer's D2 correction was real: this was not "a directory of four
files". Pass carried only the end state, RunOutcome::Failed was a
formatted String, and scenario.rs created an EventLog, appended to it and
never read it. All three had to change.
The first round trip failed to reproduce, and the cause is worth keeping:
state_hash_hex over a serde_json::Value is a different canonical form than
over the typed aggregate — Value's map is key-sorted, a struct serializes
in declaration order. The bundle was written with one basis and verified
with the other. A round trip written to recompute its own comparison value
would have PASSED this bug; it failed because the recorded hash came from
the producing process, which is control 2's entire purpose.
make replay-test implements ADR-0005 §6's four controls, 14/14: a
committed deliberately-failing fixture outside the corpus with covers: []
so it neither fails `make sim` nor inflates AM-1; a tampered recorded hash
must fail; a log short by one byte and a corrupted length prefix must be
rejected; and a mutated manifest seed must fail — which bites only because
replay re-derives the initial state from seed+setup and checks it against
the recorded snapshot, since restoring from the snapshot alone would leave
the seed inert. Plus a control on the controls: the bundle must still
replay after every mutation is reverted.
AM-7's hash-identical clause is re-earned. The probe records a hash per
per-game segment and replays each from its own genesis; folding from the
wrong seed now fails. That is the clause ADR-0005 §4 withdrew as
mutation-proven inert. The scaling >= 0.9x clause is still unenforced, so
AM-7 stays PARTIAL — reported, not rounded up.
Kernel coverage 15/18 -> 16/18. facts-check immediately caught the spec's
copy of that number going stale, on a number that moved the same hour.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Five scenarios encoded U-item defaults with no owner and no review date,
so they could shape the kernel indefinitely while looking handled.
Each now carries provisional_owner and provisional_raised, and the
runtime's ScenarioFile learned both fields (deny_unknown_fields meant
adding them to YAML alone would have failed every scenario -- the parser
had to agree).
make coverage reports every provisional item with its owner and age in
days, warns on any with no owner, and warns past 30 days. It WARNS
rather than breaking the build, on purpose: the ruling is ground-game's
to make and the kernel cannot make it for them. What the loop can
enforce is that evidence files list them, which is now stated in
GroundRules.
rule-coverage --self-test gained an assertion that every provisional
item has both fields, so the next one added without them fails a
command rather than passing quietly.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
- GR-R09: after Round 5's End the game ends and scoring runs instead of
the round advancing.
- GR-E01: claimed Problems sum their printed values against the
player-count threshold (2p 5, 3-4p 7, 5-6p 9 in dataset 0.1).
- GR-E02 SHARED GROUND: shared score, Mastery reduced per Blame token
and per Denied Problem.
- GR-E03 COMMON PROBLEM: personal score is claimed value less Blame,
tiebroken by lower Stress then more Bonds.
- GR-E04 BONDED COALITIONS: connected components over Bonds only, so
Rivalries do not connect and an unbonded player is a coalition of
one; tiebroken by lower combined Stress then fewer Blame.
Ties yield every tied candidate rather than an arbitrary pick, which is
what "shared victory" in GR-E03/E04 asks for.
AM-1 rule coverage is now 58/58 (100%), 21 scenarios, 17 tests.
Caveat recorded rather than papered over: GR-E02's "successes" is not
defined in dataset 0.1. It is implemented as the count of claimed
Problems and both scoring scenarios are marked provisional, so a
ground-game ruling flips a scenario rather than the kernel.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Resolution step 3 (GR-R06), the last unimplemented step:
- GR-D02 binding: one stage per consecutive round, DENY then ATTACK
then REVERSE, regardless of the player's later Stress.
- GR-D03 DENY: turn one face-up, unsolved, unprotected Problem face
down and Deny it. Under the U3 default no legal target is a no-op and
the sequence still advances.
- GR-D04 ATTACK: one extra Attack under the normal relation rules, then
place the Focus token beside the target even if it was cancelled.
- GR-D05 REVERSE: flip Focus to Blame, +1 Stress to the holder, one
Protection to the owner, unless the holder's GROUND-ND rejects it.
Under the U5 default the owner takes -2 either way and the sequence
ends.
- GR-D06 early end: a Support through a Bond that predates this round's
Support step cancels the stage and ends the sequence, and the placed
Focus token is removed. GROUND-GR ends it after the stage resolves.
- GR-D07: the marker returns to OFF, so a later End can re-trigger.
The Attack rules are now one routine shared by the chosen ATTACK Action
and the DARVO extra Attack, so GR-A06..A09 cannot drift between them.
Stage targets are named by their own command during Reveal, validated
against what the stage admits: DENY needs an eligible Problem, ATTACK
another player, and only a player with a live sequence may choose.
18 scenarios pass; AM-1 coverage 47/58 (81%), up from 41/58.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Closes the three rules deferred in iter 2 and 3 because each needed a
decision from a player rather than a default I would have invented:
- GR-A11 GROUND-OU: restore a Denied Problem, protect a face-up one
from Deny, or cancel an Attack aimed at the chooser.
- GR-A12 GROUND-ND: remove a Blame token, break a relation involving
the chooser, or reject a Reverse.
- GR-L02 / GR-A05: the Support target answers after Reveal — accept or
decline a Bond where no relation exists, flip or break an existing
Rivalry. A Bond can no longer form without consent.
Each choice is validated against the state it claims to act on: a
restore needs a Denied Problem, a cancel needs an Attack actually aimed
at the chooser, a Blame removal needs that token present, a break needs
that relation to exist. GR takes no sub-choice, and OU and ND may only
use choices from their own list.
GR-A09 ordering follows the U8 default: an OU cancellation is chosen at
step 1 and applies first, so a Protection token is spent only when it
is what actually cancels.
14 scenarios pass; AM-1 coverage 41/58 (70%), up from 34/58.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Fills in resolution steps 1, 4 and 6 (GR-R06):
- GR-R05 mode choice: a player who revealed GROUND picks GR/OU/ND after
Reveal. Resolution refuses to start while any revealed GROUND lacks a
mode, and only that player may choose it.
- GR-A10 GROUND-GR: self -2 Stress and Freedom readied.
- GR-A01 INVESTIGATE: reveal the chosen hidden non-Denied Problem, then
draw one Solution; the draw still happens when nothing is revealable.
- GR-A02 SOLVE: spend a Solution of the Problem's suit and claim it; a
later resolver the same round spends nothing, per Lead order.
- GR-A13 tightened: INVESTIGATE must target a hidden Problem, SOLVE a
face-up non-Denied one. Previously any existing Problem was accepted.
Deck exhaustion (U4) reshuffles the discard, seeded from the game seed
and round so validate stays a pure function of state. The resulting
order travels inside DeckReshuffled, so replay never re-derives it.
Still pending, each because it needs its own decision command rather
than a default: GROUND-OU and GROUND-ND three-way choices (GR-A11/A12)
and the DARVO stage machine (GR-D02..D07). No scenario claims coverage
of them.
Filler picks in existing scenarios moved from GROUND to INVESTIGATE:
GROUND now has a real Stress effect, which was polluting the Support
and Attack assertions.
11 scenarios pass, 34 rules covered; 17 tests, fmt/clippy green.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Round machinery, system-driven (GR-R04/R06/R08):
- GR-R06 fixed step order with GR-R07 Lead-first ordering inside a step.
Steps 1 (GROUND), 3 (DARVO stages), 4 (INVESTIGATE) and 6 (SOLVE) are
not implemented yet; their Actions resolve as no-ops and no scenario
claims coverage of them.
- SUPPORT GR-A03/A04/A05 and ATTACK GR-A06..A09, with relation
formation, flip and break per GR-L01/L03/L04 and Protection
cancellation.
- GR-R08 End: DARVO trigger at Stress 5 in Lead order, Lead rotation,
Round advance, per-round flags cleared.
- Stress clamps 0-5 on every application, the U2 default, so a mid-round
spike that is reduced before End does not trigger DARVO.
Two consent-dependent rules are deliberately left out because they need
a decision command rather than a default: Bond formation (GR-L02) and
the target's flip-or-break choice on Support-through-Rivalry (GR-A05).
Both are noted in code and covered by a provisional scenario.
Fixes a defect in the T07 scaffold: relations were keyed by a tuple,
which JSON cannot use as an object key, so state_hash would have
panicked on any state holding a relation. Relation keys are now a Pair
newtype serialized as "a-b", with a regression test.
setup.patch may now create a final key so scenarios can seed open-ended
maps; a typo anywhere earlier in the path is still an error.
8 scenarios pass, 28 rules covered; 17 tests, fmt/clippy green.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Replaces the RunOutcome::Unimplemented stub with a real runner:
- ScenarioGame trait: games own setup presets and the command
vocabulary, the runner owns execution, assertions, and determinism.
- K8 double-run: every scenario runs twice on the same seed and fails
on state-hash divergence.
- K4/K11: applied events go through Envelope into EventLog, so seq
monotonicity is enforced on the real path, not just in unit tests.
- setup.patch was parsed and silently dropped; the runner now applies
it generically and errors on a path that does not exist, so a typo
in a scenario can never pass as a no-op.
- Assertions: dot-path state lookup over objects and arrays, ordered
event subsequence matching by field subset, exact rejects-set match.
GROUND rules realized: GR-S01..S04 setup (seeded shuffle, deal, Lead,
Surface Problem face up), GR-R02 Select commit, GR-R03 stress gate and
Freedom spend, GR-A13 targeting legality.
cb-sim dispatches by the scenario's game prefix and reports rule
coverage. 3 scenarios pass, 7 rules covered; fmt/clippy/tests green.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
