vendor tool that covers what the gate checks
They ruled on all seven items the same day. Two were actionable here.
F28 RULED: points. Modes.csv MODE_COOP clarified upstream to say
"penalties apply to points, not card count"; mastery is now
total - blame - denied. A recorded scenario went red on it --
gr-e02-shared-ground pinned 0 (2 claimed CARDS - 1 - 1) and now expects
2 (4 POINTS - 1 - 1). The number moved because the rule was decided, not
because the engine drifted, and the scenario records both rulings; its
schema has no field for a second one, so both live in ruled_note with
`ruled` carrying the LATEST date.
F29 RULED not-intended and APPLIED upstream: SCN_02's suits re-tuned the
same day. The characterisation test is how we found out -- it pinned the
duplication, went red on the re-tune, and that red WAS the notification.
It now asserts every pair distinct, the stronger statement the
duplication had made unavailable. SCN_02 re-measures at 73 at 2p, not
67: its own board now.
F26/F30 ruled and recorded. F30's ruling incidentally confirms our
reading -- they name priority-2's suit as the first lever, which is the
difference we identified without having measured causation.
vendor-editions grew twice, both times because it covered less than the
gate it exists to satisfy:
- It refused to touch ground-darvo-r0/ on the reasoning that the
baseline is "a separate record". That was wrong within the hour:
ground-game clarified Modes.csv and `make vendor` reported a clean
sync while edition-check went red. A sync tool that covers less than
its check reports success into a red gate.
- Its two-block rewrite DETECTED which fence held which set and
preserved the arrangement -- faithfully preserving a swap an earlier
write had introduced, leaving each fence under a heading describing
the other. edition-check reads every sha256 line flat and passed
throughout: a document can be self-consistently wrong and green.
Order is now asserted, with a control that goes red on a swap.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
The modes were already implemented; nothing had ever COMPARED them. The
scenarios were not implemented at all: edition::deal has taken a
scenario_id since it was written and the only caller passed the literal
"SCN_01", so 15 of 20 Problem cards had never been dealt by anything.
The seam was the whole mechanism and it sat unused, with nothing red
because nothing asked.
Scenario is now state (serde default SCN_01, so all 26 recordings replay
unchanged), selected by preset `scn-03-4p` with `standard-Np` still
meaning SCN_01, and by --scenario/SCENARIO= accepting ids, numbers or
titles, validated against the edition rather than a pattern.
The threshold now comes off the Scenario card, closing F25's hardcoded
5/7/9. The first version of that control was worthless and mutation said
so: all four scenarios print 5/7/9, so reverting to the bands left it
green. Split threshold_from() so it can be handed a card that disagrees.
The header read `scoring CommonProblem` where the Mode card is titled
COMMON PROBLEM, PERSONAL EDGE -- the defect CB-WP-0034 deleted from the
move buttons, still standing on the line that says what winning means.
The coverage probe was matching that Debug output and went red when it
was fixed: third instance (CB-WP-0024, CB-WP-0034). Page now carries the
premise, the mode's rules text, and the tiebreak.
scenario-panel plays 4x3x3. Findings: SCN_01 and SCN_02 are the same
board (identical cells, pinned by a characterisation test); SCN_04 is
the hard board at 2p (52% vs 67/73%, the only deck needing two Repair);
and group success is EXACTLY equal across all three modes in all 36
cells, because greedy never reads state.mode -- filed F27, the two
competitive modes are scoring lenses over cooperative play.
F28: SHARED GROUND's mastery subtracts penalties from the claimed COUNT
where the mode card's shared score is claimed VALUE. Raised, not fixed;
scoring is ground-game's to rule on.
Also fixes design.py reporting a backticked path as no reproduction.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
H2 is ground-game's answer to our H1 reading — that a flat +1 to every
seat is a solve-rate tax scaling with the number of Problems. Unclaimed
Problems now tick only the seats in scope: global (all), personal (the
owner), bond (the owner's Bond network over Bond edges only, degree 0
falling back to personal), assigned by hidden priority so 2p never has the
bond card in play.
T01: the package is vendored with digests, and H2's Problems.csv is r0's
with one column added and NOTHING else changed — checked, not assumed,
because the delta claims deal_and_thresholds unchanged and a silent
difference would make every H2-vs-baseline comparison a comparison of two
boards as well as two rule sets. Scopes are read from the column, not
derived from the priority in Rust: F25 exists because we hardcoded numbers
the edition already carried.
T02: owner and scope are new ProblemState fields, both Option and both
skipped when None, so a baseline state serialises without them and every
recorded scenario's hash is untouched — asserted on the JSON, not assumed.
with_variant() replaces the bare field write, because state.variant = v
would leave owners unassigned: a silently wrong game rather than a failing
one.
T03: every named defect is mutation-proven — traversing Rivalry edges,
applying stacking once, a degree-0 owner ticking everyone, personal
hitting everyone. The degree-0 mutation MISSED first: the fallback lives
inside bond_network and the mutation broke the None-owner arm instead, a
different branch. It stayed green until aimed at the path the test
exercises. A mutation that misses is not evidence the test works.
T04: ownership is not a permission. Filtering SOLVE to the owner turns it
red, which is the regression this task exists for — the engine had no
owner concept before T02 added one.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
