Delivers ADR-0007 Decision 1: visualization, drag-to-propose and hot-seat
play, at a measured marginal AM-4a cost of zero.
games-ground shipped: 23 third-party crates
cb-render-html: 23 third-party crates
new crates introduced: 0
Measured, not asserted — the survey's own lesson. AM-4a is unmoved at
246,250; own source is 7,636 -> 9,652.
What shipped:
crates/cb-render-html doc.rs (HTML/SVG emission, incl. the relationship
graph), input.rs (pointer facts -> commands),
serve.rs (Guard, Request, loopback bind)
tools/cb-play hotseat.rs + `--serve PORT`
Per ADR-0007 Decision 2 there is NO cb-render-api and NO cb-render-null.
The renderer targets the existing Project trait; the port waits for
stage 2's wgpu implementation to be its second use.
The six controls, all live, all mutation-checked (8 mutations, each red
for its stated reason):
1-3 token / Origin+Sec-Fetch-Site / explicit 127.0.0.1 bind
4 a token-less request is refused, in the unit AND over a real socket
5 JS may not construct commands — the page reports pointer facts, Rust
resolves them against the legal list the aggregate already offered,
and a test asserts the emitted script contains no game vocabulary
6 the coverage gate crosses the language boundary: it walks the
serialized view for leaf paths and requires each token to appear in
the PARSED emitted document, with a test that the parse really is a
parse (script/style contents must not count as rendered)
The gate fired on its author again, on its first run: ground_choices.*.
choice, ground_choices.*.problem and players.*.blame_from were in neither
list. The last is the one worth keeping — an EMPTY vector is a leaf path
of its own, and it now renders as an explicit absence.
Also, a mutation that did not go red: removing the Sec-Fetch-Site arm
alone left the cross-site test green, because the Origin check caught it
independently. Both had to be removed before the control bit. Recorded
because a control that passes for a reason you did not intend has not
been demonstrated.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Five decisions:
1. cb-render-html emits HTML/SVG/JS; the browser draws it. Rejected on
measured marginal cost: egui+eframe 2,782,849; wgpu+winit 1,741,979;
ratatui 1,067,013; macroquad 480,501; sdl2 191,973; fltk 140,079.
The reason is allocation, not affordability — fltk is only 1.5x the
corrected headroom, but wgpu is 12x fltk, unavoidable, and named by
INTENT for stage 2. Stage 1 should not buy windowing stage 2 discards.
2. No cb-render-api and no cb-render-null. A port designed against one
document-emitting implementation acquires a document's shape and
stage 2 rewrites it. INTENT's second-use rule beats the blueprint's
port pattern on timing. cb-render-html ships against Project.
3. AM-4 counts third-party code the project causes to be ACQUIRED, not
runtimes the user already has. Browsers are not counted; sdl2 and
fltk are counted at MORE than their Rust bindings. The rule costs
more than it saves, which is the only reason to trust it here.
4. AM-4a's proc-macro defect (89,048 lines, 36.2%) is filed separately,
not bundled with the request it unblocks.
5. Six controls bind the implementation, including a mutation-backed
test that a token-less loopback request is refused, a bar on JS
constructing commands, and a coverage gate asserting over the parsed
emitted document rather than the Rust that emits it.
Reserved for the maintainer: AM-4a exceeds INTENT stage 2 by 7x and
cannot survive it; and whether decision 3's rule is the right one.
The hard gate held — no render implementation code before this commit.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Four of six challenges conceded; the survey's two main arguments are
replaced rather than clarified.
C1 The survey concluded the sub-100k region was empty without ever
measuring it. It is not empty: tiny-skia fits at 83,956, and the
real windowed floor is fltk at 140,079 — 1.5x corrected headroom,
not 128x. "Two orders of magnitude" is withdrawn.
C1b Following that concession: wgpu+winit is 1,741,979 marginal lines
against a 250,000 target. AM-4a is incompatible with INTENT stage 2
by 7x, and has been since both were written. Raised for the
maintainer; deliberately not decided by this pass.
C2 "Marginal cost zero" was scored on an axis chosen to produce zero,
and the same relocation already flattered sdl2 and fltk in the
survey's own table. One acquisition rule now covers all three, and
it raises two candidates' cost rather than lowering the winner's.
C3 The survey contradicted itself on the second-use rule. cb-render-api
and cb-render-null are withdrawn; cb-render-html ships against the
existing Project trait, and the port waits for stage 2's second use.
C6 The candidate measurements did carry a positive control. The C1
batch did not — it copied dep-weight.py's measurement function
without its guards — and was re-measured under them before being
cited. Figures reproduced unchanged. The HTML row is relabelled
0 by construction, not by measurement.
C4/C5 become six controls binding on ADR-0007.
The recommendation stands. The reasoning that reached it does not.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Measured with dep-weight.py's own method so the numbers subtract.
Marginal cost against the 23-crate base graph, not headline size:
egui+eframe 2,782,849 742x headroom
wgpu+winit 1,741,979 465x
softbuffer+tiny-skia 1,147,081 306x
ratatui+crossterm 1,067,013 285x
macroquad 480,501 128x
HTML/SVG emission 0 0x
ratatui costing more than macroquad is the surprise: rustix pulls
linux-raw-sys at 479,901 lines.
Separately, AM-4a counts proc-macro crates that never reach a binary:
89,048 lines, 36.2% of the shipped-runtime figure, syn alone 66,916.
Real headroom is 92,798, not the 3,750 this repo has been citing.
The recommendation is unchanged by that correction — macroquad is 5.2x
over even at 92,798 — which is the only condition under which a survey
may propose correcting a number in its own favour. The metric fix is
filed separately, not bundled with the decision it unblocks.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Declaration 7 of 12. Structural tier L (INTENT stage 1 creates a
capability port); d4 = 1, so no override — the pass runs at full
weight, which is the tier CB-WP-0011's roll deleted.
The leading constraint is AM-4a's 3,750 lines of headroom against
candidate implementations that are all five to six figures. T01 is
required to measure rather than estimate, and to audit the instrument
before recommending any change to the target it reports.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
CB-EV-0009. Tier S did not produce a worse outcome than tier L would
have. The roll deleted a survey that would have opened on 2D toolkit
selection; the decomposition it forced instead found that the existing
text renderer was showing 24 of 41 view fields. The structural trigger
fires on a property of the plan, not of the code, so nothing in the
tier derivation could have said the port was the wrong first question.
Recorded honestly in both directions: the pass also made an interface
change with no review, which is the cost side. One favourable fire is
not a calibration; the window stays open to 2026-09-30.
Corrects a number this pass asserted: the T01 commit message says
'42 of 43, up from 24'. Measured by splicing the old renderer back in,
it is 41 of 42 with 1 declared omitted, up from 24 -- and 16 fields
were genuinely absent, not 17, because outcome.winners was rendered in
a different format. Both original figures were counted by hand.
CHAOS gains its first caught entry. Cheapest pass per response yet
recorded (0.094 vs a previous best of 0.123).
Renders the table after every step of a .cbreplay bundle or a scenario
YAML, from any seat's projection or a spectator's. This is the first
thing in the project that answers 'what did the table look like when it
went wrong?' without adding a dbg! and re-running.
INTERFACE CHANGE (flagged per InnerLoop chaos limits -- this is a
tier-S pass that touched a runtime crate): cb-game-runtime gains
replay::open, extracted out of replay::replay. Dev-only, behind the
scenarios feature, no type changed. The point of the extraction is that
the inspector and the replay gate share one bundle reader, controls
included, so the inspector cannot show a state a replay never reached.
Three M-D1-MUT controls, each red for its stated reason. The
load-bearing one asserts one rendered table per step: without it, a
walk that rendered nothing would still report a matching hash.
The renderer moves out of the play loop into inspect.rs and grows from
24 to 42 of the 43 leaf paths a populated GroundView carries. What it
had been dropping was the whole DARVO state machine, the whole GROUND
practice, the scoring mode, Focus tokens, the discard pile, per-seat
protection, and every part of the outcome except the headline.
The load-bearing half is every_view_field_is_classified, which walks
the serialized view for leaf paths and requires each to be listed as
rendered (with a token the output must contain) or omitted (with a
reason). Paths rather than keys: 'problem' occurs under a DARVO target,
a GROUND choice and a Selection, and a key-set walk would let one of
the three vouch for the other two.
Four M-D1-MUT controls, each red for its stated reason. The
unclassified-field control fired for real on the first run --
players.*.hand, a field the gate's own author had missed.
Provenance (tier S, structural L, chaos d4=4 -> S). First fire of the
chaos mechanism in six declarations. The structural trigger was L
(stage 1 creates a rendering port); the roll overrode it to S, which
has no ADR. Rather than lawyer the hard 'no code before ADR' gate in
either direction, the declaration is split: this packet takes the part
of stage 1 that creates no port and adds no dependency, and the port
half keeps its own declaration and its own roll.
AM-4a supports that ordering independently -- 3,750 lines of headroom
against a 250,000 target means any toolkit choice needs the survey the
roll just deleted.
Finding acted on: cb-play's render() drops ~a third of GroundView,
including the whole DARVO and GROUND-practice state.
Two passes have now had the opportunity to give this type a second
consumer and declined: CB-WP-0008's bots and CLI drive GROUND's inline
commit/reveal, and this pass reviewed it and changed nothing.
The date is not moved and the type is not deleted early. The stated
condition is a second game, and no second game has been attempted, so
the test has not run — only the opportunity has passed. Deleting on a
test that was never run and extending a date because it is inconvenient
are the same error in opposite directions.
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>
Both remaining tasks were overtaken and are cancelled with pointers. T05's
control loop was answered by CB-EV-0008 §1 and §4, which measured the
windowed metric and the budget firing on real passes. T06 asked whether
there is a fourth way a number can fail to bind; there is, and CB-EV-0007
§3 recorded it — the meta budget, aggregated over a window that could not
move it, two tasks after the same defect was fixed for session shape. The
tier-taxonomy gap T06 also carried was closed by ADR-0006 D5.
A workplan left in_progress makes `make status` name a stale next task,
which it had been doing for two passes.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Tier S (structural S; chaos d4=1, no override; declaration 5 of 12).
Three items carried out of the last two passes: CB-WP-0007 left at 2/6
with both remaining tasks overtaken, GR-E03 with no scenario at all, and
CommitWindow's second failed second-use. CB-EV-0008 §4 also says the next
pass should be product, and this is how the meta share comes back down.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
The windowed budget is confirmed for the failure it was written against
and not for the general claim: a single-pass window reads 0% for
CB-WP-0008 against 50% lifetime, but the trailing-3 window reads 45%
against 50%, inside the refutation band. The prediction was written
before the window size was chosen and did not say which comparison it
meant. Both readings are on record and whether 3 is the right window is
carried as open.
gate-review's first run: 9 gates, 0 due, 2 silent. The silent two are the
chaos roll and gate-review itself, both with dates. A registry where
everything looked productive would have been one written to look good.
D4 holds per pass, not per task: three of four tasks shipped a command,
and the two that did not are the spec change that makes the commands
normative and the evidence file that checks them.
Cost is the honest part. This pass cashed out three commands and ran at
$0.177/response — cheaper than every previous meta pass (0.228, 0.298,
0.362) and still 1.4x the product pass at 0.123. Partial support for D4,
not vindication. Context breached both shape targets because the pass ran
on an already-long session; reported, not gated.
Meta reads 45% of the trailing three against a soft 25%. Nothing was
displaced, but the number is over the line and the next pass should be
product.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
D2 the two exemptions — repairing the instrument that reports a breach
is always in budget, and the maintainer may authorize above-line work in
the workplan frontmatter. v1.5 had neither, and the first thing it did
was forbid fixing the budget's own defect.
D4 loop work cashes out into something runnable in the pass that invents
it, with the measured basis and the refutation condition stated.
D5 the tier table now triggers at M for changes to the loop's own
operation, closing the gap CB-RES-0005 §6 opened and this pass's own ADR
had to declare around.
The file went from 399 lines to 386: the chaos-roll calibration
rationale and the v1.0-v1.3 change log moved to InnerLoopReference.md.
Loadability is a gate too, and growing the file to fit a rule about
gates would have been the joke writing itself.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
ADR-0006 D3. Nine standing control gates now say what they check, what
they have caught with pointers, when their keep-or-kill argument is due,
and what would retire them. make gate-review reports what is overdue and
what has caught nothing; it never fails the build, for CB-RES-0005 §4's
reason.
Drift is checked in both directions and both are pinned by self-tests: a
dependency of `make all` that is neither a registered control gate nor
listed in not_control_gates is a loop-lint finding, so a new gate cannot
acquire permanence without a review date, and an entry naming a target
the Makefile lacks is a finding too.
First run: 0 due, 2 silent. The silent two are the chaos roll, whose
12-declaration window exists precisely to find out, and gate-review
itself, which is not exempt from its own rule — if it has retired,
tightened or forced the re-justification of nothing by 2026-12-31 it is
a ritual and goes.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
ADR-0006 D1. cb-cost gains pass_costs, which buckets responses into
workplan windows in a single read of the transcripts — calling collect()
once per boundary would re-read every transcript per window, and status
is supposed to stay cheap enough that nobody replaces it with ls.
make status now reports the share over a trailing three passes with the
per-pass breakdown, keeps the lifetime figure labelled NOT the metric,
and prints the D2 exemption so the next reader does not re-derive the
standoff where the budget blocked its own repair. One pass would be a
coin flip: a meta pass reads 100%, a product pass 0%. Three is the
smallest window where the ratio means something and still moves.
First reading: 36% over the last three passes against 49% lifetime,
with CB-WP-0008 at 0%.
The first run reported $0.00 for every window. Transcript stamps are
UTC Z and git prints a local offset, so the string comparison put every
response before the first boundary. Both the fix and a self-test for it
are in; reverting the conversion turns four checks red.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
CB-EV-0007 found three defects in how gates are designed rather than in
any one gate: the meta budget cannot see the pass it governs, it blocks
its own repair, and nothing retires any gate.
D1 budgets measure their own window. D2 a soft breach is a signal, and
repairing the instrument that reports a breach is always in budget — a
gate must never block its own remedy, which is the trap CB-RES-0005 §4
named for session shape and that got built anyway two tasks later. D3
every gate declares what would retire it and a date to argue it on. D4
loop work cashes out into something runnable in the pass that invents
it, from the measured finding that cost per response tracks distance
from a runnable check. D5 the tier table finally covers changes to the
loop's own operation — CB-RES-0005 §6 said a second instance should
trigger it, and this ADR is the second.
The workplan is meta and above the budget line on recorded maintainer
authorization, which is D2's first use.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
The DFD gate caught this, not review: adding scenarios in T03 left
gr_scenarios stale at 21 and `make all` went red on the next run. That
is the gate doing exactly its job, one pass after it was built.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Stage 0's ten items are met. Three qualifications are recorded rather
than hidden behind checkmarks: GR-E01's threshold is unreachable below
five seats with the placeholder fixture, GR-A13 admits a SOLVE that
resolves to nothing, and GR-E03 has no scenario at all — implemented,
unreferenced, and would not fail if deleted.
The second-consumer verdict INTENT was waiting for: every abstraction
with a consumer fits, and the one with none is still unused. Bots and
the CLI drove Aggregate, Project, parse_command and the replay bundles
unchanged. CommitWindow had its best chance at a second user and did not
get one; its delete-by date stands.
The retrospective answers with the curve: 0.123, 0.228, 0.362, 0.298,
0.123 dollars per response across the last five passes. Neither
"meta is expensive" nor "compaction did it" survives the data. What does:
cost per response tracks how far the work is from a runnable check. The
meta passes that shipped a command were cheap; the ones that argued about
what a number means were not.
The meta budget reads 61% OVER on a pass that is 100% product, because
it aggregates over every task ever closed — the same defect CB-RES-0005
found in SH-1/SH-2 and that CB-WP-0007 T01 fixed for session shape. Not
fixed here: v1.5 forbids opening meta work above the line, so the
budget's first real act was to stop me from improving the budget.
Also fixes a doc comment that claimed DARVO was unimplemented for weeks
after it shipped. facts-check gates duplicated numbers; nothing gates a
prose claim about code.
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>
A human seat is a Policy like any bot, so the CLI adds no second driver:
HumanPolicy renders the projection, lists the legal commands and reads an
index or `pass`. `make play` runs it; `--all-bots` watches one.
K13's Project trait gains its first implementor after six passes with
none. Hidden: other seats' face-down selections until Reveal, hands and
deck (counts only), a face-down Problem's suit and value, and the seed —
not secret content, but a seat holding it can compute the deck.
A played session becomes an artifact: --record writes it as a scenario
the runner executes, --replay writes a .cbreplay bundle. record.rs is the
inverse of parse_command and its warrant is a round-trip test over every
command shape.
The acceptance test for the projection passed vacuously twice. First it
asserted the text contained "face-down", which every render does because
of Problems. Counted, it then reported zero inspected entries: seats are
asked in order, so a human at P1 is prompted before anyone has selected.
Seated at P3 it inspects ten entries and dies when the projection is
mutated to reveal everything. Counting what the harness examined caught
both, which is the second time that remedy has worked where a stronger
predicate would not have.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
A Policy trait, a seeded random policy and a greedy one with a stated
heuristic, a legal-command generator that filters candidates through
validate, and a driver that runs a 3-player all-bot game to GameEnded.
Same-seed runs are hash-identical (K8), and a different policy seed
produces a different game — without that second assertion the first is
satisfied by a bot that ignores its RNG.
Every failure is loud, because the one a bot driver must not have is the
silent one: no legal move, passing where an action is required, an
out-of-range index (not clamped), a rejected command, and a stall guard.
What the second consumer found, none of it fixed here:
- GR-A13 admits SOLVE against an already-claimed Problem and resolution
then does nothing — the action is silently wasted. The policy avoids
it; the rule is left for a ruling.
- The 3-player standard fixture cannot reach GR-E01's threshold of 7:
three Problems valued 1,2,3 cap the total at 6. No scenario noticed
because none plays to scoring.
- K13's Project trait still has zero implementors. T02 is its first.
Mutation-checked by hand. The first mutation was a no-op and survived;
removing the Resolve call outright turned three tests red for the stated
reason. Third instance of the weak-mutation class.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
INTENT stage 0 lists CLI player and simple bots. Everything else on that
list exists: the engine is correct, measured and replayable, and nothing
can play it. Six passes and $236 in, GROUND has never been played end to
end by a human or a machine.
kind: product — the first pass under InnerLoop v1.5's soft 25% meta
budget, which should read comfortably under the line.
Worth more than stage 0: a bot is the kernel's first SECOND consumer.
INTENT says a concept becomes canonical only after surviving a second
concrete use, and every abstraction here has survived exactly one. A bot
driving the same aggregate through the same validate/fold path is the
cheapest second use available, and it is what would tell us whether
CommitWindow (provisional, delete-by 2026-12-31) and the LogStore port are
the right shapes.
T02 makes the per-player projection (K13) its first real consumer — the
rule is implemented and used by nothing. T03 tests the 2-6 player range
GR-O01 states, where every scenario in the corpus is 3-player: a rule
stated for a range and tested at one point is the shape this project keeps
finding, and discovering that 2p or 6p does not work is a legitimate
outcome rather than a reason to narrow the rule.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
T01 and T03 shipped in one commit, so CA-08 attributed both to T01 and
task-done refused to close T03 rather than invent a number. Same lesson as
CB-WP-0005 T07/T08: one commit, one task id. This commit gives T03 its
own bucket; its substantive work is inside T01's.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
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>
Tier M — structural S by the letter of InnerLoop's table (no capability
port, no canonical interface, no new dependency), declared M because the
table's triggers only cover code capabilities and this decides whether the
loop constrains its own operation. Chaos d4=2, no override. Survey and ADR
merged per tier M.
The gap is not the one CB-WP-0006 assumed. SH-1/2/3 ARE measured —
cb-cost emits all three every run. The defect is that SH-1 and SH-2 are
cumulative means over every response ever recorded, so they cannot detect
a worsening trend: the history outvotes the present.
cumulative -> dfd0d6d 923 resp mean 206,952 p90 389,733 9.6%
CB-WP-0006 alone 156 resp mean 503,464 p90 607,105 0.0%
Read cumulatively, session shape looks stable and improving. Read by
window, the last pass ran at 2.4x the mean of all preceding history and
batched nothing at all — 146 tool calls in 146 responses.
This is the third shape of one disease. CB-WP-0005 found numbers that were
unmeasured; CB-WP-0006 found numbers measured but unasserted; these are
measured AND asserted and still cannot fire, because they are aggregated
over a window in which nothing can move them.
Decisions: window SH-1/SH-2 and keep cumulative as labelled history;
enforce with a live budget modelled on CB-01/CB-02, NOT `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; targets do not move, since all
three are unmet by wide margins and adjusting them in the pass that first
enforces them is the retarget §Step 4 forbids; and SH-3 is tested by
batching deliberately rather than by argument.
Recorded and not fixed: InnerLoop's tier table triggers on code
properties, so this pass would be tier S despite deciding how the loop
governs itself. Changing the taxonomy on one instance is the
invention-in-isolation INTENT warns against — the same argument used to
amend K14 and to leave v1.4 alone. A second instance should trigger it.
CB-WP-0007 executes in 6 tasks. T04's third outcome is the interesting
one: if batching stays below 5% despite trying, 20% is the number to
challenge with evidence, in an ADR rather than a quiet edit.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
The question was whether M-D1-MUT is a real instrument or a name-counter
with extra steps, given that writing a weak mutation is as easy as writing
a strong one.
It is real, but only because it was hardened three times in one pass. Five
controls now stand between a mutation and a red verdict — the mutation
must apply, the baseline must be green, the tree must be restored and
verified, the failure must match a stated reason, and that stated reason
must be absent from passing output — and every one of them exists because
its failure actually occurred. The last is the sharpest: the FA guard
needed a guard, because my first AM-2 expect was "AM-2", which the passing
report contains.
Generalizable: an instrument that measures whether other instruments work
needs more controls than the instruments it measures. M-D1-MUT carries
five; dep-weight and rule-coverage carry one each. That asymmetry is the
cost of a meta-instrument, and a project adding one should budget for it.
A worse failure mode than CB-WP-0005 predicted: a mutation can become weak
without anyone touching it. AM-6's went SURVIVED when T04 moved its gate
from debug to release — nothing about the row, the mutation or the code
changed, only the headroom. Mutation strength is coupled to measurement
conditions, so a mutation is not a write-once artifact. CB-WP-0005 T08's
stronger remedy — mutations written by someone other than the author — was
NOT tested and should not be assumed unnecessary: EXPECT-VACUOUS covers
the cheap failure, not the expensive one AM-6 demonstrated.
The "removes the manual path" test is settled as a predictor of cost, not
of worth. mutation-check fails it outright and produced six defects
nothing else would have found.
Prediction error collapsed: 4-5x, then 2.5x, now small — because this pass
predicted per task, as a mechanism, with the alternative named. Both
branches are outcomes someone must defend, so the prediction cannot be
dodged. AM-3 and AM-4c took the second branch and are better resolved for
it than if a number had been forced.
No InnerLoop change. v1.4's mutation requirement is one pass old and
changing it before a second use would be the invention-in-isolation INTENT
warns about — the same argument used to amend K14 four hours earlier.
Named next candidate: specs/SessionShape.md. SS-01..SS-05 have been stated
since CB-WP-0003 and none has ever been enforced. This pass ran at 2.5x
the context ceiling its own spec sets and nothing said a word.
CB-WP-0006 status -> done, 9/9.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Test 1: the enforced count rose. AM-2, AM-6, AM-9 and AM-11 moved from
unmutatable to red; AM-7's hash clause was re-earned so it is 2/3 rather
than 1/3. Kernel spec->code link 15/18 -> 18/18, names only.
Both denominators are stated. 8 of 14 is 57%, but four rows cannot be
enforced — AM-3 blocked on an artifact, AM-4c withdrawn, AM-5 declared
ungated by the spec, AM-10 withdrawn — so it is 8 of 10 enforceable. The
14 stays the headline and AM-4c stays in it on purpose: a score improved
by deleting the question is not an improvement.
Test 2: one row regressed and was caught. Moving AM-6's gate from debug to
release turned its mutation SURVIVED, because 4,000 black_box iterations
were calibrated against debug's 3.4x headroom and are invisible against
release's 20x. The generalizable finding is that a weak mutation is not a
fixed property of a row — it can become weak when the row's measurement
conditions change, without the row, the mutation or the code being
touched. Final SURVIVED count: 0.
Test 3 is now mechanical rather than asserted. mutation-check gained an
EXPECT-VACUOUS verdict: if a row's expect string appears in PASSING
output, the FA guard would accept any failure at all, so the row is
reported broken rather than red. Final run: 0 vacuous expects across 14
rows. The control exists because the failure happened — my first expect
for AM-2 was "AM-2", which appears in the passing report and would have
accepted a compile error as proof of enforcement.
The cost result is a refutation, not a win. Mechanical share rose to 50%,
the highest ever recorded and above the 38% baseline that motivated
CB-WP-0004. That is not a tooling regression: environment setup and task
closes are still at zero two passes on. It is the other half of CB-WP-0004
T06's finding arriving in force — text patching (45 turns, $13.79) and
orientation (19 turns, $10.97) never had their manual path removed, and a
code-heavy pass is exactly where that spends.
Mean context 493,486 against a 200,000 target, up from 315,170. SessionShape
has stated SS-01..SS-05 since CB-WP-0003 and none has ever been enforced —
the only acceptance-adjacent numbers in this project with no gate at all,
in a pass whose entire subject was ungated numbers.
Numbering corrected: the workplan said CB-EV-0004, which CB-WP-0005
already used. This is CB-EV-0005.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Two rules, two different answers, which is the point of a task phrased
"implement, or amend and say why".
K18 is implemented. "Criterion benches driving the same scenario format at
scale" was false — the bench hardcoded its commands and never touched
ScenarioFile, while MetricsAndScenarios §3 pointed at a benchmarks/
directory containing only baselines/. benchmarks/synthetic-3p.yaml now
holds the workload and both the bench and bench_shape read it: the
workload is data, not code.
A second defect surfaced while fixing the first. After the bench switched
to the file, bench_shape still hardcoded the same sequence, so the
workload existed twice — deleting end_round from the YAML broke bench-test
while bench_shape kept passing. Duplicated-fact drift in executable form.
Both now read the same include_str! and deleting a command breaks both.
Explicitly not claimed: this does not unblock AM-3. AM-3's baseline is a
declarative game object — moves, turn order, rules. synthetic-3p.yaml is a
command list; the rules live in games/ground. Marking it as AM-3's subject
would compare a script to a game definition, which is the category error
AM-3 is blocked on. The file says so in its own header, where the next
person will be tempted.
K14 is amended. CommitWindow had zero non-test users and GROUND enforces
the same contract inline. Wiring GROUND through it was rejected: it would
change the serialized shape of `selections`, which four scenario files
assert by dot-path and every state hash depends on, for the sole benefit
of making a sentence literally true.
The deciding argument is INTENT's, not convenience: abstractions are
extracted from working games rather than invented in isolation, and no
concept becomes canonical until it survives a second concrete use.
CommitWindow was invented before any game needed it and has survived none.
Imposing it on GROUND would manufacture the first use rather than discover
it. So K14 states what is actually guaranteed, CommitWindow is marked
provisional in the source, and it carries a delete-by date of 2026-12-31.
Kernel spec->code link 16/18 -> 18/18, stated with the caveat the gate
prints every run: that is about names, not assertions.
Two self-tests broke and both broke correctly. rule-coverage's gate test
hardcoded "unlinked rules exist today" and failed when the last one was
linked; it now computes that and asserts the gate fails iff rules are
unlinked. facts' text check rejected k_unlinked once it became
legitimately empty; empty now renders as "(none)" and the check
distinguishes absent from empty.
M-D1-MUT: 8 of 14, unchanged — K14 and K18 are kernel rules, not
acceptance rows.
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>
K11 is implemented: crates/cb-events/src/store.rs, magic + version header,
4-byte little-endian length prefix, append-only. Reimplemented not
assimilated per ADR-0005 §2 — no new dependency, and AM-4a/AM-4b are
unchanged at 246,250 / 317,021 because nothing entered the graph.
The operative clause is "detected", so corruption is tested rather than
assumed: a tail short by one byte, a half-written length prefix, a length
prefix corrupted to claim more than the file holds, foreign magic, and a
future format version are each rejected with a distinct error. A reader
that accepts a truncated tail is worse than no format, because it silently
returns a short history that looks complete.
AM-11 is earned. LogStore has two impls — MemLogStore and FileLogStore —
driven through ONE conformance(). The trait carries raw/set_raw precisely
so the corruption controls live in the shared suite: a format contract
that only one impl enforces is not a contract. The same shape is
retro-fitted to KernelRng, which is what AM-11 actually names: ChaChaRng
and NullRng now pass one suite asserting bounds, draw(1) == 0, determinism
across fresh instances, and shuffle preserving the multiset. They were
previously exercised by two separate tests, which is why "met, narrow" was
never earned and ADR-0005 §4 downgraded it.
K9 gets the assertion it did not have: snapshot at seq N + events N+1..M
must equal the from-genesis fold, hash-compared, on GroundState,
single-seed on purpose — AM-7's probe folds a multi-seed log, which is not
a replay of anything, and that defect is not repeated. Two positive
controls: the log must exceed 50 events, and the mid-log snapshot must
differ from the end state or "apply the remainder" is vacuous.
Proof it works: the exact mutation that SURVIVED in CB-WP-0005 — making
Snapshot::take discard its EventSeq — now fails on the K9 assertion.
AM-11's mutation breaks NullRng::draw to return its bound and the shared
suite fails. That is what M-D4-SWAP claims — either impl substitutable —
and exactly what two separate per-impl tests could never demonstrate.
M-D1-MUT: 7 -> 8 of 14. CB-EV-0001's scoreboard is refreshed: AM-2, AM-5
and AM-9 added, AM-6 moved to enforced, and the headline total corrected
from 4 to 8 — it had gone stale inside the same workplan that produced it.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
T03 reported AM-5 at 87.0 s / 61.3 s and called it a 45% breach of the
60 s target. Re-measured with the fixed instrument on a quiet machine:
load before measuring: 0.14 per CPU over 8 CPUs — quiet
dev toolchain (default features) 37.3 s [ok target <= 60 s]
best of 3: 37.3, 42.9, 46.2 (spread 1.24x)
shipped runtime (--no-default-features) 41.2 s [ok target <= 60 s]
best of 3: 41.2, 50.8, 54.2 (spread 1.32x)
AM-5 is MET with 1.6x headroom. The 87.0 s was measured while the machine
was busy with mutation-check and cargo builds — a timing measurement under
contention measures the contention.
That is the same error class as AM-6's, committed two tasks later in the
same session by the same author, in the row immediately after the one
where it was diagnosed. Knowing the failure mode did not prevent it; only
building the guard did. That is the InnerLoop v1.2 design-goal argument
holding up under a third instance: optimize for cheap correction, because
prevention keeps not converging.
The instrument now refuses to measure above 0.5 load per CPU, takes the
best of 3, and warns when the spread exceeds 1.25x. Best, not worst: a
build-time ceiling asks whether the machine can do it in 60 s, the mirror
of AM-6's best-of-N for a throughput floor. The spread warning fired on
the shipped-runtime samples — consecutive clean builds degrade 37.3 ->
46.2 — so a quiet machine is not a uniform one either.
The escalation to a maintainer decision is withdrawn: there is no breach.
The build profiling done while the breach was believed real is recorded in
the log rather than acted on — 174 s of CPU work at only 3.2x parallelism
on 8 cores, a ~22 s serial proc-macro chain, lto=thin worth ~6 s, and
pinning ppv-lite86 to drop zerocopy making it worse (23 -> 25 crates).
With 1.6x headroom there is nothing to buy.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
loop-lint failed at 427 lines. Third workplan in this project to cross the
~400-line loadability limit, which makes it structural rather than a
formatting nuisance: delivery notes accumulate in a file whose job is to
state intent, and every remaining task would push it further over.
history/260801-cb-wp-0006-log.md now holds the per-task narrative; the
workplan keeps a one-line pointer per task. 427 -> 270 lines, with room
for T05-T09. T08 draws on both.
Same fix shape as CB-WP-0005, where the limit exposed a circular reference
rather than mere length. A gate that keeps finding real structure is worth
more than its stated rule.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
AM-4c is withdrawn from the acceptance table and retained as a reported
diagnostic. GameKernel §5a carries the argument.
The ratio has no monotone better direction. INTENT's rule is "own the
semantics, assimilate the implementation": rising can mean owning
semantics properly or reimplementing what should have been assimilated;
falling can mean leverage or dependency bloat. A target requires knowing
which way is better. It is also redundant — AM-4a/AM-4b bound the
denominator and AM-2 bounds own-source density, so AM-4c is a ratio of two
already-targeted quantities.
Measured at withdrawal: 1,426 own lines per 100k third-party (shipped),
1,107 (dev). make dep-weight now prints both, labelled diagnostic — the
row was never actually reported before.
M-D1-MUT keeps AM-4c in its denominator on purpose and says so in the
output. Dropping it would move the score 7/14 -> 7/13 without enforcing
anything: a score improved by deleting the question.
Decided before Phase B deliberately, since ADR-0005 predicts own-source
growth that will move this ratio; deciding after would be the retarget
§Step 4 forbids.
A T01 correction found here. The AM-6 gate failed inside `make all` at
38,753 ev/s against 341,280 in isolation — a 9x drop, because cargo test
runs binaries and threads concurrently. A throughput assertion inside a
parallel harness measures contention, not throughput. T01's measurement
was valid; its gate placement was not.
Fixed by running it only where valid — #[ignore] plus `make am6` in
release with --test-threads=1, now 2.0M ev/s at 20.2x headroom — and not
by lowering the target, which T01 forbade. My first attempt did drift that
way, adding a debug "sanity floor" of 50,000, and was backed out: a second
threshold is still a second chance to tune.
The mutation then went SURVIVED on the first run after the move. 4,000
black_box iterations were calibrated against debug's 3.4x headroom and are
invisible against release's 20x. Raised to 100,000; back to red. A weak
mutation is not a fixed property of a row — it can become weak when the
row's measurement conditions change.
Tier S (amends one row, creates no capability), chaos d4=2, no override.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
