tegwick
3090935aac
Some checks failed
ci / check (push) Failing after 4s
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> |
||
|---|---|---|
| .. | ||
| ADR-0002-game-kernel.md | ||
| ADR-0003-cost-accounting.md | ||
| ADR-0004-am4-ratification.md | ||
| ADR-0005-assertion-coverage-and-replay.md | ||
| ADR-0006-adaptive-control-gates.md | ||