The standard moved v0.1 -> v0.4 after our assent. Reviewed; assent stands
unchanged. §9.1/§9.2/§9.3 adopt the KG-DEC-2026-001 finding and generalise
it estate-wide, and §12 now states that an unsatisfiability finding is a
success of the conformance loop.
Docs repointed at v0.4 (INTENT, SCOPE, AdjacentSystemBoundary, the
architecture spec note). KG-DEC-2026-001 still cites v0.1 deliberately —
it records what was assented to at the time.
INTENT gap table reshaped to §5.3's field names (capability,
intended_owner, blocked_on, review) so one register can hold both kinds,
with review dates set to 2026-11-28, and marked explicitly as unowned
capabilities rather than §5.3 declared contacts — kings-guard makes no
Tooling contact and is Conforming under §11.
Four findings sent to gate-house: §9.1 not carried through to the
observation claim; §13 conflating declared contacts with unowned
capabilities ahead of the maturity-engine migration; §9.6's unstated
consequence for posture (suppression biases posture optimistic and our
confidence score cannot express the doubt); and disclosure that §12's
fourth step is unstaffed while the pilot remains fixture-only.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01UEtvmYUBP2fDtirJGWn5MW
Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 4014379@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: 4af9e20f-1768-4afc-951b-b507784e382b
tegwick
d99f395aa1