From the independent assessment of 2026-08-29, which found the model sound as a
layering constitution and incomplete as a self-healing one: cognition,
authority, and execution are specified, but the two verbs that close a healing
loop — observe in production, actuate through a deterministic surface — are
pending, and one is unstaffed.
Section numbers below §14 are unchanged; the estate cites them.
- §3.3 types the Engine layer: PDP, PIP, Evidence, Lifecycle, with a role column
in §4. Collapsing them hid different failure modes — a PIP outage is input
degradation, a PDP outage is consumer residue, an evidence-plane outage must
not block the operation it records. A new engine is a PIP unless amended.
- §6.4 names the enforcement point. The standard was precise about the decision
and silent about the gate, so enforcement lived in Staff runbooks. Four
obligations: no side effect without a decision record, no local recaching of
the verdict, a declared unreachable-engine stance, reconstructability.
- §9.2 replaced. Containment was marked pending against kings-guard, the right
mark on the wrong repository: reduce, step-up, and isolate are
authority-changing operations, so they are rendered by an Engine and enforced
by a PEP. Actuation is an unowned Engine concept held at zero. Staff proposes
containment and never performs it.
- §3.4 separates human and agent principals inside Staff — same permissions,
different blast radius. No standing credential, conduit or engine API only,
agent memory is not a state plane, every action reconstructable as the
caller's.
- §9.7 puts time into the model: explicit lifetimes, revocation visibility
deadlines, consumption as a state change never inferred from a decision
record, and the three race modes named. §9.8 states what holds under
partition.
- §17 requires the Taxonomy artifacts — claim, decision-record, gap-record, and
emission-cadence schemas — without which §6.2 and §11 are reviewable but not
compileable. Ownership proposed, not assigned.
- §18 composes the sibling standards, which had been cited in frontmatter and
nowhere in the rules.
- §5 sunsets the uncatalogued-infrastructure carve-out. §5.3 declines a proposed
fourth "operator of third-party Tooling" shape: it would convert a tracked gap
into a permanent allowance, which is the relabelling failure this standard
exists to prevent.
- §10 gains the six artifacts a layer change must carry, written from the
zone-engine case, including a permission freeze during the cut.
- §2 lifts the observation rule so it cannot be lost in a summary. §13 separates
its three normative rules from the table, now a snapshot due to move into
maturity-engine. §16 decides the approval custody question: no. §19 records
the fitness verdict.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 2564823@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: 2a7ed827-4928-4b9f-8613-9135c9cadfe9
All four reviewing repositories returned findings on v0.4 and one contested a
rule. Every change below came from a reviewer, not from gate-house.
- §9.1 split into `pending` (no route, capability zero) and `declared-gap`
(route exists under §5.3, capability works). v0.4's single mark would have
forced a false "pending" onto ops-warden's production SSH issuance —
the fix was worse than the defect, and the defect was in this section.
- §9.3 rewritten. flex-auth contested it and was right: it collapsed "engine
reachable but degraded" with "engine unreachable", and the second has no
evaluator in the path to express anything. Input degradation is the engine's;
unreachability is the consumer's, bounded by a declared auditable total
stance — which ops-warden ADR-0009 already satisfies. v0.4 had ruled against
shipped behaviour in a repository that assented to it.
- §5 scoped: "Tooling-layer system" means a §4 Tooling row. Without this every
Staff repository was in undeclared violation for writing progress events.
- §9.4 requires the outbox to be local — no synchronous audit-core dependency
inside the state-change transaction, so an audit outage cannot block a
revocation.
- §9.5 forbids compiling maturity levels into registry content while decision
provenance carries no registry-snapshot digest.
- §9.6 gained load-bearing versus attributive evidence, the mirror rule that
absence is not evidence of non-occurrence, and kings-guard's finding that
suppression biases posture optimistic and silently.
- §11 gained a fourth state: blocked-clean, which MUST NOT rank below
conforming. A repository that declined a break-glass path and left a
capability at zero complied at cost; one that quietly opened a client and
declared nothing did not.
- §11 gained a machine-readable declaration form; ops-warden's layer.yaml is
the reference implementation.
- §13 gained state and owner-status columns; access-engine's decline of
authentication evidence is recorded.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 2564823@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: 2a7ed827-4928-4b9f-8613-9135c9cadfe9
