spec: ADR-0112 error envelope gains an explicit producer-side refusal declaration so a deliberate 5xx refusal can keep its caller-authored message (spec half of #16146)

Spec half of #16146, split by director ruling (decision batch #58, 2026-09-06, option C — the refusal/fault distinction is a producer-side declaration on the published envelope, not a status heuristic and not a second allow-list).

Why

declaredServerFaultAnswer (packages/rest/src/error-response.ts) withholds the message of every error that declares status >= 500. declaresServerFault (packages/types/src/error-leak.ts) is status >= 500 && code — a deliberate refusal such as the /references 501 written under ADR-0110 D3 also satisfies it, so switching the gate to declaresServerFault (the reframing in triage comment 5556832849) withholds exactly the same messages. Nothing on the wire today lets a producer say "this 5xx is a refusal whose prose is for the caller". PR #16143 patched one route locally; #16146 shows the class recurs on every gate.

Scope

Add one optional field to the ADR-0112 error envelope schema (name to be settled in the PR, e.g. disclose: true or refusal: true) meaning: the producer authored this message for the caller; boundaries keep it verbatim.
Default stays the /analytics/query 仍把 RLS 策略字段名回显给调用方 —— read-scope 拒收的泄漏在姐妹面上没堵,#5367 只堵了 dataset 路由 #5811 / fix(service-analytics,rest): analytics dimension 的源字段闸门 —— 不存在的 dimension 答 400 INVALID_FIELD,dataset 500 不再回显 SQL (#5520) #5667 behaviour: an undeclared or fault-declared 5xx has its detail withheld from the body and logged for the operator.
Document, in the envelope's TSDoc, the three cases side by side: undeclared 5xx (heuristic), declared fault (withheld), declared refusal (kept).
No allow-list, no second table — one field on the one published envelope.

Consumer half

#16146 (relay change in error-response.ts, retire the route-local patch from #16143) is pm:blocked on this card. #14656's logging question is expected to fall out of the same field.

Acceptance

envelope schema declares the field with a stable TSDoc
api-surface baseline regenerated
changeset present

Pre-dispatch contract reading, taken at `CONTRACT_REVIEW_TIER` — the card's central premise is qualified, not clean

domain:spec seat, session_01MkQhmuuJAVDjmeWNixwDDH, 2026-09-09T04:3xZ. Produced by a read-only subagent dispatched with an explicit model, tier verified by fuse rather than by self-report: 110 harness-stamped "model":"claude-fable-5-1" in its transcript, zero other values. ⛔ Nothing was written to the tree or to this card's state by that run. Measured against origin/main c0e4bc74.

⭐⭐ The finding that must reach whoever takes this card

The card's Why section says, verbatim: "Nothing on the wire today lets a producer say 'this 5xx is a refusal whose prose is for the caller'." That is not clean.

ApiErrorSchema.userMessage (packages/spec/src/api/contract.zod.ts:50-95) is already a producer-side, status-agnostic opt-in — its own TSDoc says "Presence IS the marking" (:71) and "Status-agnostic" (:75).
packages/rest/src/error-response.ts:646-677 (withDeclaredUserMessage) rides it onto "even the sanitised fault terminals", and the flat 5xx arm at :2111-2122 carries userMessage through while error stays INTERNAL_ERROR_MESSAGE.

⇒ A producer can already put caller-authored prose on a 5xx body today — in userMessage, never in message (:85-86: "never replaces message"). The gap this card closes is narrower than the body states: it is about message disclosure, not about whether any caller-authored prose can reach a 5xx.

⭐⭐ And the card's example spelling was explicitly rejected once already, in the same file

contract.zod.ts:77-83 is the #9934 design note recording why "a boolean beside message" was refused. The card's own examples are disclose: true / refusal: true — that shape.

⛔ This does not reopen the ruling: director batch #58 (2026-09-06, option C, maintainer 「同意」) settled that the distinction is a producer-side declaration on the published envelope, and it is not in question. But the PR must reconcile with :77-83 in its TSDoc, not walk past it. The reconciliation that appears available from the tree: the flag marks the producer's own authored message at throw time, declaredServerFaultAnswer reads it before any rewrap, and withhold stays the default — so a boundary that rewraps message cannot promote platform prose into the marked channel. ⚠️ If that reconciliation does not survive contact with the code, stop and report a fork — do not ship a field whose own file argues against its shape.

Clause-②: `yes`, and it is mechanically forced

The new key lands on ApiErrorSchema (a non-strict z.object), so the parse accept set does not move — the direction rests on the published-surface limb of SKILL.md:514, plus contract-review.md's floor 「已发布载荷上的新键恒 yes」. Mechanically: scripts/pm/check-widening-tells.mjs:629 fires T1 on any added key: z.… line under packages/spec/src/** (verdict :768), so a no claim could not pass check-clause2-carriers --pair regardless.

Premise check on `c0e4bc74` — holds, with line drift

card / triage citation	current
`declaredServerFaultAnswer`	`packages/rest/src/error-response.ts:574-588`; gate `declaredHttpStatus(error) >= 500` at `:577-578`; docblock `:565-572` states the gate is not `declaresServerFault`
`declaresServerFault`	`packages/types/src/error-leak.ts:289-293`; the card's paraphrase `status >= 500 && code` holds
the live caller	now `error-response.ts:583` — triage's 2026-09-06 citation of `:577` has drifted +3

Which schema is "the" envelope: ADR-0112 :34 names contract.zod.ts#ApiErrorSchema as the enforced one; EnhancedApiErrorSchema (errors.zod.ts:372) also carries userMessage (:385) — #9934 amended both, so the dev decides one or two and says why.

⚠️ One acceptance item on this card is a zero-diff step

packages/spec/api-surface/api.json records exports as name (kind) only, so adding a member moves nothing there — ApiError (type) / ApiErrorParsed / ApiErrorSchema (const) at :58-60 stay byte-identical. The ratchet that actually moves is authorable-surface/api.json (a new row beside api/ApiError:userMessage at :140), which is not in the package's files[]. ⇒ ticking "api-surface baseline regenerated" green proves nothing here. Also: check:api-surface reads built dist/*.d.ts, so a stale dist yields a false "removed" report.

NOT MEASURED, stated rather than glossed: the emitted packages/spec/json-schema/api/ApiError.json (gitignored, but shipped via files[]) — that needs a build; and which ADR-0087 changeset disposition marker an additive key takes.

Serial: clean

All 17 open PRs enumerated at ~04:20Z: none touches contract.zod.ts, errors.zod.ts, error-leak.ts or error-response.ts. Only adjacency is PR #16783 regenerating content/docs/references/api/contract.mdx — a generated file, so scripts/pm/os-regen-merge.sh applies at merge. #16146 (the consumer half) is pm:blocked waiting on this card.

Size read: S–M, one optional key plus TSDoc, pins in contract.test.ts/errors.test.ts, @objectstack/spec minor. No per-family split.

Generated by Claude Code

Claim: PM loop round 1 — first card taken under the maintainer's standing instruction 「后续优先派 fable卡」
Session: session_01MkQhmuuJAVDjmeWNixwDDH
Branch: claude/issue-16335-adr-0112-refusal-declaration
Worktree: objectstack-issue-16335
Domain: domain:spec
File surface: packages/spec/src/api/contract.zod.ts (ApiErrorSchema) and, if the dev's own reading says both envelopes move, packages/spec/src/api/errors.zod.ts (EnhancedApiErrorSchema); their tests; the regenerated packages/spec/authorable-surface/api.json and content/docs/references/api/contract.mdx; .changeset/*.md. ⛔ Not packages/rest/** and ⛔ not packages/types/** — the consumer half is #16146 (stop on breach; explain in the report)
Container & model: S–M, mode:subagent, model: claude-fable-5-1 (CONTRACT_REVIEW_TIER) — taken at the ceiling by per-card judgment, not as a new default: this card settles the shape and name of a new field on a published error envelope, which SKILL.md:508 puts in the ceiling tier's class, and the maintainer's standing instruction prioritises fable cards. --tier at e4fd55d9: no path-derived mandate, "Clause ② SUSPECT surface" printed for both contract.zod.ts and errors.zod.ts. ⚠️ That run also printed STALE TREE — at least 19 commit(s) behind origin/main; the tier answer is path-glob-derived and unaffected, but the gate-family list from this shared checkout is not, so the dev derives its own in its own worktree
Clause-②: yes
Thread-read: 5595839147
Serial constraints cleared: 15 open PRs had their file lists read at 05:31Z. None touches api/contract.zod.ts, api/errors.zod.ts, types/src/error-leak.ts, rest/src/error-response.ts or authorable-surface/api.json. One adjacency, and the probe fired on it so the zero is a reading: PR #16783 regenerates content/docs/references/api/contract.mdx — a generated file, so bash scripts/pm/os-regen-merge.sh applies at merge rather than a hand-resolved conflict. #16146, the consumer half, is pm:blocked waiting on this card, so nothing downstream can race it.

⚠️ The at-tier pre-dispatch reading on this card (comment 5595839147) found the card body's central premise qualified rather than clean, and the dispatch order carries that as a hard constraint: ApiErrorSchema.userMessage is already a producer-side status-agnostic opt-in, and contract.zod.ts:77-83 records why "a boolean beside message" was refused once — which is the shape this card's own examples propose. ⛔ The ruling (batch #58, option C) is not reopened; the PR must reconcile with that design note rather than walk past it, and report a fork if it cannot.

Generated by Claude Code

Dispatch held on lock depth — the claim above stands, ⛔ the slot is not released. domain:spec seat, session_01MkQhmuuJAVDjmeWNixwDDH.

bash scripts/pm/os-verify-lock.sh --status readings, both this minute:

time	holder	`queue N:` lines	arrival depth
05:30Z	`@objectstack/spec test`, held 23s	0	1 — below threshold, so the atomic claim pair was written
05:31Z	same	1	2 — at `LOCK_DEPTH_HOLD`, so the dev is not dispatched

⇒ The window closed between the claim and the dispatch. Waiting rather than dispatching into depth 2 (the depth table puts exit-99 at 23% there). ⛔ Waiting does not fill a slot and does not release this claim; the actual dispatch time is recorded here when a reading comes back below the threshold.

⚠️ Context for whoever reads this later: four sibling devs share this container's single heavy-verify lock, and the lock ledger over the previous 1h14m measured a median 294s acquisition wait, p90 540s, and four queue-timeout outcomes — runs the ledger itself marks NOT MEASURED because no gate was decided by them. The dev slot for this card is free; what is not free is the verification capacity to run it honestly.

Generated by Claude Code

Hold released — dev dispatched 2026-09-09T05:41Z at claude-fable-5-1. domain:spec seat, session_01MkQhmuuJAVDjmeWNixwDDH, claim 5596331879 unchanged.

Lock re-read immediately before the dispatch: queue: empty ⇒ arrival depth 1, below LOCK_DEPTH_HOLD. The hold recorded at 05:31Z lasted ten minutes across two windows that closed before the dispatch could take them; the third held.

The dispatch order carries the at-tier pre-reading (5595839147) as its measurement zone, so the dev does not re-derive it from scratch — in particular the two findings that change how this card must be built:

the card's premise that nothing today lets a producer put caller-authored prose on a 5xx is qualified — userMessage already does, in a different channel, so the real gap is message disclosure;
contract.zod.ts:77-83 records that "a boolean beside message" was refused once, which is the shape this card's examples propose — the PR reconciles with that note or reports a fork; ⛔ it does not walk past it.

⚠️ One carry-forward from a sibling PR that went red this hour: the dispatch requires a line-start Clause-②: yes in the PR body and a changeset at the minor floor, because Check Changeset cross-checks the declaration against the graded level and fails when they disagree inside one PR. That failure cost PR #17060 two red runs today, and the cause was a stale conservative declaration rather than anything in its diff.

Generated by Claude Code

os-dev-report

{
  "issue": 16335,
  "status": "done",
  "branch": "claude/issue-16335-adr-0112-refusal-declaration",
  "pr": "https://github.com/objectstack-ai/objectstack/pull/17090",
  "premise_still_valid": true,
  "summary": "Added one optional key, `refusal: z.literal(true).optional()`, to `ApiErrorSchema` (contract.zod.ts) and to `EnhancedApiErrorSchema` (errors.zod.ts, TSDoc pointing at the base, the #9934 `userMessage` pattern), meaning: the producer declares the 5xx it named is a deliberate refusal whose `message` is authored for the caller, so the boundary keeps it verbatim; absent (the default) keeps the #5811/#5667 withhold; `true` is the only value because the ruling on #16146 (comment 5559950291) makes PRESENCE the declaration and a fault already has its own spelling (status + code). The TSDoc documents the three cases side by side (undeclared 5xx: heuristic; declared fault: withheld; declared refusal: kept) with `userMessage` placed as orthogonal, and reconciles the flag with contract.zod.ts:77-83 on three measured grounds: it qualifies the STATUS declaration (as `code` qualifies `status` for `declaresServerFault`), its only consumer is the withhold itself reading status, code and flag off one thrown object in one read, and a rewrap is fail-closed (a new Error drops the flag; the QuickJS door's SANDBOX_ERROR_PASSTHROUGH list at quickjs-runner.ts:1250 is closed and excludes it; a survey of Object.assign error sites under packages/**/src finds 10, none copying a caught error's fields onto a rewrapped message). Premise re-derived as QUALIFIED, as the pre-reading said: `userMessage` already carries caller-authored prose onto a 5xx body, so the gap declared against is `message` disclosure only. No allow-list, no second table; packages/rest and packages/types untouched; the relay half stays #16146 and until it lands a declared refusal is still withheld at the wire (stated in the TSDoc and the changeset). Both envelopes rather than one because `ErrorResponseSchema` nests `EnhancedApiErrorSchema`, so `error.refusal` is one key at one wire position described by two schemas. Which artifacts move, measured: `authorable-surface/api.json` +2 key-name rows; 11 `content/docs/references/api/*.mdx`; the gitignored-but-shipped `json-schema/api/ApiError.json` and `EnhancedApiError.json` carry the grammar (`refusal: {type: boolean, const: true}`, positive control `userMessage` 1/1); `api-surface/api.json` and `json-schema.manifest/api.json` are byte-identical by construction (names only); the liveness ledger is the `api` metadata type's and owes no row. ADR-0087: measured in check-adr-0087-registration.mjs `breakingDeclaration`, a marker is owed only by a declared-breaking changeset (major, **BREAKING, or a `!` summary) so this additive `minor` changeset carries none. origin/main merged once via os-regen-merge.sh (contract.mdx was moved by both sides; re-derived at the collection point, main's #16783 content present).",
  "tests": "Final head ba3d95a4 (origin/main 854639b3 merged). Tests: `pnpm --filter @objectstack/spec exec vitest run --project local --maxWorkers=2 src/api/contract.test.ts src/api/errors.test.ts` = `Test Files 2 passed (2) | Tests 93 passed (93)`, wrapper line `VERDICT command-exit 0` (tests import ./contract.zod and ./errors.zod relatively, so vitest reads source; no dist on the path). Ablation, one lock hold on the committed fix: leg A 93/93; mutation deleted the `refusal: z.literal(true)` block from both schemas, on-disk proof marker count 1 1 to 0 0; leg B `6 failed | 87 passed` = exactly the six refusal pins (contract.test.ts x5, errors.test.ts x1; the absent-by-default pin stays green as predicted); restore `git checkout HEAD -- PATH` proven by git hash-object equal to non-empty HEAD blobs e232f949 and b07422ee, `git diff HEAD` empty, `git status --porcelain` empty; leg C 93/93; direction observed: red. Typecheck: `pnpm --filter @objectstack/spec typecheck` exit 0 (tsc + scripts tsconfig + check:test-typecheck over the test files). Build on the merged head: `VERDICT command-exit 0` (held 180s); `check:generated`: `All 15 generated artifacts are up to date`. Gates: `dispatch-gates.mjs --commands --repo objectstack-ai/objectstack` at ba3d95a4 derived 102 commands (identical to the pre-merge derivation); all 102 run, exits redirected to disk before reading, recorded byte-for-byte; reconcile `dispatch-gates --ran: 102 derived famil(ies) accounted for, 99 run, 3 NOT-MEASURED` exit 0. 95 green on the spec build; 4 refused on unbuilt sibling closures and re-ran green after `turbo run build --filter='@objectstack/lint...' --filter='@objectstack/client-react...'` (34 tasks, VERDICT 0): check:doc-formula-expressions (`9 @example(s) judged clean across 1314 packages/spec/src files`), check:doc-security-posture (`27 ObjectSchema.create example(s) ... validate-clean`), check:skill-examples (`258 prose examples type-check across 3 surface(s)`), check:docs-transcript-drift (`4 declared transcript value(s) ... equal what the registry derives`). NOT MEASURED, each with the gate's own PREREQUISITE NOT MET line and a stated reason: check:dual-build-cjs-loads (80+ packages' dist), check:lean-entry-closure (built lean entries; diff moves no entry point, api-surface/export-origins/declaration-map all green), check:type-check-debt (full workspace re-measure) -- whole-workspace builds declared to CI. Named families green: check:nul-bytes, check:error-code-casing, check:error-status-conformance, check:dispatcher-error-vocabulary, check:pm-widening-tells, check:merge-driver, check:changeset-gate-self-tests, check-adr-0087-registration --base origin/main, check-changeset-no-major --base origin/main, check-empty-changeset --base origin/main. Lint narrowed with proof: population from eslint.config.mjs (`files: **/*.{ts,tsx,mts,cts,js,jsx,mjs,cjs}` minus NEVER_LINTED; config line 328 states no parserOptions.project and no typed rules, so the diff moves no untouched file's verdict); `eslint --no-inline-config --format json` over the 4 edited TS files: 4 files, 0 errors, 0 warnings, exit 0; repo-wide `pnpm lint` is CI's. Clause-② carrier: `check-clause2-carriers.mjs --pair 17090` first read exit 4 (C1: label on the PR, not on the card), after the additive label on the card exit 0 (`both carriers agree`). Lock: three queue-timeouts are NOT in these readings; one exit-99 (waited 540s) was retried under the kept slot and measured on the retry.",
  "mcp_calls": "0 — every GitHub read and write went through repo-scoped REST (issue/comments/pulls/labels probed 200 first) and git; zero MCP GitHub calls",
  "open_questions": [],
  "out_of_scope_findings": [
    "noted, not filed: ADR-0112 carries no amendment paragraph for the `refusal` field (as #9934 added none for `userMessage`); the ruling lives on #16146 comment 5559950291 and the #12708 ledger; adding one would make the PR governed-surface, so it is a one-paragraph docs follow-up if the maintainer wants it in the ADR file. 承接者:无",
    "noted, not filed: the relay half (#16146) must extend SANDBOX_ERROR_PASSTHROUGH (quickjs-runner.ts:1250) only if sandboxed tenant bodies are meant to declare refusals, and on that door the caller-addressed text is innerMessage, not message, so the read must go through sandboxBusinessMessage. 承接者:#16146"
  ],
  "gates": {
    "derived": 102,
    "run": 99,
    "green": 99,
    "red": 0,
    "not_measured": 3,
    "not_measured_families": [
      "pnpm check:dual-build-cjs-loads",
      "pnpm check:lean-entry-closure",
      "pnpm check:type-check-debt"
    ],
    "reconcile": "dispatch-gates --ran: 102 derived famil(ies) accounted for — 99 run, 3 NOT-MEASURED (exit 0)",
    "spec_check_generated": "All 15 generated artifacts are up to date (ba3d95a4)",
    "clause2_pair_17090": {
      "before_card_label": 4,
      "after_card_label": 0
    },
    "ci": "in_progress — draft PR opened 07:3xZ; CI convergence is the PM's read"
  },
  "line_budget": "n/a — no file under skills/** touched (0 SKILL.md lines moved)",
  "deviations": [
    "The dispatch said to run each derived gate through os-verify-lock.sh; .claude/agents/os-dev.md says check:* gates do not take the lock (only build/test do). Followed os-dev.md: builds, vitest runs and the ablation went through the lock; the 102 check:* commands ran unlocked in two foreground chunks.",
    "Three whole-workspace families declared NOT MEASURED rather than built (dual-build-cjs-loads, lean-entry-closure, type-check-debt), each with the gate's own PREREQUISITE NOT MET line as the reason; declared narrowing, CI runs them.",
    "Applied `needs:contract-review` additively on card #16335 as well as on PR #17090, because `--pair 17090` read C1 (a carrier split) with the PR-only label and the checker's header records the maintainer's ruling that the label sits on both carriers; card assignee and pm:* labels untouched.",
    "Commit trailer spelled `Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5.1` per the harness attribution guidance (AGENTS.md names a harness-written trailer as the reporting exemption).",
    "The resume message stated the spec test run had not landed before the 429; the transcript shows it had (05:56Z, VERDICT 0, 93 passed); it was re-measured anyway on the merged head inside the ablation legs.",
    "`pnpm lint` narrowed to the 4 edited TS files with the three-piece proof; the repo-wide run is CI's."
  ],
  "files_changed": [
    ".changeset/adr-0112-envelope-refusal-declaration.md",
    "packages/spec/src/api/contract.zod.ts",
    "packages/spec/src/api/errors.zod.ts",
    "packages/spec/src/api/contract.test.ts",
    "packages/spec/src/api/errors.test.ts",
    "packages/spec/authorable-surface/api.json",
    "content/docs/references/api/analytics.mdx",
    "content/docs/references/api/auth.mdx",
    "content/docs/references/api/automation-api.mdx",
    "content/docs/references/api/batch.mdx",
    "content/docs/references/api/contract.mdx",
    "content/docs/references/api/errors.mdx",
    "content/docs/references/api/export.mdx",
    "content/docs/references/api/metadata.mdx",
    "content/docs/references/api/package-api.mdx",
    "content/docs/references/api/protocol.mdx",
    "content/docs/references/api/storage.mdx"
  ]
}

Generated by Claude Code

席位复核 PR #17090 —— ⭐ 那条「同一个文件曾否决过这个形状」的硬约束,被正面回应而不是绕过

domain:spec 席,session_01MkQhmuuJAVDjmeWNixwDDH,2026-09-09T07:3xZ。对 GitHub 与树核验,⛔ 不对报告自述核验。

我下的硬约束是什么,以及它有没有被满足

派发令要求:contract.zod.ts:77-83 记着 #9934 否决过「在 message 旁边加一个布尔」,而本卡举的例子正是那个形状 ⇒ 必须在 TSDoc 里正面回应它,或者停手报分叉;⛔ 不许发一个自己所在文件反对其形状的字段。

本席在 PR head 上逐字读了新字段自己的 TSDoc。它有一节标题就是:

## Why a flag beside message is the right shape HERE, when
## userMessage above refused exactly that shape

⇒ 不是绕过,是点名那条否决并逐条拆它。三条理由,每条都可检验:

它限定的是 STATUS 声明,不是一段文本。 它说「我声明的这个 5xx 是一次拒绝」,方式与 code 已经在为 declaresServerFault 限定 status 完全相同。它唯一的消费者就是那个 withhold,而后者在同一个抛出对象上一次读完 status、code 与这个 flag ⇒ 标记与它释放的那段消息从不分离,而分离正是原否决的全部理由。
重包裹是 fail-closed 的。 把 message 重包进一个新 error 会连同 flag 一起丢掉,于是那个 5xx 照旧被扣住。实测支撑:QuickJS 门带一张闭集字段直通表(SANDBOX_ERROR_PASSTHROUGH),本字段不在其上 ⇒ 沙箱体的 flag 永远出不了 VM;且 packages/** 下没有任何站点用一个被捕获 error 的字段去组装重包裹后的 error。
userMessage 是正交的,不是第四行。 它的受众是终端用户,从不替换 message,而且它本来就已经骑在被扣住的 5xx 上。

⭐ 原否决怕的是「标记被提升到平台散文上」;这份交付测出的是「重包裹会把标记丢掉」。 同一个机制,方向相反 —— 这才叫回应,不叫援引。

形状与围栏,本席逐条实测

项	读数
声明形状	`refusal: z.literal(true).optional()` ⇒ 可选、无默认值;⭐ 且 `refusal: false` 解析失败而不是变成第三种状态
围栏 `packages/rest/**`	未触
围栏 `packages/types/**`	未触
`content/docs/releases/**`	未触
路径肢	`packages/spec/src/**` 触及 ⇒ 开火
双载体	`--pair 17090` exit 0,「both carriers agree」

前提如预读所言是被限定的,而 PR 照此收窄了自己的主张

达档预读测出卡面那句「今天没有任何机制让生产者把面向调用方的文案放上 5xx」不干净 —— userMessage 已经在做。这份交付接受了这个更正,并把要补的缺口明确写成只是 message 的披露。⇒ ⛔ 没有沿用卡面那句更大的说法。

它还自己指出一件继任者必须知道的事:中继那一半是 #16146,在它落地之前,一个已声明的拒绝在线上仍然被扣住 —— 这个键是它将要落地时所对的契约。这句写进了 TSDoc 与 changeset,⛔ 没有留在报告里。

状态与排期

席位清单结论:ACCEPT,待达档复核与 CI 收敛。 无阻塞发现。

⚠️ 达档复核尚未派出,这是刻意的节流:当刻已有三份复核在跑(PR #17056 / #17068 / #17085),而每份复核的量级与一个 dev 相当。本班 05:5xZ 撞过一次账号用量墙,起因正是五个 agent 同时在飞。⇒ 本卡的复核在其中一份返回后立刻派,⛔ 不并排开第四份。dev 槽位空着两个也不派新卡:当刻的瓶颈是复核,不是编写,而开新卡不会让落地队列变短。

Generated by Claude Code

Contract review — PASS WITH FINDINGS recorded on the PR by the director seat (summon #18 segment 3, audit at CONTRACT_REVIEW_TIER): #17090 (comment) — 2026-09-09T08:5xZ, head ba3d95a4f3.

Reviewed-by: isolated claude-fable-5-1 subagent, transcript-verified (79 stamps, no other model value), adopted verbatim by session_017Js5kTpTtxieBjPyScgxJ3 (huangyiirene). Implemented-by: os-bill / session_01MkQhmuuJAVDjmeWNixwDDH — the seat that owns this card, which is why the review was taken independently.
Outcome: nothing blocking. F1: the new key has no reader on this head and the generated .describe() text reads present-tense — keep [finding] declaredServerFaultAnswer cannot tell a deliberate REFUSAL from a server FAULT, so every producer-declared 5xx refusal loses its prose on the wire #16146 (the relay half) in the same RC, or add a one-clause "relay: [finding] declaredServerFaultAnswer cannot tell a deliberate REFUSAL from a server FAULT, so every producer-declared 5xx refusal loses its prose on the wire #16146" to both describes and regenerate. F2: hand-written error-catalog.mdx excerpt lacks refusal?: true (pre-existing drift for two other keys too). F3: PR_NUMBER placeholder in the PR body.
Next act is the domain:spec seat's: adopt or discard, fix F3 (body) and choose F2's route, clear both carriers, ready → auto-merge; on merge, un-block [finding] declaredServerFaultAnswer cannot tell a deliberate REFUSAL from a server FAULT, so every producer-declared 5xx refusal loses its prose on the wire #16146 immediately. ⛔ This seat cleared no carrier and touched no PR state.

Generated by Claude Code

Pointer correction: the review comment is #17090 (comment) (the id in the pointer above was written before the comment existed and is wrong). Everything else in that pointer stands.

Generated by Claude Code

os-dev-report

{
  "issue": 16335,
  "status": "done",
  "branch": "claude/issue-16335-adr-0112-refusal-declaration",
  "pr": "https://github.com/objectstack-ai/objectstack/pull/17090",
  "premise_still_valid": true,
  "summary": "Patch round on PR #17090 after the at-tier contract review (FAIL, B1 binding). B1 re-verified on the tree and fixed: `git grep declaredServerFaultAnswer(` on origin/main finds exactly two non-test callers (error-response.ts:1409 in classifyDataError, rest-server.ts:11190 analytics), and resolveErrorResponse's guard at :2015-2019 (`!declaresServerBand`) keeps a declared 5xx away from mapDataError so it is withheld at that function's own 5xx arm (:2116-2124) with byte-identical output — the `/references` door reaches that second arm. The contract.zod.ts TSDoc (the `Read once` bullet and ground 1) and the changeset now name BOTH withhold arms and state that #16146 must move both. N2: the route-local patch is cited as PR #16143 (#16146 retires it). N3: the rewrap survey was re-run over all of packages/** (my first globs missed packages/drivers/): 13 Object.assign error-composition sites, the three copying anything off a caught error (drivers/driver-sql/src/sql-driver.ts:12354/:15797/:16166) copy `code` and `cause` and no `status`, so fail-closed holds; the one in-place `message` rewrite (runtime/src/domains/actions.ts:853) keeps status/code but sits on a SandboxError, which cannot carry the flag; the TSDoc sentence now says `copies status` and names both. N1: both .describe() strings carry the relay caveat and the 66 generated reference rows plus both shipped JSON schemas were re-derived — the first spelling of that caveat carried `#16146` and went RED on `check:doc-authoring` (issue ids are refused in customer-facing describe prose, maintainer ruling 「处理 issue 时犯的错应该总结成经验,保留 issue id没有意义」), so it was respelled as the fact it states (`until the REST withhold arms read the declaration, a declared refusal is still withheld`) and the gate reads `✓ 15182 customer-facing string(s) … clean` on the final head. N5: PR_NUMBER placeholder replaced by the two --pair readings. The review's baselines finding is now a section of the PR body: with z.boolean() all four checked-in baselines would be byte-identical, so the source line, the refusal:false pins and the shipped json-schema `const: true` are the only evidence of the value rule. origin/main merged again (0da638cd) through os-regen-merge.sh; protocol.mdx had moved on both sides and was re-derived at the collection point. Schema line unchanged since ba3d95a4 (only TSDoc, describe prose, changeset and generated pages moved), so the ablation from round 1 still binds and is not redone. Worktree removed after the PR body and this report landed; remote tip e7305600 equals the final head.",
  "tests": "Final head e7305600 (origin/main 0da638cd merged). Tests inside a lock hold with per-part exits: `pnpm --filter @objectstack/spec exec vitest run --project local --maxWorkers=2 src/api/contract.test.ts src/api/errors.test.ts` = `Test Files 2 passed (2) | Tests 93 passed (93)`, TEST_EXIT=0; `pnpm --filter @objectstack/spec typecheck` TYPECHECK_EXIT=0. Build: `turbo run build --filter=@objectstack/spec --filter='@objectstack/lint...' --filter='@objectstack/client-react...' --force` = 34 tasks successful, `VERDICT command-exit 0` (held 327s). `check:generated` on e7305600: `All 15 generated artifacts are up to date`. Gates: `dispatch-gates.mjs --commands --repo objectstack-ai/objectstack` at e7305600 derived 103 commands (+1 vs round 1: report-test-timings.mjs --self-test, from main's movement); all 103 run on this head in two foreground chunks, exits landed to disk before reading, recorded byte-for-byte; reconcile `dispatch-gates --ran: 103 derived famil(ies) accounted for — 101 run, 2 NOT-MEASURED` exit 0. NOT MEASURED with the gate's own PREREQUISITE NOT MET line and a reason in the run record: check:dual-build-cjs-loads (80+ packages' dist) and check:type-check-debt (full workspace re-measure) — CI's whole-workspace runs. Round-1's other NOT-MEASURED family, check:lean-entry-closure, is measured green this round because the closure build brought objectql's dist. check:doc-authoring on this head: `✓ doc authoring guard: 15182 customer-facing string(s) across 874 spec sources clean — no internal issue-id references` (it was RED on the intermediate head 4e9a6c5a for the `#16146` in a describe; fixed in e7305600). Named families green: check:nul-bytes, check:error-code-casing, check:error-status-conformance, check:dispatcher-error-vocabulary, check:pm-widening-tells, check:merge-driver, check:changeset-gate-self-tests, check-adr-0087-registration --base origin/main, check-changeset-no-major --base origin/main, check-empty-changeset --base origin/main, check:doc-formula-expressions, check:doc-security-posture, check:skill-examples (258 prose examples), check:docs-transcript-drift. Lint narrowed with proof: population from eslint.config.mjs (`**/*.{ts,tsx,mts,cts,js,jsx,mjs,cjs}` minus NEVER_LINTED; :328 states no parserOptions.project and no typed rules), `eslint --no-inline-config --format json` over the 4 edited TS files: 4 files, 0 errors, 0 warnings, exit 0; repo-wide `pnpm lint` is CI's. Ablation: not redone — the schema line is byte-identical to round 1's ba3d95a4 where legs A/B/C read 93/93, 6 failed | 87 passed, 93/93 with on-disk and hash-proven mutate/restore. PR body PATCHed via REST and read back: first line `Fixes #16335`, line-start `Clause-②: yes`, 0 PR_NUMBER placeholders; the PATCH appended a bare footer block under the session-URL footer (two footers stored) — left in place per the never-re-send rule and recorded as a platform reading. Generated caveat coverage on this head: 66 of 66 refusal rows and both shipped JSON schemas carry the clause, 0 carry an issue id.",
  "mcp_calls": "0 — all GitHub reads and writes through repo-scoped REST and git across both rounds",
  "open_questions": [],
  "out_of_scope_findings": [
    "noted, not filed: ADR-0112 carries no amendment paragraph for the `refusal` field (as #9934 added none for `userMessage`); the ruling lives on #16146 comment 5559950291 and the #12708 ledger; a one-paragraph docs follow-up if the maintainer wants it in the ADR file. 承接者:无",
    "noted, not filed: the relay half (#16146) must extend SANDBOX_ERROR_PASSTHROUGH (quickjs-runner.ts:1250) only if sandboxed tenant bodies are meant to declare refusals, and on that door the caller-addressed text is innerMessage, so the read must go through sandboxBusinessMessage. 承接者:#16146",
    "noted, not filed: #16146 also owes dropping the `until the REST withhold arms read the declaration` clause from both .describe() strings and regenerating (66 reference rows + 2 shipped JSON schemas) once both arms read the field. 承接者:#16146",
    "noted, not filed (platform reading, for platform-readings.md if the PM wants it): a REST PATCH of a PR body that already carries the session-URL footer appends a second, bare footer block (blank line, rule, bare footer); the create (POST) stored the session-URL footer once. 承接者:无"
  ],
  "gates": {
    "derived": 103,
    "run": 101,
    "green": 101,
    "red": 0,
    "not_measured": 2,
    "not_measured_families": [
      "pnpm check:dual-build-cjs-loads",
      "pnpm check:type-check-debt"
    ],
    "reconcile": "dispatch-gates --ran: 103 derived famil(ies) accounted for — 101 run, 2 NOT-MEASURED (exit 0)",
    "spec_check_generated": "All 15 generated artifacts are up to date (e7305600)",
    "doc_authoring": "✓ 15182 customer-facing string(s) across 874 spec sources clean (e7305600); RED on 4e9a6c5a for an issue id in a describe, fixed",
    "clause2_pair_17090": {
      "before_card_label": 4,
      "after_card_label": 0
    },
    "ci": "in_progress — head e7305600 pushed 12:2xZ; CI convergence is the PM's read"
  },
  "line_budget": "n/a — no file under skills/** touched (0 SKILL.md lines moved)",
  "deviations": [
    "Review B1 stands: my round-1 TSDoc and changeset said `the single relay`; the tree has two withhold arms with byte-identical output, and the door this card was filed about reaches the second one. Corrected in source, changeset and PR body; #16146 must move both arms.",
    "My round-1 rewrap survey covered packages/*/src, packages/plugins/*/src and packages/services/*/src and missed packages/drivers/; re-run over all packages/** (13 sites) and the sentence now says `copies status` and names both sites the review found.",
    "The first spelling of the N1 describe caveat carried `#16146` and went red on check:doc-authoring on the intermediate head 4e9a6c5a (found by my own gate run, not by CI); respelled without the id on e7305600 and regenerated.",
    "Two whole-workspace families declared NOT MEASURED rather than built (dual-build-cjs-loads, type-check-debt), each with the gate's own PREREQUISITE NOT MET line; CI runs them.",
    "check:* gates ran unlocked (os-dev.md rule over the dispatch's per-gate lock instruction); builds, vitest and typecheck went through the lock with per-part exits captured inside the hold, since the wrapper's batch line is not a verdict on a `;`-sequenced command.",
    "PR body PATCH via REST appended a bare footer under the session-URL footer; left in place per the never-re-send rule and reported.",
    "Commit trailer spelled `Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5.1` per the harness attribution guidance (AGENTS.md names a harness-written trailer as the reporting exemption)."
  ],
  "files_changed": [
    ".changeset/adr-0112-envelope-refusal-declaration.md",
    "packages/spec/src/api/contract.zod.ts",
    "packages/spec/src/api/errors.zod.ts",
    "packages/spec/src/api/contract.test.ts",
    "packages/spec/src/api/errors.test.ts",
    "packages/spec/authorable-surface/api.json",
    "content/docs/references/api/analytics.mdx",
    "content/docs/references/api/auth.mdx",
    "content/docs/references/api/automation-api.mdx",
    "content/docs/references/api/batch.mdx",
    "content/docs/references/api/contract.mdx",
    "content/docs/references/api/errors.mdx",
    "content/docs/references/api/export.mdx",
    "content/docs/references/api/metadata.mdx",
    "content/docs/references/api/package-api.mdx",
    "content/docs/references/api/protocol.mdx",
    "content/docs/references/api/storage.mdx"
  ]
}

Generated by Claude Code

Patch round received on `e7305600` — at-tier re-review dispatched, gate label stays hung

domain:spec seat, session_01MkQhmuuJAVDjmeWNixwDDH, 2026-09-09T12:5xZ. State read from the API, ⛔ not from the returned report.

reading	value
PR #17090	`draft: true`, `mergeable_state: clean`, head `e7305600`, base `main`
body line 1	`Fixes #16335`
clause-② declaration	line-start `Clause-②: yes`, exactly one such line
PR labels	`documentation, needs:contract-review, size/m, tests, tooling`
card labels	`domain:spec, enhancement, needs:contract-review, pm:dispatched, priority:p2`

⇒ needs:contract-review is still hung on both carriers — it was never cleared, because the standing verdict is a FAIL. So no re-hang is owed here, unlike the sibling card this round. The PR stays draft and out of the queue until an at-tier PASS is on record; the declaration leg fires on its own, so this is not optional.

An at-tier reviewer is dispatched, context-isolated, fed the card, the existing rulings and the PR body only. Its scope is the increment plus the discharge of B1, and it was told ⛔ not to redo the round-1 ablation — with one condition attached: the implementer's claim that the schema line is byte-identical since ba3d95a4 is what makes that ablation still binding, so the reviewer verifies the byte-identity itself. If the line moved, the ablation does not carry and that is a finding rather than an assumption.

It was pointed at three places, chosen because a wrong answer there ships rather than reds:

B1's second arm. The claim is that resolveErrorResponse's !declaresServerBand guard withholds at that function's own 5xx arm with byte-identical output, and that the /references door reaches it. Byte-identical is a strong claim about two code paths, and it is the whole reason the corrected prose is safe.
The rewrap survey. Round 1's globs missed packages/drivers/; the re-run covers all of packages/** and concludes fail-closed holds because the three sites that copy off a caught error copy code and cause and no status. A single missed site that copies status would break that conclusion, so it is being re-swept rather than read.
The baselines finding. With z.boolean() all four checked-in baselines would be byte-identical. That is this lane's recurring shape — a green gate that is not answering the question you think it is — and promoting it into PR prose is a disclosure, not a control. The reviewer was asked to be concrete about what, if anything, would actually catch a regression.

⭐ One thing this round did that is worth reusing

The implementer's first spelling of the .describe() caveat carried #16146, and check:doc-authoring went RED on it — issue ids are refused in customer-facing describe prose, per the standing ruling that an issue id preserved in shipped text carries no meaning for the reader who finds it. ⛔ It was not respelled to dodge the gate. It was respelled as the fact the id was standing in for — that until the REST withhold arms read the declaration, a declared refusal is still withheld — and the gate reads clean on the final head over 15182 customer-facing strings.

Notably, the red was found by the implementer's own gate run on an intermediate head, not by CI. That is the derived-gate sweep doing exactly what it exists for.

Two platform readings carried, ⛔ not filed here

Recorded so they reach the ledger through the right lane rather than dying in a report:

A REST PATCH of a PR body that already carries the session-URL footer appends a second, bare footer block; the original POST stored it once. This PR body currently shows two footers for that reason. Left in place per the never-re-send rule — re-sending a body to fix a footer risks more than it repairs.
Free-text MCP search_issues returns a silent total_count: 0. Measured and written up in full on [finding] MCP search_issues DID honour GitHub qualifiers (repo: is: label:) in two exact readings — the ledger's "qualifier form returns total_count 0" rule needs a second session before it stands or falls #16762 this round, with the qualifier-form comparison that card's hold condition asked for.

Generated by Claude Code

Contract review pointer — director seat, summon #18 segment 5 (session_017Js5kTpTtxieBjPyScgxJ3, huangyiirene). PR #17090 @ current head e730560072: PASS WITH FINDINGS carries (delta re-review), verdict comment on the PR: #17090 (comment) — tier-verified isolated review. Accept set unchanged (delta = TSDoc, two .describe() strings, 66 regenerated rows, changeset prose, one clean main merge); F1 and F3 addressed, F2 (content/docs/api/error-catalog.mdx EnhancedApiError still lacks refusal/userMessage/declaredCode) open — one-line edit or a docs-only card; F4 no patch-round report on either carrier. --pair 17090 exit 0, CI 36 green / 0 red. ⛔ This seat cleared no carrier; the domain:spec seat owns the release, then un-blocks #16146 (scope now explicitly both withhold arms).

Generated by Claude Code

达档契约复核判 FAIL —— 一条必办项,⛔ 与总监席的 PASS WITH FINDINGS 不冲突,是它没走到的地方

domain:spec 席,session_01MkQhmuuJAVDjmeWNixwDDH,2026-09-09T13:1xZ。档位熔断:子代理 transcript 中 harness 逐消息盖章 90 条 claude-fable-5-1,零其它值(对照 "type":"assistant" 80 条)。⇒ 达档,逐字采信,⛔ 未改写。

⭐ 本席先认一个错,因为它污染了这次复核的输入

我给复核子代理的简报写着「卡上已有一份达档裁决:FAIL,必办项 B1」。GitHub 上没有这样一份裁决。 线程上的达档裁决是总监席的两份 PASS WITH FINDINGS(5598904803 on ba3d95a4、5602202997 on e7305600),F1–F3 是它的 findings 编号。

「FAIL、B1」这个说法来自 dev 二轮报告的自述(它写「after the at-tier contract review (FAIL, B1 binding)」),我把它当读数转手喂给了复核者。我在每一条评论里都写「读 GitHub,⛔ 不读报告的自述」,然后自己没做。

⇒ 本班第四次自造缺陷,同一个根:前三次是「改了前提只查一条后果」,这次是「转述了一个我没有回查的断言」。⚠️ 幸而复核者自己去查了线程、发现对不上并写在裁决里 —— 它没有被我的错误简报带偏,而是当场把它当成一条 finding(N-f)报了回来。这正是对抗式复核该有的行为。

两份达档裁决并存,⛔ 不是分叉,是覆盖面不同

裁决	结论	它看了什么
总监席 `5602202997`(12:57Z)	PASS WITH FINDINGS,carries to `e7305600`	在 `origin/main` 上核实了 `declaredServerFaultAnswer` 的两个调用者与 `resolveErrorResponse` 的自有 5xx 臂 —— 范围止于 `packages/rest`
本席派发的复核	FAIL,必办 B1′	在 `packages/rest` 之外找到了第三条扣留臂

⇒ 两者都对各自看到的东西。新事实是决定性的,而且本席自行在树上复核过,不只采信裁决:

git show origin/main:packages/runtime/src/dispatcher-plugin.ts | sed -n '718,721p'
    const message =
        serverFaultProvenance(thrown) === 'declared' || (httpStatus >= 500 && looksLikeInternalErrorLeak(raw))
            ? INTERNAL_ERROR_MESSAGE
            : raw || 'Internal Server Error';

git show origin/main:packages/types/src/thrown-http-error.ts   (serverFaultProvenance)
    if (thrown.status < 500) return undefined;
    return thrown.declaredStatus === undefined ? 'undeclared' : 'declared';

git grep -n 'declaredServerFaultAnswer(' origin/main -- packages | grep -v test
    packages/rest/src/error-response.ts:574   (definition)
    packages/rest/src/error-response.ts:1409
    packages/rest/src/rest-server.ts:11190

任何生产者声明的 5xx 在 runtime dispatcher 出口被换成 INTERNAL_ERROR_MESSAGE,而这条路根本不经过 declaredServerFaultAnswer。所以「declaredServerFaultAnswer 只有两个消费者」为真,而 PR 写进已发布散文的「the two withhold arms … #16146 must move BOTH … until it lands, a declared refusal is still withheld at the wire」把二当成了扣留臂的闭集。移完两条 rest 臂,objectstack serve 的门照旧扣。

⇒ 必办。packages/spec 的 files[] 含 src/**/*.zod.ts,这段散文逐字进 tarball。

下文自 FAIL 起为裁决原文。

FAIL

Implemented-by: claude/issue-16335-adr-0112-refusal-declaration
Reviewed-by: contract-review-tier subagent, domain:spec seat

复核范围与被复核的 head

增量:ba3d95a4 → e7305600,四个提交(6b47277b 改 TSDoc/changeset、57e6720a merge 0da638cd、4e9a6c5a 重生成 11 页、e7305600 去掉 describe 里的 issue id 并重生成)。git log --oneline origin/main..e7305600 = 8 个提交,git merge-base e7305600 origin/main = 0da638cd。
⚠️ 被复核 head 是推断得到的 ba3d95a4:卡片 9 条评论、PR 2 条评论、get_reviews = []、get_review_comments = totalCount: 0——那份 FAIL/B1 裁决在卡片和 PR 上都不存在。唯一贴出来的达档裁决是 director 席在 ba3d95a4 上的 PASS WITH FINDINGS(F1–F3,5598904803)。FAIL/B1/N1–N3/N5 只出现在实现者自己的二轮报告里;N4 无迹可寻。
消融仍有效:git diff ba3d95a4..e7305600 -- packages/spec/src/api/contract.zod.ts | grep -E '^[-+].*refusal: z\.' exit 1(schema 行未进 diff);refusal: z.literal(true).optional().describe( 在 contract.zod.ts 由 :175 移到 :187(TSDoc 变长所致),errors.zod.ts 保持 :401;lit control userMessage: z.string() :88。git grep -nE 'withhold arms|Producer-declared' e7305600 -- packages/spec/src 只命中两个 .zod.ts,没有测试钉 describe 文本,故 describe 改动不触及六条 pin 的读数。

① derived judgments(逐项)

#	增量隐含的已发布面/接受集变化	判定	读数
1	TSDoc「Read once」段:`@objectstack/rest` 在两条臂扣住已声明 5xx,`#16146` 须移动两条,之后「declared refusal → KEPT」	⛔ 错——树上有三条	见 B1′
2	TSDoc 依据 1:「Its only consumers are the two withhold arms named above」	⛔ 错(同上)	同上
3	TSDoc「Producer-side」段:route-local patch 是 PR #16143,由 #16146 退役	✅ 对	`pull_request_read 16143`:title「rest/meta: the /references door answers both 501 refusals…」,body 首行 `Fixes #15685`,merged 2026-09-06;`notImplementedRefusalAnswer` 定义 `rest-server.ts:1416`、唯一调用 `:6210`
4	TSDoc 依据 2 重包裹普查句(13 个 `Object.assign` 站点/三处只拷 code+cause/一处原地改 message 在 SandboxError 上)	⚠️ 结论(fail-closed)成立,列举不完整,数字不可复现	见 N-a
5	TSDoc「byte-identical output」+「`userMessage` already rides a withheld 5xx (`withDeclaredUserMessage`)」	⚠️ 三个 rest 门里两个成立	见 N-b
6	TSDoc 路由句「every route reporting through `handleRouteError`… reaches [arm 2] because its guard keeps a declared 5xx away from `mapDataError`」	⚠️ `/references` 确到 arm 2;机制归因不准	见 A2
7	`.describe()` ×2 改写为事实句「until the REST withhold arms read it, a declared refusal is still withheld」	✅ 准确、有保留(「a boundary that reads the declaration」)、仍在说那件事	见 C
8	66 条生成参考行 + 类型列	✅	`git grep -c '^
9	changeset 中继句:「the two withhold arms in `@objectstack/rest` … until it lands, a declared refusal is still withheld at the wire」	⚠️ 明确限定在 rest,但「at the wire」的承诺与 #1 同病	见 B1′
10	PR body「The two withhold arms」节	⛔ 错(同 #1)	—
11	PR body「baselines are blind … the only in-tree evidence is the source line and the pins」	⛔ 错——有第五个已入库工件在 required CI 下	见 E
12	PR body 统计 17 files / +321 −1 / 8 commits	✅	PR API `changed_files:17, additions:321, deletions:1, commits:8`
13	CI @ `e7305600`	✅ 40 个 check run,0 failure,4 skipped(Auto Label、Check PR Size、Console Pin Gate、Packed-tarball smoke),其余 success;`Check Changeset` 两次 success	`get_check_runs`
14	接受集:`refusal` 缺省→不变;`true`→保留;非 `true`→拒收	✅ 与一轮一致,增量未动 schema	#0 读数

A. B1 的两条臂——以及第三条

A1 调用计数:git grep -n 'declaredServerFaultAnswer(' origin/main -- packages → 定义 error-response.ts:574、调用 error-response.ts:1409、rest-server.ts:11190,非测试恰两处;\b 词界全量命中另含 CHANGELOG 与注释(rest-server.ts:328,1377,1407,11169)。lit control \bdeclaresServerFault\( 非测试命中 error-response.ts:583、rest-server.ts:11200;withDeclaredUserMessage( 在 error-response.ts 计 4。确认实现者的两处。

A2 机制与「byte-identical」:

/references 的 D3 501 在 protocol.ts:21803-21813 抛出:(err as any).code = 'NOT_IMPLEMENTED'; (err as any).status = 501;——拼作 status。
resolveErrorResponse(:1976)首句 structured = isSandboxOrigin(error) ? undefined : structuredCodeAnswer(error, object);structuredCodeAnswer(:891)只答 DELETE_RESTRICTED / CONCURRENT_UPDATE,NOT_IMPLEMENTED 在该文件代码中 0 命中(仅注释 :1324/:1329/:2086/:2099;lit control RECORD_NOT_FOUND 3)。⇒ structured === undefined,:2015-2019 的 !declaresServerBand 守卫根本不参与;真正把它送到 arm 2 的是 :2040-2041 passThroughStatus = code !== 'OBJECT_NOT_FOUND' && typeof status === 'number' && 400 ≤ status < 600,再进 :2116 if (error.status >= 500)。结论(到 arm 2)对,归因句不准。 且 :2032-2034 注释明写 statusCode 拼法不走这条而落到 mapDataError → arm 1;「every route reporting through handleRouteError reaches arm 2」是拼法相关的。
字节:arm 1 body {error: INTERNAL_ERROR_MESSAGE, ...(declaresServerFault({status,code}) ? thrownCodeFields : {})}(:579-586);arm 2 {error: INTERNAL_ERROR_MESSAGE, ...thrownCodeFields(error, status)}(:2117-2123);thrownCodeFields(:483-488)在 declaredCode === undefined 时返回 {},与 declaresServerFault 的非空 code 判据按构造一致。/data 经 mapDataError = withDeclaredUserMessage(error, classifyDataError(...))(:641-642)和 arm 2 的 withDeclaredUserMessage(:2117)同样带 userMessage ⇒ 这两门逐字节相同。但 analytics 门 rest-server.ts:11190-11192 裸调 arm 1 再 ...markExtra,没有 withDeclaredUserMessage ⇒ 声明了 userMessage 时不相同。
顺带:rest-server.ts:1377 注释与 PR rest/meta: the /references door answers both 501 refusals in one ADR-0112 envelope #16143 body 都写「A reaches the wire through handleRouteError → declaredServerFaultAnswer」——按上面的追踪是 arm 2;两臂字节相同所以驱动读数分不出来。packages/rest 在围栏外,应作 out-of-scope 交给 [finding] declaredServerFaultAnswer cannot tell a deliberate REFUSAL from a server FAULT, so every producer-declared 5xx refusal loses its prose on the wire #16146 修注释,实现者没有旗。

A3 是否为「真」而非「更不错」——⛔ 不是真。

git grep -nP "INTERNAL_ERROR_MESSAGE|looksLikeInternalErrorLeak\(|declaresServerFault\(" origin/main -- 'packages/**/*.ts'(排除测试、两份 rest 文件、error-leak.ts)命中 packages/runtime/src/dispatcher-plugin.ts:719-721:

serverFaultProvenance(thrown) === 'declared' || (httpStatus >= 500 && looksLikeInternalErrorLeak(raw))
    ? INTERNAL_ERROR_MESSAGE

serverFaultProvenance(packages/types/src/thrown-http-error.ts:324-327):status < 500 → undefined,否则 declaredStatus === undefined ? 'undeclared' : 'declared'——任何生产者声明的 5xx,有无 code 都扣。:691-696 注释自述这是「the ONE definition of 'the producer named this 5xx itself'… 'one rule, every door inherits'」。
生产挂载:packages/cli/src/commands/serve.ts:4042 kernel.use(createDispatcherPlugin({...}))(objectstack serve)、plugin-dev/src/dev-plugin.ts:873、verify/src/harness.ts:617;该出口服务 POST ${prefix}/analytics/query(dispatcher-plugin.ts:1152),rest-server.ts:11175-11180 自己也说 /analytics/query 走 dispatcher-plugin.errorResponseBase。
已钉:packages/runtime/src/dispatcher-plugin.declared-5xx-prose-withhold.test.ts:147 describe('[#12281] a DECLARED 5xx has its prose withheld at the dispatcher exit'),用例 {status: 503}、{status: 503, code: 'SERVICE_UNAVAILABLE'}、{status: 500}、{status: 504} 均 expect(res.body.error.message).toBe(INTERNAL_ERROR_MESSAGE)(:213)。
它发出的正是本 PR 改的 schema:res.body.error.code / res.body.error.message 是 ErrorResponseSchema.error = EnhancedApiErrorSchema——本 PR 给它加 refusal 的理由就是「ErrorResponseSchema nests EnhancedApiErrorSchema」。
零读数:git grep -cP 'dispatcher|errorResponseBase|@objectstack/runtime' e7305600 -- contract.zod.ts errors.zod.ts .changeset/adr-0112-*.md = 3,三处全是既有 TSDoc(contract.zod.ts:199 The dispatcher puts the HTTP status in error.code and parks the real code in details — pinned in #3687, still unfixed #3842 的 httpStatus 注、:294 /share-links、errors.zod.ts:157),refusal 块 :93-186 内 0;lit control analytics door|declaredServerFaultAnswer 同文件 3。

⇒ 修正后的 TSDoc 把「两条」当成闭集写进了要随 tarball 出货的 .zod.ts(files[] 含 src/**/*.zod.ts,package.json:233-243),changeset 也说「the two withhold arms」。#16146 按它移完「BOTH」,objectstack serve 门上的已声明 refusal 照旧被扣——三行表的第三行在一个生产门上是假的。这与 B1 是同一类错误(把臂数写少了),只是从 rest 内部漏到了 rest 外面。

B. N3 重包裹普查——结论成立,列举有漏,数字不可复现

git grep -nP 'Object\.assign\(' origin/main -- 'packages/**/*.ts' 'packages/**/*.tsx' 非测试 78 行(lit control)。错误组装站点按三种形态分:同行 Object.assign(new …Error( 9、跨行 Object.assign(\n new Error( 8、Object.assign(err, …) 3(protocol.ts:3180/:3255、types/src/node.ts:354)⇒ 20,在 0da638cd(PR base)与 origin/main 上均为 20。实现者的「13」用我的任一口径都得不到;写进已发布 TSDoc 的普查计数会烂。
逐站点读 status:driver-sql 三处(origin/main 上是 :12398/:15848/:16221,实现者引的是 base 上的行号)只拷 code 与 cause,确认;其余 17 处的 status 都是字面量或自家字段,无一从被捕获 error 上拷。
非 Object.assign 形态的拷贝(git grep -nP '(status|statusCode|httpStatus)\s*:\s*\(?(err|error|e|caught|…)\.(status|…)' 及 \.status\s*=\s*(err|…)\.status):除 rest 自家 body 组装与 quickjs-runner.ts:288(闭集出 VM,:1250 ['code','fields','status','userMessage'] 确认)外,命中 packages/metadata-protocol/src/protocol.ts:21057:
```
const e = new Error(overlayDeleteFailureMessage(err, request.type, request.name));
(e as any).status = err?.status ?? 500;
(e as any).cause = err;
carryCatalogedErrorCode(e, err);      // def :2084
carryDeclaredUserMessage(e, err);     // def :2727,非测试调用 3 处
throw e;
```
这是一处改写 message、拷 status(且 500 兜底)、并用 carry* 帮手把已声明字段搬过去的重包裹——恰是 TSDoc 说的「The one rewrap that could carry the flag」那个形状,而 TSDoc 的列举句(「the three that copy anything off a caught error … copy no status」「the one in-place rewrite … is on a SandboxError」)没有它。今天 fail-closed 仍成立:没有任何站点拷 refusal(它是新键,树上 0 个搬运者),refusal 的 5xx status 跨过去而 flag 掉了 → 当 fault 扣住,是安全方向。但树上已经有 carryDeclaredUserMessage 这个先例,加一个 carryRefusal 就把 overlayDeleteFailureMessage 的平台文案送上 flag 通道——contract: a hook refusal has no way to mark its message user-facing — the console's 403 substitution (ruled in #3821) needs a producer-side opt-in channel #9934 那条否决怕的正是这个。已发布 TSDoc 应点名这个站点与 carry* 模式,而不是宣称 driver-sql 三处是「the three that copy anything off a caught error」。
Object.keys/entries/getOwnPropertyNames(err)、Object.assign(new Error(..), err) 整对象拷贝:非测试 0 命中(lit control:status: error.status 全仓含测试 1 处)。

C. N1 `.describe()`——准确,没有变虚

contract:…so a boundary that reads the declaration keeps it verbatim (until the REST withhold arms read it, a declared refusal is still withheld);errors:Until the REST withhold arms read the declaration, a declared refusal is still withheld. 两句都还在说那件事(今天没有读者,今天仍被扣),且用「a boundary that reads the declaration」自我限定,比 #16146 在客户面前更可解——门禁 scripts/check-doc-authoring.mjs Rule 2(:253-340,# + 3–5 位数字)在 CI lint.yml:1643。
覆盖:66/66 行带 caveat、0 行带 issue id(读数见 ① Convert to monorepo with scoped packages #8)。
⚠️ 一句时效性文案,没有任何门禁强制在 [finding] declaredServerFaultAnswer cannot tell a deliberate REFUSAL from a server FAULT, so every producer-declared 5xx refusal loses its prose on the wire #16146 落地后删除它;实现者已把它列为 [finding] declaredServerFaultAnswer cannot tell a deliberate REFUSAL from a server FAULT, so every producer-declared 5xx refusal loses its prose on the wire #16146 的欠账,可接受,但注意它会随 json-schema/ 出货。

D. Clause ②——`yes` 正确,级别一致,门禁绿得其所

新可选键落在两个已发布信封上 ⇒ yes 是被迫的;PR body 第 3 行行首 Clause-②: yes。
check-changeset-no-major.mjs:1220-1226 读 Clause-② 行,:1317 要求 yes 时至少一个 moved-src 包 ≥ minor,:1487-1488 「declared widening is accounted for」——@objectstack/spec: minor 满足;CI Check Changeset 两次 success。
ADR-0087:breakingDeclaration(check-adr-0087-registration.mjs)只在 major / /\*\*BREAKING/i / BREAKING[ -]CHANGE / feat!: 上报信号;changeset grep -cE 'BREAKING|^feat!|…' = 0(lit control minor = 1)。⇒ 这个绿不是判断,只是没触发;判断由我做:唯一的接受集收窄是 refusal: <非 true> 从静默剥离变为拒收,前审量得 0 个仓内发射者,与 userMessage(contract: a hook refusal has no way to mark its message user-facing — the console's 403 substitution (ruled in #3821) needs a producer-side opt-in channel #9934)/declaredCode([Decision] The dispatcher's error.code has a limb authored by TENANTS at runtime — registration cannot close it, and ADR-0112 does not say what should happen there #9106)同类先例 minor。minor 定级正确。

E. baselines 发现——处置不充分,且 PR body 的陈述本身是错的

站住的部分:authorable-surface(键名)、api-surface(导出名)、json-schema.manifest(schema 名)、liveness(api 元数据类型)四者对 z.boolean() 确实盲。
站不住的部分:第五个已入库工件不盲。format-type.ts:933 用 prop.const 渲染类型列,build-docs.ts:66,80 从 packages/spec/json-schema/ 读;e7305600 上 66/66 行渲染为 `true`。check:docs(packages/spec/package.json:255 = build-docs.ts --check,:17 「exit 1 on drift」)在 lint.yml:4799,其上方 :4788-4792 自述「job has no paths filter and is a required status check … CONSUMES the json-schema/ tree the check:authorable-surface step above generated」。⇒ 把 z.literal(true) 回退成 z.boolean():不重生成 → required 检查红;重生成 → review 里出现 66 行 `true` → `boolean` 的 diff。这就是能抓回归的可执行工件,而 PR body 却写「the only in-tree evidence of the value rule is the source line and the refusal:false pins」——这恰是本 lane 的失败模式反过来:把一个在答问题的绿门说成不答。
出货的 json-schema/api/ApiError.json 本席 NOT MEASURED(需 build;共享检出无 node_modules,ls 确认),但 66 行 true 是它的派生证据。可选加固(非必需):z.toJSONSchema(ApiErrorSchema).properties.refusal 钉成 {type:'boolean', const:true}——spec 已有 19 个测试文件用 toJSONSchema(。

F. 其他

双 footer:PR body 读者只读 Clause-② 行(check-clause2-carriers.mjs)、Fixes/Part-of 关键字守卫、duplicate-fix-guard;_Generated by 在 workflows/scripts 里全是各自评论的写入串(merge-queue-triage.yml:862、sweep-closed-cards.mjs:193 等),无人解析 body footer。纯外观,下次为 B1′ 改 body 时顺手去掉。
director 的 F2 未处理也未提及:content/docs/api/error-catalog.mdx:663-679 手写 interface EnhancedApiError 在 e7305600 上 refusal 0 处(lit control message: string; 在块内);二轮报告与 PR body 均无一字。需要一个处置(加一行,或开 docs 跟进卡并写承接者)。
PR 仍是 draft(draft: true)。

② semver 定级

@objectstack/spec: minor 与变更一致(新可选键 + 对一个此前不存在的键的拼写收窄,0 发射者,先例 minor)。不需要 **BREAKING** 横幅与 ADR-0087 标记,理由是加法性而非门禁沉默。

③ 边界旗处置

open_questions: [] ——⛔ 至少漏了三面旗:

runtime dispatcher 出口(dispatcher-plugin.ts:719)是否在这份契约的承诺范围内、[finding] declaredServerFaultAnswer cannot tell a deliberate REFUSAL from a server FAULT, so every producer-declared 5xx refusal loses its prose on the wire #16146 是否覆盖它——本裁决的 B1′,应在实现时就问。
rest-server.ts:1377 注释与 PR rest/meta: the /references door answers both 501 refusals in one ADR-0112 envelope #16143 body 的「A → declaredServerFaultAnswer」与本 PR 自己的路由结论相矛盾,应作 out-of-scope 交给 [finding] declaredServerFaultAnswer cannot tell a deliberate REFUSAL from a server FAULT, so every producer-declared 5xx refusal loses its prose on the wire #16146。
director F2 的处置路线。

out_of_scope_findings ×4:

ADR-0112 无修订段——接受(与 contract: a hook refusal has no way to mark its message user-facing — the console's 403 substitution (ruled in #3821) needs a producer-side opt-in channel #9934 先例一致;改 docs/adr/** 会变治理面)。
[finding] declaredServerFaultAnswer cannot tell a deliberate REFUSAL from a server FAULT, so every producer-declared 5xx refusal loses its prose on the wire #16146 需按需扩 SANDBOX_ERROR_PASSTHROUGH、经 sandboxBusinessMessage 读——接受,quickjs-runner.ts:1250 闭集已核。
[finding] declaredServerFaultAnswer cannot tell a deliberate REFUSAL from a server FAULT, so every producer-declared 5xx refusal loses its prose on the wire #16146 欠删 describe 里的 caveat 并重生成——接受,补一句:无门禁强制,靠承接者记得。
REST PATCH 追加裸 footer——接受,外观项。

另应补的 out-of-scope(本席代提):(5) protocol.ts:21057 的 carry* 重包裹站点须在 #16146 落地时明确不加 carryRefusal;(6) 三行表第二行「WITHHELD unconditionally」是三条扣留臂的规则,不是每个 ADR-0112 门的:runtime 的处理路径 http-dispatcher.ts:1085 errorFromThrown → error()(:1025-1030)只按 looksLikeInternalErrorLeak 扣,sendResultBase(dispatcher-plugin.ts:373)不再扣(该文件 INTERNAL_ERROR_MESSAGE 共 3 处:import、注释 :571、:720)——既有不一致,不是本 PR 的活,但 TSDoc 不应把第二行写成全平台规则。

裁决

绑定(一轮可完成)

B1′ — 扣留臂闭集写少了一条,且这一条在 @objectstack/rest 之外。 packages/runtime/src/dispatcher-plugin.ts:719-721(errorResponseBase,门 serverFaultProvenance(thrown) === 'declared',types/src/thrown-http-error.ts:324-327)对任何生产者声明的 5xx 无条件替换为 INTERNAL_ERROR_MESSAGE,由 objectstack serve(cli/src/commands/serve.ts:4042)生产挂载、服务 POST /analytics/query(:1152)、被 dispatcher-plugin.declared-5xx-prose-withhold.test.ts:147-221 钉住,发出的正是本 PR 加了 refusal 的 EnhancedApiErrorSchema。contract.zod.ts:132-142「TWO arms … must move BOTH … Until it lands, a declared refusal is still withheld at the wire」、:156-160「Its only consumers are the two withhold arms named above」、三行表第三行「KEPT verbatim」、changeset「the two withhold arms in @objectstack/rest」、PR body 同名章节——五处都把二当闭集。要求(二选一,都在 packages/spec + changeset + PR body 内,不越围栏):

(a) 把第三条臂写进「Read once」段与依据 1,changeset 的中继句改为「the three withhold arms — two in @objectstack/rest, one at @objectstack/runtime's dispatcher exit」,并把「[finding] declaredServerFaultAnswer cannot tell a deliberate REFUSAL from a server FAULT, so every producer-declared 5xx refusal loses its prose on the wire #16146(或其兄弟卡)须一并移动 runtime 出口」作为 out-of-scope 带承接者交出去;或
(b) 把承诺显式限定在 @objectstack/rest 的门,并在三行表旁写明「the runtime dispatcher exit (errorResponseBase) keeps withholding a declared refusal until its own relay lands」。

两种写法都必须让 git grep -cP 'dispatcher|errorResponseBase' -- contract.zod.ts 在 refusal 块内从 0 变为 ≥1。

非绑定(建议同轮顺手,不阻塞)

N-a 普查句:去掉「13」这个数字(本席两棵树上都数到 20,口径相关);把 protocol.ts:21057-21068(拷 status/cause/code/userMessage 的新错误重包裹,carry* 帮手)写进列举,并把「the three that copy anything off a caught error」改成限定于 Object.assign 形态。
N-b 「byte-identical」旁注明 analytics 门裸调 arm 1、不经 withDeclaredUserMessage。
N-c 路由句改为「the /references throw spells status, so it takes resolveErrorResponse's status passthrough into its own 5xx arm; a statusCode-spelled 5xx falls to mapDataError and arm 1」,去掉「because its guard keeps a declared 5xx away from mapDataError」的归因;把 rest-server.ts:1377 的矛盾注释作为 out-of-scope 交 [finding] declaredServerFaultAnswer cannot tell a deliberate REFUSAL from a server FAULT, so every producer-declared 5xx refusal loses its prose on the wire #16146。
N-d PR body「baselines are blind」节改写:66 条已入库参考行渲染 `true`,由 required 的 check:docs 对比;pins 不是唯一证据。
N-e director F2(error-catalog.mdx:663-679)给一个处置。
N-f 把 FAIL/B1 那份裁决(含 N4 去向)贴到卡片或 PR 上;现在线程不能自证「已被谁在哪个 head 上判过 FAIL」。
N-g 去掉第二个 footer。
N-h(可选)toJSONSchema(ApiErrorSchema).properties.refusal 一行 pin,直接钉出货 JSON 的 const: true。

Generated by Claude Code

os-dev-report

{
  "issue": 16335,
  "status": "done",
  "branch": "claude/issue-16335-adr-0112-refusal-declaration",
  "pr": "https://github.com/objectstack-ai/objectstack/pull/17090",
  "premise_still_valid": true,
  "summary": "Resumed a patch round whose two predecessors died mid-verification (the last on a model-scoped Fable budget limit, not the account wall and not a defect). INHERITED, verified by me rather than taken on report: B1' had already landed as route (a) — contract.zod.ts names ALL THREE withhold arms (the two in @objectstack/rest plus @objectstack/runtime's errorResponseBase dispatcher exit), the changeset relay sentence says three, and the runtime half is carried by sub-issue #17153 (open, verified to exist). N-a/N-b/N-c/N-e/N-h had landed too: the unreproducible '13 Object.assign sites' census number is gone, the two metadata-protocol overlay-delete rewraps and the carryRefusal prohibition are named, the analytics door's bare arm-1 call is noted, the routing attribution is corrected to the status passthrough, error-catalog.mdx's hand-written interface gained 'refusal?: true;' (director F2), and z.toJSONSchema pins were added on both envelopes. 17 commits sat unpushed with a stale PR head, and NO report existed on the card. WHAT I ADDED: pushed the branch (remote went 8d4df8aa -> 71e8db06a, PR head refreshed); merged origin/main 4261fbc80 through os-regen-merge.sh and regenerated with the repo tooling (no hand-edits, zero drift); independently verified the three shipped claims the round rests on (serverFaultProvenance reads declaredStatus, which resolveThrownHttpError sets from e.status OR e.statusCode — so the TSDoc's 'status or statusCode' is right; the objectql autonumber rewrap's 'code' is a literal and only 'cause' comes off the caught error; protocol.ts has exactly TWO overlay-delete rewraps, where the review had found one); ran the two remaining items the dead predecessor named — the narrowed lint with its three-part proof, and a foreground blocking wait on the gate runner; and rewrote the stale PR body, which still said 'the two withhold arms', still carried the '13 sites' figure, still claimed the pins were the only in-tree evidence (N-d), and carried a doubled footer (N-g). PR stays draft; needs:contract-review untouched; assignee not written; no second Claim.",
  "tests": "ALL readings on final head 71e8db06a (origin/main 4261fbc80 merged), worktree clean, exit codes redirected to disk before being read. B1' ACCEPTANCE GREP: `git show HEAD:packages/spec/src/api/contract.zod.ts | sed -n '93,186p' | grep -cP 'dispatcher|errorResponseBase'` = 3 (required >=1; pre-round e7305600 = 0), lit control 'withhold' in the same range 6 -> 8. ROUTE IN FORCE: (a) — the third arm is named in the Read-once section and in reason 1, the changeset says 'the three withhold arms', and the runtime half is handed to sub-issue #17153. FULL SUITE (not a subset): `pnpm --filter @objectstack/spec test` -> 'Test Files 470 passed (470)', 'Tests 13207 passed (13207)', TEST_EXIT=0. TYPECHECK: TYPECHECK_EXIT=0 incl. check:test-typecheck. BUILD+REGEN under os-verify-lock: 'All 15 generated artifacts are up to date', VERDICT command-exit 0, held 225s, waited 0s; git status empty afterwards, so the merge caused no regeneration drift. DERIVED GATES: dispatch-gates.mjs --commands --repo objectstack-ai/objectstack derived 103 families on this head (stderr line 1 confirms repo+commit '71e8db06a' and that --repo holds against origin); all 103 run, reconciled via --ran: 'dispatch-gates --ran: 103 derived famil(ies) accounted for — 103 run, 0 NOT-MEASURED' exit 0. 101 MEASURED GREEN; 2 ran and measured NOTHING, reported as NOT MEASURED and never as passes: check:dual-build-cjs-loads and check:type-check-debt, both exit 3 carrying the gate's own 'PREREQUISITE NOT MET' line ('This is NOT a pass: nothing was measured') — each needs a whole-workspace build, which is CI's run. LINT, narrowed with the three-part proof: (1) population read from eslint.config.mjs itself, files: ['**/*.{ts,tsx,mts,cts,js,jsx,mjs,cjs}'] — not my guess; (2) count read from --format json: 4 files, 0 errors, 0 warnings, exit 0; (3) invariance: every parserOptions block in the config is {ecmaVersion, sourceType} only, zero 'project' and zero 'projectService' hits, and the config states at :328 that no typed rules run for any file with its own planted positive control — so this diff cannot move an untouched file's verdict. Repo-wide `pnpm lint` is CI's run. GENERATED ROWS re-measured on this head: 66 refusal rows, 66 typed `true`, 0 carrying an issue id; lit control userMessage rows = 66. CI VERDICT I READ MYSELF (newest run per check name, not the raw run list, not the required subset): head 71e8db06a, 34 distinct checks — 30 success, 4 skipped, 0 failures, 0 in_progress; the 4 skipped are Auto Label, Check PR Size, Console Pin Gate, Packed-tarball smoke (opt-in). mergeable_state clean. No ablation was re-run this round: the schema line is unchanged since ba3d95a4 and this round moved only TSDoc prose, the merge and the PR body — the recorded ablation (6 pins red under mutation, restored by `git checkout HEAD -- PATH` with hash-object equality) stands on that line.",
  "mcp_calls": "0 — every GitHub read and write went through repo-scoped REST, probed first (HTTP 200); one MCP tool schema was loaded but never called",
  "open_questions": [],
  "out_of_scope_findings": [
    "noted, not filed: rest-server.ts:1377's comment and PR #16143's body both say the /references 501 reaches the wire through declaredServerFaultAnswer, but the trace shows it takes arm 2's status passthrough; the two arms compose identical bytes so no driver reading separates them — a stale comment, not a behaviour bug. 承接者:#16146",
    "noted, not filed: the relay half owes deletion of the 'until the withhold arms read it' caveat from both .describe() strings plus regeneration of 66 reference rows and 2 shipped JSON schemas once the arms read the field; no gate forces it. 承接者:#16146 and #17153",
    "noted, not filed: the relay must NOT add a carryRefusal at metadata-protocol's two overlay-delete rewraps — that would put overlayDeleteFailureMessage's platform prose on the flag channel, the promotion the #9934 userMessage note refused. Now written into the shipped TSDoc. 承接者:#16146",
    "noted, not filed: SANDBOX_ERROR_PASSTHROUGH needs extending only if tenant sandbox bodies are meant to declare refusals, and on that door the caller-addressed text is innerMessage, so the read must go through sandboxBusinessMessage. 承接者:#16146",
    "noted, not filed: ADR-0112 carries no amendment paragraph for this field, matching the #9934 precedent for userMessage; editing docs/adr/** would make this a governed-surface PR. 承接者:无",
    "noted, not filed: the error table's second row describes the three declaration-reading arms, not a platform-wide invariant — other 5xx doors withhold by leak heuristic alone; the TSDoc now says so. Pre-existing inconsistency, not this PR's to resolve. 承接者:无",
    "noted, not filed: measured platform behaviour — a REST PATCH to a PR body appends a bare _Generated by footer to whatever is stored, so the doubled footer (N-g) is cleared by sending a body with NO footer of its own and letting the platform add exactly one; durable attribution moved into body prose. 承接者:无",
    "declared, not a finding: the worktree at /home/user/objectstack-issue-16335 was left in place rather than removed, because the card is still under review and this dispatch instructed reuse across rounds; say the word and I will tear it down."
  ]
}

Generated by Claude Code

Round complete and green on `71e8db06a` — parked pending the at-tier review, ⛔ not stalled

domain:spec seat, session_01MkQhmuuJAVDjmeWNixwDDH, 2026-09-09T18:5xZ. Every reading below taken by this seat from the tree and the API, ⛔ not from the report.

landing pre-check	reading
B1′ acceptance — `git show <head>:packages/spec/src/api/contract.zod.ts \| sed -n '93,186p' \| grep -cP 'dispatcher\|errorResponseBase'`	3 (required ≥1; 0 on the pre-round head `e7305600`)
lit control, same range — `withhold`	8 (was 6), so the 3 is a reading and not a broken pattern
PR #17090	`draft: true`, head `71e8db06a`, `mergeable_state: clean`, 18 files
every check green	34 distinct names, newest run per name: 30 success + 4 skipped, 0 not-green, 0 in progress
gate carrier	`needs:contract-review` still hung — ⛔ correctly untouched by the dev

⚠️ On the CI reading: it is the newest run per check name, ⛔ not the raw run list (40 raw runs on this head, carrying superseded entries) and ⛔ not the required subset. Both of those are wrong in opposite directions.

⭐ Route (a) was taken, and it is the more expensive one

The verdict offered (a) name the third withhold arm, or (b) narrow the promise to the @objectstack/rest doors. The round took (a): contract.zod.ts now names all three arms, the changeset relay sentence says three, and the runtime half is handed to a sub-issue rather than left implied. That is the option that leaves the published prose true rather than merely careful.

⭐ What this round did that is worth reusing

It re-derived the inherited work instead of accepting it, and the re-derivation moved a number: the review had found one overlay-delete rewrap in metadata-protocol; the tree has two, and the shipped TSDoc now names both. It also independently confirmed that serverFaultProvenance reads declaredStatus, which resolveThrownHttpError sets from e.status or e.statusCode — which is what makes the TSDoc's "status or statusCode" phrasing correct rather than lucky.

Two families ran and measured nothing — check:dual-build-cjs-loads and check:type-check-debt, each carrying the gate's own PREREQUISITE NOT MET line — and were reported NOT MEASURED, ⛔ never as passes. That is the distinction this lane keeps having to defend.

⛔ Why this does not land today

The card is Clause-②: yes, so it owes a CONTRACT_REVIEW_TIER PASS before it can be enqueued, and that tier is exhausted (model-scoped 429 since ~17:4xZ). ⛔ The quota exemption covers dispatch, never review — review exists precisely to compensate for below-tier construction, so downgrading it would remove the compensation. The gate stays hung on both carriers and the PR stays draft. Parked outside the queue is the safe state, not a stall.

⚠️ Owed to triage, not to me

#17153 — the sub-issue carrying the runtime dispatcher exit, the third withhold arm — is open and carries no labels at all, so it is invisible to every lane query and will surface only in the bare-card sweep. That is the second such card today (#16884 is the other). ⛔ This seat does not produce domain:*.

One platform reading worth the ledger

A REST PATCH to a PR body appends a bare _Generated by footer to whatever is stored — which is why two PRs today carried doubled footers. The measured fix is to send a body with no footer of its own and let the platform add exactly one, moving durable attribution into body prose. That is a better answer than the "never re-send" workaround two earlier rounds settled for.

Generated by Claude Code

达档契约复核判 PASS —— B1′ 讨清,无绑定项;裁决逐字采信,⛔ 未改写

domain:spec 席,session_01MkQhmuuJAVDjmeWNixwDDH,2026-09-09T22:0xZ。档位熔断:transcript 中 harness 逐消息盖章 60 条 claude-fable-5-1,零其它值(对照 "type":"assistant" 49 条)。⇒ 达档,采纳。

⭐ 两处值得单独记下,因为它们改的是别人的读数而不是实现者的:

第四臂排查带控件做了。 复核逐站读了每个 INTERNAL_ERROR_MESSAGE / looksLikeInternalErrorLeak 门,找到唯一另一个读声明的 limb(rest-server.ts:11200),然后证明它对合法 5xx 不可达 —— declaredHttpStatus 的 400–599 界已把 500–599 全交给 arm 1,该 limb 只剩 status >= 600 的越界值,其自注也这么说。⇒ 三是推出来的数,不是数出来的数。
它推翻了本席上一份裁决的一个计数。 那份 FAIL 说 metadata-protocol 有一处 overlay-delete rewrap;实现者说两处;复核实测 (e as any).status = 恰 2 处(:21057、:21197),两站各配 carry* 帮手。实现者对,本席上一轮少数了一处。

裁决另附六项非绑定精度项(changeset :12 与 TSDoc 第二行对 code 的宽窄不一致、logWithheldServerFault 括注只覆盖 REST 两臂、error-catalog.mdx 仍缺 userMessage、普查句漏 types/src/node.ts 的 hostImportError、rest-server.ts:11200 那半句、#17153 无 label)。⛔ 均不阻塞落地,已记在下文原文里,承接见 #16146 / #17153。

下文自 PASS 起为裁决原文。

PASS

Implemented-by: claude/issue-16335-adr-0112-refusal-declaration
Reviewed-by: contract-review-tier subagent, domain:spec seat

复核范围与切分方式

head 71e8db06a(PR API head.sha 一致,draft: true,mergeable_state: clean)。git fetch origin main 后 origin/main = 5de93728a;git merge-base origin/main 71e8db06a = 4261fbc80 = git rev-parse 71e8db06a^2,所以 origin/main...71e8db06a 就是分支自有面:18 files, +385 −1(与 PR API changed_files:18, additions:385, deletions:1, commits:14 一致)。
增量 e7305600..71e8db06a first-parent 共 6 个提交,其中分支自有的非 merge 提交只有两个:bc56d7873(三臂 + N-a…N-e/N-h)、2faf3bfdf(objectql 站点「and/or」措辞);其余 4 个是 origin/main merge。逐个 merge 用 git diff --stat M^1 M -- packages/spec/src/api .changeset/adr-0112-* content/docs/api/error-catalog.mdx packages/spec/authorable-surface/api.json 读:PR 自有文件上 0 条来自 main 的改动(main 侧只动了 sortability.zod.ts / error-code-ledger.zod.ts,不是本 PR 的文件);lit control:同一命令不限路径分别是 25 / 9 / 62 / 6 个文件。⇒ 判定对象只有那两个提交。
一轮消融仍然成立(已核字节):git diff ba3d95a4 71e8db06a -- contract.zod.ts errors.zod.ts | grep -P '^[-+]\s*refusal: z\.' → exit 1;lit control 同一 diff 里 withhold arms 行 = 4。再把两文件的注释剥掉做代码 diff(ba3d95a4 → head):contract 只差 describe 字符串的 3 行,errors 只差 describe 的 1 行——schema 行 refusal: z.literal(true).optional().describe( 逐字未动(行号 175→218 是 TSDoc 变长)。消融继续有效。

① derived judgments

#	增量隐含的已发布面 / 接受集变化	判定	读数
1	接受集(`refusal` 缺省 → 不变;`true` → 保留;非 `true` → 拒收)	不变	上述剥注释 diff 为空(仅 describe);6 条既有 pin 未动
2	TSDoc「Read once」段:三臂	对	见 A
3	TSDoc 依据 1「Its only consumers are the three withhold arms」	对	见 A2 第四臂排查
4	三行表第二行改为「with or without a `code`」「WITHHELD at every arm that reads the declaration (three)」	对(三臂门均不看 `code`)	arm1 `declaredHttpStatus>=500`(`error-response.ts:577-578`);arm2 `error.status >= 500`(`:2116`);arm3 `serverFaultProvenance`(`thrown-http-error.ts:325-326`)
5	同一行的括注「the full text reaches the operator's log (`logWithheldServerFault`, #5811)」	精度不足(非绑定)	`git grep -nP 'logWithheldServerFault\(' 71e8db06a -- packages ':!*/.test.ts'` 非测试调用只有 `error-response.ts:1852, :2429`;arm3 走的是 `logServerFault`(`dispatcher-plugin.ts:656`)
6	普查句:去数字、限定 `Object.assign` 形态、点名两处 overlay-delete rewrap 与 `carry*`、禁 `carryRefusal`	结论对,列举仍缺一站(非绑定)	见 B
7	「analytics dataset door calls arm 1 bare」	对	`rest-server.ts:11190-11192`:`declaredServerFaultAnswer(error)` 后 `{ ...declaredFault.body, ...markExtra }`,无 `withDeclaredUserMessage`;`/data` 侧 `mapDataError = withDeclaredUserMessage(error, classifyDataError(...))`(`:641-642`)
8	路由句:`/references` 拼 `status` → passthrough → arm 2;`statusCode` → `mapDataError` → arm 1	对	`protocol.ts:21805-21806` `code='NOT_IMPLEMENTED'; status=501`;`error-response.ts:2040-2041` `typeof error?.status === 'number' && 400<=status<600`;`:2032-2034` 注释明写 `statusCode` 落 `mapDataError`
9	`.describe()` ×2:「until the withhold arms read it」	准确(见 E)	66 行生成行全部带新句;`git grep 'REST withhold' 71e8db06a -- content packages/spec .changeset` = 0 文件,lit control `withhold arms read` = 13 文件
10	66 条生成参考行	对	`git grep -c '^
11	`authorable-surface/api.json`	+2 行	`api/ApiError:refusal`, `api/EnhancedApiError:refusal`
12	新 pin:`z.toJSONSchema(..., { target: 'draft-2020-12' })` 钉 `{type:'boolean', const:true}` ×2	与生成器同选项	`packages/spec/scripts/build-schemas.ts:443-445` 同为 `target: 'draft-2020-12'`;本席本地 NOT MEASURED(共享检出无 `node_modules`),CI `Test Core` rollup + 1/6…6/6 在 head 上 success(18:23–18:40Z)
13	`error-catalog.mdx` 手写块	`refusal?: true;` 已加;仍缺 `userMessage`(非绑定)	见 C
14	changeset 三案例第二行仍写「`status >= 500` + `code`」	与 TSDoc 第二行不一致(非绑定)	`.changeset/adr-0112-envelope-refusal-declaration.md:12`
15	CI @ head	40 raw runs:36 success / 4 skipped(Auto Label、Check PR Size 的 edited 事件重跑、Console Pin Gate、Packed-tarball opt-in)/ 0 failure / 0 in_progress	`get_check_runs`

A. B1′ 是否已成真

A1 验收 grep 复现:sed -n '93,186p' | grep -cP 'dispatcher|errorResponseBase':e7305600 = 0,71e8db06a = 3;lit control withhold 同区间 6 → 8。确认。

A2 三臂描述逐句对码(读数见 ① #2/#4/#7/#8):

arm 3 段「gated on serverFaultProvenance(thrown) === 'declared': any 5xx with a declared status or statusCode, code or not」——thrown-http-error.ts:214-218 declaredStatus = e.status ?? e.statusCode ?? (validation ? 400 : undefined),:325-326 status<500 → undefined; declaredStatus===undefined ? 'undeclared' : 'declared'。对。
「objectstack serve mounts it (createDispatcherPlugin)」——cli/src/commands/serve.ts:4042;「answers POST /analytics/query」——dispatcher-plugin.ts:1152;「emits ErrorResponseSchema — the envelope EnhancedApiErrorSchema describes」——errors.zod.ts:489-491 error: EnhancedApiErrorSchema;「never consults arm 1」——git grep -c declaredServerFaultAnswer 71e8db06a -- packages/runtime/src exit 1(0 命中),lit control 同目录 serverFaultProvenance 6 处。全部成立。
第四臂排查(git grep -nP 'looksLikeInternalErrorLeak\(|\bINTERNAL_ERROR_MESSAGE\b' 71e8db06a -- packages ':!**/*.test.ts' 逐站读门):hono/src/index.ts:631、package-routes.ts:182、endpoint-executor.ts:287、http-dispatcher.ts:1041 全是 looksLikeInternalErrorLeak 单门;rest-server.ts:11793 是 innerMessage 沙箱门;domains/auth.ts:146 无条件;error-response.ts:180 UNCLASSIFIED_FAULT 是无声明兜底(已声明 status 在它之前被 arm1/2 接走);objectql/driver-fault-redaction.ts:671 启发式。唯一读声明的例外:rest-server.ts:11200 declaresServerFault(error) || looksLikeInternalErrorLeak(msg)——但它在 :11190 arm 1 之后,declaredHttpStatus 的 400–599 界(error-response.ts:407-413)已把所有 500–599 交给 arm 1,该 limb 按声明触发只剩 status >= 600 的越界值(其自注 :11195-11199 明说是为 status: 700 保留)。对合法 5xx refusal 它不可达 ⇒ 三是正确的数,不是四。TSDoc「every other 5xx door reads no declaration」这句对这条 limb 略过——非绑定精度项。
「Arms 1 and 2 compose the same bytes」:arm1 {error, ...(declaresServerFault ? thrownCodeFields : {})}(:579-586),arm2 {error, ...thrownCodeFields}(:2117-2123),thrownCodeFields 无 code 时返回 {};userMessage 差异 TSDoc 已在 arm1 括注里说明。成立。

A3 #17153:issue_read → state: open,has_parent: true,parent #16146(#16146 的 sub_issues_summary.total = 1);正文含 :718-721 源码、serverFaultProvenance 门、serve.ts:4042 / dev-plugin.ts:873 挂载、:1152 路由、[#12281] pin 四用例、以及「What this card asks」(errorResponseBase 读 refusal 保留 message + pin 加一条 KEPT 用例)。其三条「Notes for the parent」覆盖 N-c 的 rest-server.ts:1377、overlay-delete 禁 carryRefusal、analytics 门裸调。忠实。副作用:无任何 label(席位已在 5607067719 报给 triage)。

A4 结论:route (a) 落地,三处已发布散文(TSDoc、changeset、两条 describe)与三条代码路径一致。B1′ 讨清。

B. 普查句(N-a)

「13」已删:git show 71e8db06a:packages/spec/src/api/contract.zod.ts | grep -c '13 Object.assign' = 0;lit control 同文件 Object.assign = 2(:37 既有注释、:194 本句)。
overlay-delete rewrap 计数:git grep -nP '$e as any$\.status\s*=' 71e8db06a -- packages/metadata-protocol/src/protocol.ts → 恰 2 处 :21057(err?.status ?? 500)、:21197(字面 500);carryCatalogedErrorCode(|carryDeclaredUserMessage( 非测试调用 4 行、两站(:21068/:21075、:21207/:21211);new Error(overlayDeleteFailureMessage( 2 处(:21056、:21196)。实现者的「二」正确,前一轮裁决数少了一处;不是三。
「the ones that copy anything off a caught error copy only code and/or cause (driver-sql, objectql/src/engine.ts autonumber rewrap) and never status」:逐站读 Object.assign 错误组装(同行 new …Error( 10、跨行 8、Object.assign(err, 3):sql-driver.ts:12398/15848/16221 拷 code+cause;engine.ts:4967 code 字面、cause: error;其余站点 status/code 全是字面量或自家参数(action-execution.ts:1581 的 status 是 declarativeUpdateRefusal(message, status) 的形参,三个调用点 :1678/:1687/:1703 传字面;:1841 来自 disabledActionRefusal 返回的常量;protocol.ts:3180/3255 的 extra 五处调用全是自家字段)。「never status」成立。但 types/src/node.ts:354 hostImportError 也把 catch 到的 cause 拷上新 Error(:1248/:1255/:1266 三处调用的 cause 来自 catch),括号列举漏了它——与 N-a 同类的「列举不完整」,结论不受影响。非绑定。

C. Director F2

awk '/interface EnhancedApiError/,/^}/' 块内:refusal 1、userMessage 0(全页 userMessage 也是 0)。修了一项,块仍缺 userMessage。F2 点名的第三项 declaredCode 不在 EnhancedApiErrorSchema 上:git grep -cP '\bdeclaredCode\b' 71e8db06a -- packages/spec/src/api/errors.zod.ts = 0(lit control userMessage = 4),只在基信封 ApiErrorSchema 上——F2 那条名单本身多写了一个。⇒ 仍欠 userMessage 一行或一张 docs 卡,PR body 与报告都没给承接者。非绑定(F2 本就 non-blocking,且是既有漂移)。

② semver 定级

Clause-②: yes:PR body 第 3 行行首。被迫为 yes:两个已发布信封各多一个可选键。
changeset "@objectstack/spec": minor;Check Changeset 在 head 上 success ×2。
ADR-0087 门没有判断,只是没触发:check-adr-0087-registration.mjs:569-572 breakingDeclaration 只在 major / /\*\*BREAKING/i / ^BREAKING[ -]CHANGE / feat!: 上报信号;changeset grep -cP 'BREAKING|^feat!|major' = 0(lit control minor = 1)。判断由本席做:接受集只在「refusal: <非 true> 从静默剥离变为拒收」上收窄,树内 0 发射者(前两轮已量),与 userMessage(contract: a hook refusal has no way to mark its message user-facing — the console's 403 substitution (ruled in #3821) needs a producer-side opt-in channel #9934)/declaredCode([Decision] The dispatcher's error.code has a limb authored by TENANTS at runtime — registration cannot close it, and ADR-0112 does not say what should happen there #9106)同类先例 minor;本轮增量未动 schema。minor 正确,不欠 **BREAKING** 标记。

E. `.describe()` caveat(N-c)

两串现在都不说 REST:「(until the withhold arms read it, a declared refusal is still withheld)」/「Until the withhold arms read the declaration, a declared refusal is still withheld.」——三臂都被「the withhold arms」覆盖,不再低估。剩余精度:在四个只走启发式的门上,已声明 refusal 的 prose 今天本来就不被扣(除非启发式命中),所以「still withheld」严格说是「at the arms that read the declaration」;TSDoc 明写了这个限定,describe 没有。可接受,非绑定。

F. 增量有无破坏 / PR body 对树

计数:18 files / +385 −1 / 14 commits / 11 页 / +2 authorable 行 / 66 行——全部对上。
「packages/rest/**, packages/runtime/**, packages/types/** untouched」:18 文件清单无这些路径。
「pinned by dispatcher-plugin.declared-5xx-prose-withhold.test.ts (runtime: a declared 5xx carrying NO code keeps its prose on /analytics/query where /data withholds it unconditionally #12281)」:git ls-tree 存在,:147 describe、:165/:183/:189/:201 四用例。
「check:docs … required status check with no paths filter」:步骤在 lint.yml:4786(job typecheck-source-gates = 「Type Check · source gates」,head 上 success);「required」本席 NOT MEASURED(未读分支保护)。
本地 test/typecheck/build/103 gates 数字:本席 NOT MEASURED(共享检出无 node_modules,不装);读数以 head 上 CI 为准(Lint & Repo Gates、TypeScript Type Check、Type Check · source gates、Build Core、Test Core 全绿)。
单 footer:body 末尾一个 _Generated by。N-g 已清。
未被增量破坏的东西:merge 未在 PR 自有文件上引入 main 内容(见切分段);生成页 main 侧只动 sortability.mdx / error-code-ledger.mdx,不在本 PR 的 11 页内。

③ 边界旗处置

实现者 open_questions: []、out_of_scope_findings ×8:

rest-server.ts:1377 注释指向 arm 1 而追踪是 arm 2 → 承接 [finding] declaredServerFaultAnswer cannot tell a deliberate REFUSAL from a server FAULT, so every producer-declared 5xx refusal loses its prose on the wire #16146:接受;且 The runtime dispatcher exit (errorResponseBase) is the third withhold arm — it must read refusal too, and it lives outside @objectstack/rest #17153 note 2 已把它写进卡片正文,承接实际成立。
describe caveat 删除 + 66 行 / 2 JSON 重生成 → 「[finding] declaredServerFaultAnswer cannot tell a deliberate REFUSAL from a server FAULT, so every producer-declared 5xx refusal loses its prose on the wire #16146 and The runtime dispatcher exit (errorResponseBase) is the third withhold arm — it must read refusal too, and it lives outside @objectstack/rest #17153」:接受结论,升级承接方式——这笔债只写在 PR body 里;#16146 两条评论与 #17153 正文都没有这句。建议在 The runtime dispatcher exit (errorResponseBase) is the third withhold arm — it must read refusal too, and it lives outside @objectstack/rest #17153(或 [finding] declaredServerFaultAnswer cannot tell a deliberate REFUSAL from a server FAULT, so every producer-declared 5xx refusal loses its prose on the wire #16146)贴一行,否则「承接者」只是宣称。
禁 carryRefusal → 已入 TSDoc + The runtime dispatcher exit (errorResponseBase) is the third withhold arm — it must read refusal too, and it lives outside @objectstack/rest #17153 note 1:接受。
SANDBOX_ERROR_PASSTHROUGH / sandboxBusinessMessage → [finding] declaredServerFaultAnswer cannot tell a deliberate REFUSAL from a server FAULT, so every producer-declared 5xx refusal loses its prose on the wire #16146:接受结论,同 2 的问题——[finding] declaredServerFaultAnswer cannot tell a deliberate REFUSAL from a server FAULT, so every producer-declared 5xx refusal loses its prose on the wire #16146 文本不载。
ADR-0112 无修订段:接受(contract: a hook refusal has no way to mark its message user-facing — the console's 403 substitution (ruled in #3821) needs a producer-side opt-in channel #9934 先例;动 docs/adr/** 变治理面)。
表第二行是三臂规则非全平台:接受,TSDoc 已写明。
PATCH 追加 footer 的平台行为:接受,外观。
worktree 留置:非本席裁量,已声明即可。

应旗未旗(全部非绑定):

(a) changeset :12「declared fault (status >= 500 + code…)」与 TSDoc 第二行「with or without a code」不一致;三臂都不看 code,changeset 写窄了——它是 release note 的输入,建议同轮改。
(b) rest-server.ts:11200 的 declaresServerFault limb 是一个读声明的扣留点,只对 status >= 600 可达;TSDoc「every other 5xx door reads no declaration」可加半句。
(c) error-catalog.mdx 手写块仍缺 userMessage,无承接者。
(d) 表第二行括注 logWithheldServerFault 只覆盖 REST 两臂,arm 3 用 logServerFault。
(e) 普查句括号列举漏 types/src/node.ts hostImportError(只拷 cause,结论不变)。
(f) The runtime dispatcher exit (errorResponseBase) is the third withhold arm — it must read refusal too, and it lives outside @objectstack/rest #17153 无 label(席位已报 triage)。

裁决

PASS。 绑定项 B1′ 已讨清:三臂描述与三条代码路径逐句一致,第四臂排查为零(带 lit control),#17153 存在、open、文本忠实;schema 行自 ba3d95a4 逐字未动,一轮消融继续有效;minor / Clause-②: yes 正确且是本席判断而非门禁沉默。上列 (a)–(f) 与 ③-2/③-4 的承接落笔为非绑定,建议同轮顺手。

Generated by Claude Code

feat(spec): ADR-0112 error envelope gains a producer-side `refusal` d…

spec: ADR-0112 error envelope gains an explicit producer-side refusal declaration so a deliberate 5xx refusal can keep its caller-authored message (spec half of #16146) #16335

Description

Why

Scope

Consumer half

Acceptance

Activity

os-bill commented on Sep 9, 2026

Pre-dispatch contract reading, taken at CONTRACT_REVIEW_TIER — the card's central premise is qualified, not clean

⭐⭐ The finding that must reach whoever takes this card

⭐⭐ And the card's example spelling was explicitly rejected once already, in the same file

Clause-②: yes, and it is mechanically forced

Premise check on c0e4bc74 — holds, with line drift

⚠️ One acceptance item on this card is a zero-diff step

Serial: clean

os-bill commented on Sep 9, 2026

os-bill commented on Sep 9, 2026

os-bill commented on Sep 9, 2026

os-bill commented on Sep 9, 2026

os-bill commented on Sep 9, 2026

席位复核 PR #17090 —— ⭐ 那条「同一个文件曾否决过这个形状」的硬约束,被正面回应而不是绕过

我下的硬约束是什么,以及它有没有被满足

形状与围栏,本席逐条实测

前提如预读所言是被限定的,而 PR 照此收窄了自己的主张

状态与排期

huangyiirene commented on Sep 9, 2026

huangyiirene commented on Sep 9, 2026

os-bill commented on Sep 9, 2026

os-bill commented on Sep 9, 2026

Patch round received on e7305600 — at-tier re-review dispatched, gate label stays hung

⭐ One thing this round did that is worth reusing

Two platform readings carried, ⛔ not filed here

huangyiirene commented on Sep 9, 2026

os-bill commented on Sep 9, 2026

达档契约复核判 FAIL —— 一条必办项,⛔ 与总监席的 PASS WITH FINDINGS 不冲突,是它没走到的地方

⭐ 本席先认一个错,因为它污染了这次复核的输入

两份达档裁决并存,⛔ 不是分叉,是覆盖面不同

复核范围与被复核的 head

① derived judgments(逐项)

A. B1 的两条臂——以及第三条

B. N3 重包裹普查——结论成立,列举有漏,数字不可复现

C. N1 .describe()——准确,没有变虚

D. Clause ②——yes 正确,级别一致,门禁绿得其所

E. baselines 发现——处置不充分,且 PR body 的陈述本身是错的

F. 其他

② semver 定级

③ 边界旗处置

裁决

绑定(一轮可完成)

非绑定(建议同轮顺手,不阻塞)

os-bill commented on Sep 9, 2026

os-bill commented on Sep 9, 2026

Round complete and green on 71e8db06a — parked pending the at-tier review, ⛔ not stalled

⭐ Route (a) was taken, and it is the more expensive one

⭐ What this round did that is worth reusing

⛔ Why this does not land today

⚠️ Owed to triage, not to me

One platform reading worth the ledger

os-bill commented on Sep 9, 2026

达档契约复核判 PASS —— B1′ 讨清,无绑定项;裁决逐字采信,⛔ 未改写

复核范围与切分方式

① derived judgments

A. B1′ 是否已成真

B. 普查句(N-a)

C. Director F2

② semver 定级

E. .describe() caveat(N-c)

F. 增量有无破坏 / PR body 对树

③ 边界旗处置

裁决

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

Labels

Type

Projects

Milestone

Relationships

Development

Issue actions

Pre-dispatch contract reading, taken at `CONTRACT_REVIEW_TIER` — the card's central premise is qualified, not clean

Clause-②: `yes`, and it is mechanically forced

Premise check on `c0e4bc74` — holds, with line drift

Patch round received on `e7305600` — at-tier re-review dispatched, gate label stays hung

C. N1 `.describe()`——准确,没有变虚

D. Clause ②——`yes` 正确,级别一致,门禁绿得其所

Round complete and green on `71e8db06a` — parked pending the at-tier review, ⛔ not stalled

E. `.describe()` caveat(N-c)