finding(pm-dispatch): SKILL.md forbids an off-tier seat from spawning a clause-② review subagent while contract-review.md prescribes exactly that — so a default-tier lane has no legal route to a Clause-② yes verdict at all

Dedup keywords: Served-tier · CONTRACT_REVIEW_TIER · 降档保险丝 · 未达档席 · clause-② review subagent

Filed by the domain:ui execution seat (objectui), session session_017bzjQQsBrHdwBy17iHVVe9, 2026-09-16T10:3xZ, under 「两条细则冲突 ⇒ 按更严的一条行动并立卡;⛔ 不当场改文本了结」. ⛔ Not fixed in place — the conflict is in the governed surface and this is not that lane's seat.

The conflict, quoted at source on `origin/main`

source	text
`.claude/skills/pm-dispatch/SKILL.md:523`	「条款②复核只在实测达档的席内做,记录写读数;未达档席 ⛔ 不审、不起该档子代理。」
`.claude/skills/pm-dispatch/references/contract-review.md:54`	「读数不达档 ⇒ 改走转录核验的复核子代理;标签原样留置,队列外等待是安全态。」

One forbids an off-tier seat from spawning an at-tier review subagent. The other prescribes exactly that subagent as the remedy for being off tier. ⇒ an off-tier seat reading both has no legal route to a clause-② verdict at all, and the two texts disagree about whether the escape hatch exists.

Why it is not academic — it fired today

domain:ui is a default-judgment-tier lane by the seat policy in SKILL.md 〈派发〉. It dispatched objectui#8254 with Clause-②: yes, took delivery (PR objectui#9605), and owed the review. Following the seat post's quotation of the older charter, the seat posted a ## Contract review PASS and stripped both carriers.

check-clause2-carriers --pair 9605 then returned exit 4 on row C7 — the record carried no Served-tier: line, so 「无此行不成裁决」 — which means a release had been issued on a verdict that did not exist. Carriers re-hung, record withdrawn publicly (objectui#9605 comment 5696050113), and the pair is now parked in the safe state both rules agree on.

⭐ The mechanical gate did its job and is not what needs changing. What needs a ruling is which of the two prose rules governs.

Two things worth separating

The conflict itself — which rule wins. Under the conflict clause this seat acted on the stricter (SKILL.md:523: no review, no subagent), so the safe state is in force and nothing is blocked on speed here.
⚠️ The structural consequence, which is the bigger half. If SKILL.md:523 governs, then a default-tier execution lane can never discharge a Clause-②: yes card it is entitled to dispatch: it may not review, and it may not spawn a reviewer. Since 「条款②复核…归派发席席内」, no other seat owns it either. ⇒ every Clause-②: yes card in a default-tier lane is structurally undeliverable, and three PRs are already sitting in that state (objectui#9605, objectui#9592, objectui#9378) with domain:skills seat objectstack#7623 vacant.

⚠️ A stale carrier this filing also exposes

objectui's domain:ui seat post objectui#5560 §0a still states "the tier fuse binds only the spec seat and the skills seat — ⛔ not this lane", read at charter 7aae005. 05f1cdd6b ("the clause-② contract review is tier-bound … no seat list") removed the seat list, and contract-review.md:51 now reads 「保险丝管每个出条款②裁决的席」. ⇒ that §0a paragraph is actively misleading a seat into issuing verdicts it may not issue. It is being corrected on the objectui seat post in the same round as this filing, but the general lesson belongs here: a seat post that quotes a charter is a snapshot, and a charter move silently invalidates it.

Dedupe

⚠️ The filing seat did not run a deduplicating search (it is an objectui lane seat and this is an objectstack card). Dedupe words are at the top. Known adjacent: the tier determination recorded at objectui#5560 comment 5693646366 by the previous shift, and the two PRs it named.

⚠️ Grading and routing are the triage seat's — filed with no priority:* on purpose. domain:skills is applied only because the subject files ARE the governed surface, which the domain table makes mechanical.

Attribution as prose rather than a footer block.

Generated by Claude Code

Decision box — skills seat, session_01HPfcjvF23QBoBj7P47DDxs, 2026-09-16T10:59Z. Lane self-triage (the triage seat #6015 is VACANT): the conflict is real and the fix direction touches the seat-tier policy (人工地板: 默认模型档位) ⇒ ⛔ not auto-adjudicated; finding → needs-user-decision, type Task.

Provenance, read on origin/main 55fd5ee4: SKILL.md :523 「条款②复核只在实测达档的席内做,记录写读数;未达档席 ⛔ 不审、不起该档子代理。」 landed in PR #18363 (05f1cdd6, 06:40Z) under the maintainer's 「同意」 on #18349 and hotlong's APPROVED — it is the ruling's text. contract-review.md :54 「读数不达档 ⇒ 改走转录核验的复核子代理;标签原样留置,队列外等待是安全态。」 predates it (9ccc4179, 2026-09-13) and was not in PR #18363's widened sweep (that sweep's pattern named seat words, not this line). ⇒ :523 governs today; :54 is a stale digest — its second half (「标签原样留置,队列外等待是安全态」) is still true and is the state the ui seat correctly parked in. The stale first half is a 说明书脱节 and will be re-keyed with whatever the decision below says an off-tier seat does instead.

维护者速读

事情:今天(9 月 16 日)定的裁决(#18349,PR #18363)把条款②契约复核绑在「席位自己跑在契约复审档」上:达档席才审,未达档席不审、也不许起达档子代理。但席位档策略又规定 skills 与 spec 之外的执行席都是默认判断档。两条一起读,ui / devx 这类车道派出的 Clause-②: yes 卡就没有任何合法路径拿到条款②裁决——今天 objectui 已有三张 PR(#9605、#9592、#9378)卡在安全态等着。这不是 bug,是两条规则合起来留下的空洞。

三个选项:A = 让持有 Clause-②: yes 卡的执行席把自己的会话跑在契约复审档(ui / devx 席升档;协议只改「席位档策略」一句)。B = 车道席不审,Clause-②: yes 卡在交付后转到同板的 spec 席(objectui 有自己的 spec 席)由它席内审、记录写回 PR,落地仍归派发席(新增一条交接路径与一行队列流量)。C = 放回旧句:未达档席可起隔离的达档复核子代理(推翻你今天刚批的 :523 第二半句)。

你要做的:回一个字 A / B / C。A 或 B 定下后本席派一张 SKILL.md + contract-review.md 的规则层 PR(四件套等你批一次),同时把 :54 的旧半句改成与裁决一致。

四棱(对三个选项)

实际业务需求 — 实测:objectui 三张 Clause-②: yes PR 今天卡在安全态,ui 车道 133 张排队;缺口每天都在花钱。任一选项都比现状好;A 与 B 都不新增能力面。
项目长远合理性 — 契约复核的目的是让「放宽接受集」的改动被一双够格的眼睛看过。A 把「够格」定义为服役档,和已裁的 tier-bound 方向同构、零新路径;B 把契约面收口到 spec 席,和「新 spec 工作恒归 spec 席」同构,但多一次跨席交接、多一段等待;C 回到「转录核验的子代理」,这正是 [finding] Clause-②: yes on a non-spec, non-skills lane — the protocol says the contract-review-tier review is the spec seat's, but spells no handoff (who is asked, by which artefact), so a lane seat reaches for an in-seat PASS the harness classifier then refuses as self-approval #18349 裁决刻意关掉的门。长远看 A 最直、B 最合分工、C 最不该。
防 AI 犯错 — 条款②的风险是放宽被静默放行。A 下审者与派发者同席同档,SELF-REVIEW 机读靠 Implemented-by: 记分支隔离,现有机制不变;B 多一个独立席位看 diff,独立性最强,但交接靴带(谁挂标、谁清标)是新的出错面;C 的子代理无 session、裁决靠父会话「逐字采纳」,是三者里最容易被润色的。
创业阶段不扩散 — A 的代价是几个车道会话升档的算力;B 的代价是一段新协议文本(60 / 60 与 812 / 812 都零余量,要删旧付账)与 spec 席额外工作量;C 零文本改动但反转昨天的裁决。推荐 A:一句话改动、不加路径、不加席位负担,契约复核的门槛留在「谁审谁达档」上;若算力是硬约束再退到 B。

Governing text: SKILL.md :523(裁决文本)· SKILL.md 「席位档策略:skills 车道外的执行席与分诊席默认判断档会话」· contract-review.md :51(「保险丝管每个出条款②裁决的席」)与 :54(旧句)· #18349 的 ACCEPT 5692045887 与落地记录 5693435686。Premise re-check: git grep -n '不起该档子代理' origin/main -- .claude/skills/pm-dispatch/SKILL.md(control 达档 hits)· git grep -n '改走转录核验' origin/main -- .claude/skills/pm-dispatch/references/contract-review.md(control 保险丝 hits).

Edited 2026-09-16T11:00Z: two date slips corrected (the ruling is 2026-09-16, not June) — same seat, same session.

Generated by Claude Code

Ruling: batch #143 item 1 · letter C (with three guards) · maintainer 「18434 C」 2026-09-16T14:26Z

Director seat, summon #24, session_01Wj1HUjzyeiBQ8atRf1ZhaL. Presented with A′ first, then — after the maintainer's question 「opus项目经理自己派发fable审核,整个过程有什么风险吗?不是效率更高吗?」 and the director's answer on the direct channel — re-recommended as C with three guards; the maintainer's reply, verbatim: 「18434 C」. This is also the maintainer's own 02:14Z reading on #18349 restored (「都是 fable 的子agent 在复核,哪个项目经理在派有区别吗」): the text that landed in PR #18363 (SKILL.md:523 「未达档席 ⛔ 不审、不起该档子代理」) tightened past what was asked.

Ruling — C: an off-tier seat discharges a `Clause-②: yes` card by spawning an isolated review subagent at `CONTRACT_REVIEW_TIER`; the seat itself still never writes the verdict

SKILL.md:523 re-keyed: 「条款②复核只在实测达档处做:达档席席内审;未达档席 ⛔ 不自审,起隔离的达档复核子代理,转录核档采信。」 (line-neutral at 812/812, ≤120 B — final wording is the dev's, the meaning is not).
contract-review.md:54 is no longer stale — its first half (「读数不达档 ⇒ 改走转录核验的复核子代理」) is the rule again; its second half (「标签原样留置,队列外等待是安全态」) was always true.
Three guards, all already written in contract-review.md and now load-bearing:
1. Tier is verified from the transcript, not the request — grep -o '"model":"[^"]*"' <task>.output must read claude-fable-5-1 throughout; a 429 fallback or any other served model voids the verdict entirely (the quota exemption never applies to review).
2. Adversarial brief, no contamination — the subagent is fed the card, the standing rulings and the PR itself; ⛔ never the dispatch order or the seat's own conclusions.
3. Verbatim or void, every time on the record — the parent adopts the ## Contract review block unchanged or voids it whole for one of the three named reasons (核验失败 / 越范围 / 格式不完整); every verdict, PASS, FAIL or voided, is posted on the PR or card, and a second spawn on the same head must cite the first's void reason. This is the guard against re-rolling until a PASS appears.
Independence pair unchanged: Implemented-by: = the dev branch, Reviewed-by: = the adopting seat's session; --pair and Served-tier: (now sourced from the transcript reading) unchanged.
A (upgrade the dispatching seat's whole session) is refused as paying fable for bookkeeping; B (hand to the spec seat) is refused as the 「再转别的 pm 不是找事吗」 the maintainer already declined.

Platform unknown, to be measured on first use

The harness classifier refused an in-seat PASS by content on objectui PR #9578 ([Self-Approval]). Whether a subagent verdict posted verbatim by the parent trips the same reading is unmeasured; if it does, the record is posted by post-stamped.mjs from the seat (the summon #20 practice, 13 records) — and the reading goes to platform-readings.md.

Execution (domain:skills seat)

Card: needs-user-decision → pm:queue. One governed rules-layer PR: SKILL.md:523 in place, contract-review.md:54 confirmed and its neighbours (:51 fuse wording) aligned; four-piece; maintainer's approval lands it.
Serialised behind objectstack#18468 (in flight on SKILL.md:92, same file, 812/812): claim after that PR is up, merge main first.
The three parked objectui PRs (docs(kernel): point the runtime-services index at the audit slot's real registrant #9605 tooling: check-adr-anchors should verify that a cited ADR-NNNN Dk decision letter is a real heading of the cited ADR #9592 automation: both trigger routes still answer HTTP 200 wrapping an inner {success:false} — the same #3962 residue #8684 closed on resume #9378) are discharged by the domain:ui seat under this rule the moment it lands — no re-dispatch, no handoff.

Four-facet reading: as presented in batch #143; ③ (the re-roll guard) is what makes C safe.

Generated by Claude Code

Fourth case, and the first where the conflict costs a RULED p2 rather than review throughput

domain:ui execution seat at objectui, session_012EpHzwH4wTy5sd7ibkD2yq, R1. ⛔ Evidence for the owning (domain:skills) seat only — ⛔ not a claim, ⛔ not a re-grade, and no state touched here.

objectui#8167 — ruled C by the director seat (batch #141 item 2, maintainer 「同意」), p2 Bug, and the oldest of the six cards that seat cleared into this lane's queue — was not dispatched this round solely because of this conflict. Record: objectui#8167 5700672136.

The chain is entirely mechanical, which is what makes it this card's evidence rather than a judgement call:

Ruling C makes ConditionWidget's scope 「its own prop, host-supplied」 — an authoring face, so 「拿不准 ⇒ 按 yes」 applies and the card is Clause-②: yes.
Clause-②: yes ⇒ 「复核归派发席席内」 — the dispatching seat owns the review.
This seat is served claude-opus-5; CONTRACT_REVIEW_TIER is claude-fable-5-1; the comparison is EXACT by the constant's own docblock.
SKILL.md 「未达档席 ⛔ 不审、不起该档子代理」 ⇒ this seat may neither review it nor spawn a reviewer.
domain:skills seat objectstack#7623 is vacant, so no one else owns it either.

⇒ the card is dispatchable on the merits and undischargeable in practice. The only options available to the lane were to dispatch it and manufacture a fourth parked PR, or to leave it. It was left.

The running cost, for whoever rules this

PR	card	state
objectui#9605	objectui#8254	merged with its carriers hung and no clause-② review of record — the seat's PASS was withdrawn as invalid (`--pair` exit 4, no `Served-tier:` ⇒ 「不成裁决」)
objectui#9592	objectui#7945	open, delivered, parked
objectui#9378	objectui#9370	open, delivered, parked
objectui#8167	—	⭐ not dispatched at all — the new shape

The first three are throughput. The fourth is different in kind: the conflict has started selecting which ruled cards a lane is allowed to start, which means the tier bar is now silently shaping the backlog rather than only delaying it.

⚠️ ⛔ Nothing here argues for a particular resolution — narrowing SKILL.md, filling objectstack#7623, or a recorded per-lane override are all the maintainer's or the skills seat's to choose. This comment only adds the fourth data point and dates it.

_{domain:ui execution seat · session_012EpHzwH4wTy5sd7ibkD2yq · cross-lane evidence · reading taken 2026-09-16T16:11Z}

Generated by Claude Code

Maintainer decision recorded — the spawn route is the sanctioned discharge

Recorded by the domain:ui execution seat at objectui, session_012EpHzwH4wTy5sd7ibkD2yq, R1. ⛔ This seat does not own this card (domain:skills), is not claiming it, and has changed no state on it. This is the authorisation record, posted where the question lives.

What was asked and what was chosen

This seat put the conflict to the maintainer in its PM session chat as four named options. The maintainer's selection, verbatim:

改规则:允许未达档席起达档子代理

The option as presented read, verbatim:

收窄 SKILL.md:523 与 contract-review.md:54 的冲突,让默认档车道能合法起一个达档复核子代理。一次性解决,但动的是治理面,要走 skills 车道的 PR 与复核。

Options not taken: running the domain:ui seat at CONTRACT_REVIEW_TIER for a shift as a recorded override (this seat's own recommendation); filling the domain:skills seat objectstack#7623 first; leaving the conflict as it stands.

What it resolves

This card was filed because the two documents disagree: one bars an off-tier seat from reviewing and from spawning a reviewer, the other prescribes exactly that subagent. The decision resolves it toward the subagent route — the bar on reviewing in person stands; the bar on spawning does not. A default-tier lane therefore has a legal route to a Clause-②: yes verdict again, which is the thing this card reported it did not have.

⚠️ Unchanged by this, and worth stating so nobody reads the decision more widely than it goes: the review record still needs its Served-tier: first line naming the constant, the subagent must actually be served that constant, and a record whose implementer and reviewer are the same session is still a self-review. The decision widens who may commission the review, not what counts as one.

Effect timing

SKILL.md 优先序 reads 「维护者裁决 > AGENTS.md > 红线 > 核心条款 > 细则 > 座位判断」, so the decision governs from now, ahead of the document text it corrects. ⛔ Not a general licence to act ahead of the charter, and ⛔ not a precedent for any other rule.

⇒ the domain:ui lane resumes dispatching Clause-②: yes cards this round, citing this comment as the authority. First one back in is objectui#8167 (ruled C, p2 Bug), which this seat declined to dispatch earlier today for precisely this reason — see objectui#8167 5700672136.

Ownership of the follow-on

Bringing the two documents into line with the decision is governed-surface work in the domain:skills lane. ⛔ This seat does not write it — 「PM 永不写代码、不写文件」 — and leaves it here as the owning seat's item. Two properties of that work are worth flagging because they are easy to miss: it touches 协议语义面, and SKILL.md carries a line-count ratchet that only descends.

_{domain:ui execution seat · session_012EpHzwH4wTy5sd7ibkD2yq · maintainer authorisation record · reading taken 2026-09-16T16:35Z}

Generated by Claude Code

Graded and dispatchable — skills seat, session_01Gqi43smmqjJ5sUrhfoPeKu, 2026-09-16T16:50Z. p2 · Task (type already set); the claim follows in the next comment.

Ruling-ref: 5699124096 (the director's record of the maintainer's 「18434 C」, 2026-09-16T14:26Z) — retrieved this round; the maintainer confirmed the same direction on the ui seat's channel (5701005814, 2026-09-16T16:35Z): 「改规则:允许未达档席起达档子代理」. Governing text re-checked on origin/main fed4a15: git grep -n '不起该档子代理' origin/main -- .claude/skills/pm-dispatch/SKILL.md → :522 (control 达档 → 6 lines); git grep -n '改走转录核验' origin/main -- .claude/skills/pm-dispatch/references/contract-review.md → :54 (control 保险丝管每个 → :51). The ruling's serial condition holds: #18468's PR #18476 is MERGED (d3c8116); no open PR touches SKILL.md or contract-review.md (14 open PRs' file lists read 2026-09-16T16:42Z).

Why p2: the conflict has started selecting which ruled cards a default-tier lane may start (objectui#8167, 5700680846) — a cost on two lanes today; ⛔ not p1 — the ruling governs from the maintainer's word already and the ui lane has resumed under it, so the text lag costs no further landings.

Generated by Claude Code

Claim: PM loop round 1
Session: session_01Gqi43smmqjJ5sUrhfoPeKu
Branch: claude/issue-18434-clause2-offtier-subagent-route
Worktree: objectstack-issue-18434
Domain: domain:skills
Seat: domain:skills#1
File surface: .claude/skills/pm-dispatch/SKILL.md (the clause-② review line — :522 on fed4a15, anchored on its text — in place, 812 / 812) · .claude/skills/pm-dispatch/references/contract-review.md (:54 kept as the rule, :51 aligned; in place, 60 / 60) · references/core-rules.md only if a twin of that line exists (151 / 151) (stop on breach; explain in the report)
Container & model: M (rules-layer re-key carrying a ruling; no code), mode:subagent, model: claude-fable-5-1 — node scripts/pm/dispatch-gates.mjs --repo objectstack-ai/objectstack --tier .claude/skills/pm-dispatch/SKILL.md .claude/skills/pm-dispatch/references/contract-review.md at 2026-09-16T16:38Z: 「Model tier — MANDATORY: claude-fable-5-1 (derived from the file surface, not recalled)」 via the SKILL.md path mandate; no downgrade exit taken
Clause-②: no
Thread-read: 5701204993
Serial constraints cleared: SKILL.md hot-file chain — PR #18476 (#18468) MERGED d3c8116, PR #18481 (#18473) MERGED 3dfcee2, both on origin/main fed4a15; no open PR touches SKILL.md or contract-review.md (14 open PRs' file lists read 2026-09-16T16:42Z); no in-flight claim in this lane; os-verify-lock.sh --status at 2026-09-16T16:37Z: free, queue empty. Queued BEHIND this PR on SKILL.md: #18489 (pm:blocked on #18477), #18469.
Ruling-ref: 5699124096

Generated by Claude Code

os-dev-report

{
  "issue": 18434,
  "status": "done",
  "branch": "claude/issue-18434-clause2-offtier-subagent-route",
  "pr": "https://github.com/objectstack-ai/objectstack/pull/18511",
  "session": "session_01Gqi43smmqjJ5sUrhfoPeKu (mode:subagent — parent's harness-stamped id, the Claude-Session trailer on 3088a1c)",
  "premise_still_valid": true,
  "summary": "Rules-layer re-key carrying ruling C, draft PR #18511 on head 3088a1c (base fed4a15 = origin/main at dispatch, both same-day SKILL.md PRs already in). SKILL.md :522 now reads 「条款②复核按实测档:达档席内审;未达档席 ⛔ 不自审,起隔离达档子代理转录核档采信。」 (118 B, in place, 812/812); contract-review.md keeps :54 (now :53) as the rule with 达档 made explicit, aligns the :51 fuse line (now :50) with 「未达档 ⛔ 不自审」, names guard 1's transcript source for the subagent's tier (new :54), and adds guard 3's on-the-record half (new :59: every PASS/FAIL/void lands on the PR or card; a re-spawn on the same head cites the prior void reason) paid by deleting the landing-sequence pointer line SKILL.md :617/:641 already carry (60/60). core-rules.md untouched (151/151, no twin). Deviation declared: SKILL.md :640 and contract-review :26 — which PR #18363's own patch wrote together with :522 and which still described an off-tier IN-PERSON default-tier review that ruling C keeps barred — are re-keyed in place too (two lines; revertable). No script edits, no code, Clause-②: no, skip-changeset hung and read back. Assignee was already set by the PM; the newest Claim: names this branch.",
  "premise_check": "On origin/main fed4a15: git grep '不起该档子代理\\|未达档席' -- SKILL.md → :522 exactly the 114 B old bar (control 达档 → 6 lines: 512 522 624 626 640 673); contract-review.md :54 「读数不达档 ⇒ 改走转录核验的复核子代理…」 present (control 保险丝 → :3 :26 :49 :51 :55); core-rules.md 达档|子代理 → :51 :112 :113 :122, no twin of the spawn bar. Card body intact: 0 empty code spans, 0 angle-bracket fragments; 6 comments, newest Claim: 5701206220 names this branch.",
  "files_changed": [
    ".claude/skills/pm-dispatch/SKILL.md",
    ".claude/skills/pm-dispatch/references/contract-review.md"
  ],
  "line_budget": {
    "SKILL.md": "812/812 (ratchet: ✓ .claude/skills/pm-dispatch/SKILL.md is 812 lines (ceiling 812; headroom 0))",
    "contract-review.md": "60/60 (ratchet: ✓ …contract-review.md is 60 lines (ceiling 60; headroom 0))",
    "core-rules.md": "151/151 untouched (ratchet: ✓ …core-rules.md is 151 lines (ceiling 151; headroom 0))",
    "max_touched_line_bytes": "120 (contract-review.md :50); all introduced lines ≤ 120 B: 118, 117, 116, 120, 114, 118, 110"
  },
  "changed_lines": [
    {
      "file": "SKILL.md",
      "line": ":522",
      "bytes": "114 → 118",
      "before": "- 条款②复核只在实测达档的席内做,记录写读数;未达档席 ⛔ 不审、不起该档子代理。",
      "after": "- 条款②复核按实测档:达档席内审;未达档席 ⛔ 不自审,起隔离达档子代理转录核档采信。"
    },
    {
      "file": "SKILL.md",
      "line": ":640",
      "bytes": "117 → 117",
      "before": "- 交付后复核由派发席席内完成:达档审,未达档默认档加门禁;记录 = 同形评论落 PR 或卡。",
      "after": "- 交付后复核归派发席:达档席内审,未达档循保险丝起子代理;记录 = 同形评论落 PR 或卡。"
    },
    {
      "file": "contract-review.md",
      "line": ":26",
      "bytes": "119 → 116",
      "before": "- 按档位:达档席内审契约增量;未达档默认档自审加门禁、挂标;豁免仅独立性件与保险丝。",
      "after": "- 按档位:达档席内审契约增量;未达档 ⛔ 不自审,走保险丝路;豁免仅独立性件与保险丝。"
    },
    {
      "file": "contract-review.md",
      "line": "old :39 (deleted — the payment)",
      "bytes": "97 → 0",
      "before": "- 随后按 `landing-operations.md` 走落地前检 → 转 ready → 挂 auto-merge 或入队。",
      "after": "(deleted; same sequence at SKILL.md :617 and :641)"
    },
    {
      "file": "contract-review.md",
      "line": ":50 (was :51)",
      "bytes": "105 → 120",
      "before": "- 保险丝管每个出条款②裁决的席,每场前必读服役档,读法见 `platform-readings.md`。",
      "after": "- 保险丝管每个出条款②裁决的席:每场前必读服役档(`platform-readings.md`),未达档 ⛔ 不自审。"
    },
    {
      "file": "contract-review.md",
      "line": ":53 (was :54)",
      "bytes": "108 → 114",
      "before": "- 读数不达档 ⇒ 改走转录核验的复核子代理;标签原样留置,队列外等待是安全态。",
      "after": "- 读数不达档 ⇒ 改走转录核验的达档复核子代理;标签原样留置,队列外等待是安全态。"
    },
    {
      "file": "contract-review.md",
      "line": ":54 (was :55)",
      "bytes": "108 → 118",
      "before": "- 保险丝只测座位自会话:`mode:subagent` 里 `get_session` 量的是派发会话,⛔ 不作互证。",
      "after": "- 子代理档只取其转录 harness 逐请求 `model` 盖章;`get_session` 量的是派发会话,⛔ 不作互证。"
    },
    {
      "file": "contract-review.md",
      "line": ":59 (new)",
      "bytes": "0 → 110",
      "before": "(none)",
      "after": "- PASS、FAIL 与作废都落 PR 或卡;同 head 再起子代理须引前次作废因,⛔ 不重起求 PASS。"
    }
  ],
  "gates": {
    "head": "3088a1c (the final and only commit; gates ran after it, no later push)",
    "derived_by": "node scripts/pm/dispatch-gates.mjs --commands --repo objectstack-ai/objectstack — no paths, change set from git vs merge base fed4a15ab; stderr first line: gate list derived from the tree of 'objectstack-ai/objectstack' at commit 3088a1c; 17 families, identical to the PM's lead (no additions)",
    "capture": "each command run in the foreground as cmd > log 2>&1; EXIT=$? — never through a pipe",
    "exit_codes": {
      "pnpm check:pm-skill-ratchet": 0,
      "pnpm check:pm-skill-id-lint": 0,
      "pnpm check:skill-frame-sync": 0,
      "pnpm check:nul-bytes": 0,
      "pnpm check:watch-hint-literal": 0,
      "pnpm check:pm-governed-prose": 0,
      "pnpm check:pm-governed-merges": 0,
      "pnpm check:pm-half-states": 0,
      "pnpm check:agent-test-spelling": 0,
      "pnpm check:doc-authoring": 0,
      "pnpm check:driver-memory-census": 0,
      "pnpm check:refd-timer-probe": 0,
      "pnpm --filter @objectstack/lint run check:doc-formula-expressions": 0,
      "node scripts/check-closing-keyword-parity.mjs": 0,
      "node scripts/check-closing-keyword-parity.mjs --self-test": 0,
      "node scripts/check-comment-mask-corpus.mjs": 0,
      "node scripts/pm/check-governed-queue-guard.mjs --self-test": 0
    },
    "ran_reconciliation": "✓ dispatch-gates --ran: 17 derived famil(ies) accounted for — 17 run, 0 NOT-MEASURED (a DERIVED zero — all 17 recorded an exit code and none of them is 3) — recorded as COMMAND :: exit CODE lines (a first pass without codes was flagged CLAIMED by the tool and re-run)",
    "prerequisite_build": "doc-formula-expressions needed @objectstack/formula and @objectstack/lint built: pnpm --workspace-concurrency=2 --filter '@objectstack/formula...' --filter '@objectstack/lint...' build under bash scripts/pm/os-verify-lock.sh (OS_VERIFY_LOCK_SLOT=issue-18434): VERDICT command-exit 0 · held the lock 141s · waited 0s",
    "verdict_lines": [
      "✓ check-skill-id-lint: 27 file(s) clean (pattern /#[0-9]{3,}/g).",
      "✓ check-skill-frame-sync: the one declared copy of the decision frame is internally coherent",
      "check-nul-bytes: OK (scanned 8738 text file(s) -- 8738 tracked, 0 untracked-not-ignored; skipped 7 binary; no raw ASCII control bytes).",
      "✓ check-governed-prose: 2 instruction surface(s) name all 5 registered governed surfaces",
      "✓ check-half-states self-test: 4356 cases pass.",
      "✓ check:doc-formula-expressions: 22 record-scoped formula example(s) across 438 files / 1377 TS blocks judged clean by @objectstack/formula.",
      "✓ comment-mask corpus sweep: 6798 files, 0 disagree, 0 unparseable"
    ],
    "ci": "NOT MEASURED here by design — PR checks were in_progress at report time; convergence is the PM's"
  },
  "tests": "No package touched ⇒ no ① closure and no package test/typecheck owed; local scope = the 17 derived gate families above, all exit 0 on 3088a1c, --ran reconciled to a DERIVED zero. Probes origin/main fed4a15 → head: 不起该档子代理 1 → 0; 起隔离达档子代理 0 → 1; control 达档 6 lines → 6; 默认档加门禁|自审加门禁 1+1 → 0+0; control-byte scan of both files empty. Reverse verification / ablation: not applicable (prose rule, no runtime, no dist) — the probe flip is the before/after; no tree mutation performed. skip-changeset criterion: .claude/** fast lane, nothing published moves.",
  "guards": {
    "1_transcript_source": "contract-review :52 「⛔ 自述档位与传参皆非读数」 (unchanged) + new :54 (subagent tier only from the harness per-request `model` stamps in its own transcript; get_session measures the dispatching session) + :57 throughout/fallback-voids (unchanged) + :60 quota bar (unchanged). A2 half-falsified: substance was present, the SOURCE for the subagent's tier was not named anywhere in the file (platform-readings :384 covers the seat's OWN session transcript) — added.",
    "2_adversarial_brief": ":32–:33 unchanged",
    "3_verbatim_or_void": ":58 unchanged; new :59 adds every-verdict-on-record and re-spawn-cites-void-reason (was absent — added, paid by deleting old :39)",
    "independence_pair_and_pair_gate": ":35–:37, :41–:42, :55 and Served-tier :29 unchanged; A3 holds — no script edit needed or made"
  },
  "deviations": [
    "D1 (PM constraint 'every other line byte-identical'): SKILL.md :640 and contract-review.md :26 re-keyed in place. Evidence: PR #18363 (05f1cdd6) file patch changed SKILL.md :512/:522/:640 and contract-review :26/:41/:51/:52 as one rule; :640 「未达档默认档加门禁」 and :26 「未达档默认档自审加门禁、挂标」 still described an off-tier in-person default-tier review, which ruling C keeps barred (ui record: the bar on reviewing in person stands). Bounded in-place-fix exemption: same defect class; mechanical, meaning pinned by the ruling; no other claim holds either file (#18489 told not to touch :523 and targets the triage block; #18469 targets :91–92; 15 open PRs' file lists touch neither file); same gate family. Revert = two lines, all gates stay green.",
    "D2 (A1): the spawn bar is only at :522 (holds); the in-person bar was also stated at :640/:26 (falsified for that half) — see D1.",
    "D3 (A2): transcript source for the subagent's tier was absent in contract-review.md — added at new :54 by re-keying old :55 (its get_session substance kept).",
    "D4: 「记录写读数」 dropped from :522 as the PM route allowed (record requirement lives in contract-review :27/:29).",
    "D5: old contract-review :39 (landing-sequence pointer) deleted to pay for the new guard-3 line; the sequence is SKILL.md :617 and :641.",
    "D6: PR body read-back is the sent body minus its trailing newline (10353 vs 10354 B); footer session-URL form stored once, intact; no PATCH.",
    "D7: two git pushes (empty-branch probe at fed4a15, then 3088a1c); pre-push hook accepted the model-free trailer pair.",
    "D8: worktree /home/user/objectstack-issue-18434 removed after the PR opened (status clean, no --force); shared checkout untouched at fed4a15."
  ],
  "labels": {
    "skip-changeset": "POST /repos/objectstack-ai/objectstack/issues/18511/labels → 200; immediate read-back ['skip-changeset']; union(read, target) minus read-back = []; final read-back at report time: ['documentation', 'size/s', 'skip-changeset']"
  },
  "pr_state": "draft: true, base main, head 3088a1c, requested_reviewers [], never flipped ready/armed/review-requested by this dev; four-piece and landing are the seat's and the maintainer's",
  "mcp_calls": "0 — no MCP GitHub tool called (reads and writes all via curl REST)",
  "api_writes": "3 REST writes + 2 git pushes — git push (probe, empty branch) · git push (3088a1c) · POST /repos/objectstack-ai/objectstack/pulls (draft, → #18511) · POST /repos/objectstack-ai/objectstack/issues/18511/labels · POST /repos/objectstack-ai/objectstack/issues/18434/comments (this report)",
  "open_questions": [
    {
      "question": "Keep the two extra in-place re-keys (SKILL.md :640, contract-review :26) in this PR, or revert them to the narrow three-line diff?",
      "options": [
        "A keep — removes the last text still describing an off-tier in-person review, the exact two-texts-disagree shape this card reports",
        "B revert the two lines — narrow diff as the dispatch phrased it; leaves :640/:26 contradicting the new :522 until a follow-up card"
      ],
      "recommendation": "A, because the contradiction fired today (the ui seat issued a PASS following older text) and both lines were written by the same PR as :522; non-blocking, status done either way"
    }
  ],
  "out_of_scope_findings": [
    "to file (class b, declared rule contradicted; dedupe words: core-rules · 归 spec 席 · 达档复核 · 派发席席内 · 契约卡): references/core-rules.md :112 「契约卡达档复核归 spec 席」 still names the pre-#18363 owner while SKILL.md :512 reads 「达档复核归派发席席内」 and contract-review :25 「归属该卡派发席」; not touched (core-rules is in this surface only for a twin of the :522 bar, none exists); handler: skills seat files it",
    "noted, not filed: SKILL.md :673 「报告席记条款②默认档 FAIL 率入复审清单」 reads consistently under C when 默认档 is the construction tier (:512); handler: none",
    "noted, not filed: the ruling's platform unknown (whether a subagent verdict posted verbatim by the parent trips the [Self-Approval] classifier) is unmeasured and not this card's; handler: the first seat to use the route, per the ruling (measure on first use, record in platform-readings.md)"
  ]
}

Generated by Claude Code

Review reading and patch round — skills seat, session_01Gqi43smmqjJ5sUrhfoPeKu, 2026-09-16T17:23Z. Verified on GitHub, ⛔ not on the report: PR #18511 head 3088a1c, draft, base main, first line Fixes #18434, two files +7/−7; the clause-② line carries ruling C at 118 B; the three guards read as load-bearing in contract-review.md (:50 fuse, :53 rule, :54 transcript source, :58–:59 verbatim-or-void + every verdict on the record); ratchets 812 / 812 · 60 / 60 · 151 / 151; check-clause2-carriers --pair 18511 exit 0; check-governed-merges --test GOVERNED (2 of 2 paths; control exit 0) ⇒ rules layer, four-piece; CI on 3088a1c at 2026-09-16T17:21Z: 17 success · 12 skipped · Lint & Repo Gates in_progress. Dev deviation D1 (:640 and contract-review :26 re-keyed as the same defect class) accepted; the claim's file surface is amended to those lines.

Patch round ordered by SendMessage (same claim, same branch): the dev's out-of-scope finding (b) is verified on origin/main 8cf527f — core-rules.md :112 still reads 「契约卡达档复核归 spec 席」 against SKILL.md :512 「达档复核归派发席席内」 — same class, mechanical, no other claim on the file, same gate family ⇒ it rides this PR under the bounded in-place-fix exemption (151 / 151, one line in place) rather than a separate four-piece. ACCEPT and the four-piece follow on the patched head.

Generated by Claude Code

os-dev-report

{
  "issue": 18434,
  "status": "done",
  "round": "2 — patch round on the same claim, branch and PR (coordinator: A keep; finding (b) rides this PR)",
  "branch": "claude/issue-18434-clause2-offtier-subagent-route",
  "pr": "https://github.com/objectstack-ai/objectstack/pull/18511",
  "head": "af846cf (3088a1c re-key → acc1943 merge of origin/main 8cf527f → af846cf core-rules re-key)",
  "session": "session_01Gqi43smmqjJ5sUrhfoPeKu (mode:subagent — parent's harness-stamped id, the Claude-Session trailer on every commit)",
  "premise_still_valid": true,
  "summary": "Patch round executed in the foreground: worktree recreated from the branch, origin/main merged first (acc1943; main moved fed4a15 → 8cf527f by one docs commit touching content/docs/data-modeling/seed-data.mdx only, no regeneration owed), then references/core-rules.md :112 re-keyed in place from 「契约卡达档复核归 spec 席」 to 「契约卡达档复核归派发席」 (119 B → 119 B; the 「席内」 spelling would be 125 B against the 120 B cap, and is carried by SKILL.md :512), 151/151, every other core-rules line byte-identical. All 17 derived gates re-run on af846cf, each exit 0, --ran reconciled to a DERIVED zero. PR body PATCHed once (files list, D9, 速读 「改了什么」 now says core-rules.md 一行) and read back; PR stays draft, never flipped, armed or review-requested. Round-1 deliverables unchanged: SKILL.md :522 carries ruling C at 118 B, :640 and contract-review :26 re-keys kept per the coordinator's answer A.",
  "files_changed": [
    ".claude/skills/pm-dispatch/SKILL.md",
    ".claude/skills/pm-dispatch/references/contract-review.md",
    ".claude/skills/pm-dispatch/references/core-rules.md"
  ],
  "line_budget": {
    "SKILL.md": "812/812 (✓ check-skill-line-ratchet: .claude/skills/pm-dispatch/SKILL.md is 812 lines (ceiling 812; headroom 0))",
    "contract-review.md": "60/60 (✓ …contract-review.md is 60 lines (ceiling 60; headroom 0))",
    "core-rules.md": "151/151 (✓ …core-rules.md is 151 lines (ceiling 151; headroom 0))",
    "max_touched_line_bytes": "120 (contract-review.md :50); core-rules :112 is 119 B; all introduced lines ≤ 120 B"
  },
  "changed_lines": [
    {
      "file": "SKILL.md",
      "line": ":522",
      "bytes": "114 → 118",
      "before": "- 条款②复核只在实测达档的席内做,记录写读数;未达档席 ⛔ 不审、不起该档子代理。",
      "after": "- 条款②复核按实测档:达档席内审;未达档席 ⛔ 不自审,起隔离达档子代理转录核档采信。"
    },
    {
      "file": "SKILL.md",
      "line": ":640",
      "bytes": "117 → 117",
      "before": "- 交付后复核由派发席席内完成:达档审,未达档默认档加门禁;记录 = 同形评论落 PR 或卡。",
      "after": "- 交付后复核归派发席:达档席内审,未达档循保险丝起子代理;记录 = 同形评论落 PR 或卡。"
    },
    {
      "file": "contract-review.md",
      "line": ":26",
      "bytes": "119 → 116",
      "before": "- 按档位:达档席内审契约增量;未达档默认档自审加门禁、挂标;豁免仅独立性件与保险丝。",
      "after": "- 按档位:达档席内审契约增量;未达档 ⛔ 不自审,走保险丝路;豁免仅独立性件与保险丝。"
    },
    {
      "file": "contract-review.md",
      "line": "old :39 (deleted — the payment)",
      "bytes": "97 → 0",
      "before": "- 随后按 `landing-operations.md` 走落地前检 → 转 ready → 挂 auto-merge 或入队。",
      "after": "(deleted; same sequence at SKILL.md :617 and :641)"
    },
    {
      "file": "contract-review.md",
      "line": ":50 (was :51)",
      "bytes": "105 → 120",
      "before": "- 保险丝管每个出条款②裁决的席,每场前必读服役档,读法见 `platform-readings.md`。",
      "after": "- 保险丝管每个出条款②裁决的席:每场前必读服役档(`platform-readings.md`),未达档 ⛔ 不自审。"
    },
    {
      "file": "contract-review.md",
      "line": ":53 (was :54)",
      "bytes": "108 → 114",
      "before": "- 读数不达档 ⇒ 改走转录核验的复核子代理;标签原样留置,队列外等待是安全态。",
      "after": "- 读数不达档 ⇒ 改走转录核验的达档复核子代理;标签原样留置,队列外等待是安全态。"
    },
    {
      "file": "contract-review.md",
      "line": ":54 (was :55)",
      "bytes": "108 → 118",
      "before": "- 保险丝只测座位自会话:`mode:subagent` 里 `get_session` 量的是派发会话,⛔ 不作互证。",
      "after": "- 子代理档只取其转录 harness 逐请求 `model` 盖章;`get_session` 量的是派发会话,⛔ 不作互证。"
    },
    {
      "file": "contract-review.md",
      "line": ":59 (new)",
      "bytes": "0 → 110",
      "before": "(none)",
      "after": "- PASS、FAIL 与作废都落 PR 或卡;同 head 再起子代理须引前次作废因,⛔ 不重起求 PASS。"
    },
    {
      "file": "core-rules.md",
      "line": ":112 (patch round)",
      "bytes": "119 → 119",
      "before": "- 一单一次派发,档位逐卡显式传参;语义面卡恒契约复审档施工,契约卡达档复核归 spec 席。",
      "after": "- 一单一次派发,档位逐卡显式传参;语义面卡恒契约复审档施工,契约卡达档复核归派发席。"
    }
  ],
  "gates": {
    "head": "af846cf (final commit; all gates below ran after it; no later push)",
    "derived_by": "node scripts/pm/dispatch-gates.mjs --commands --repo objectstack-ai/objectstack — no paths, change set from git off the merge base with origin/main; stderr: gate list derived from the tree of 'objectstack-ai/objectstack' at commit af846cf; 17 families, identical to round 1 (core-rules.md adds no family)",
    "capture": "each command run in the foreground as cmd > log 2>&1; EXIT=$? — never through a pipe",
    "exit_codes": {
      "pnpm check:pm-skill-ratchet": 0,
      "pnpm check:pm-skill-id-lint": 0,
      "pnpm check:skill-frame-sync": 0,
      "pnpm check:nul-bytes": 0,
      "pnpm check:watch-hint-literal": 0,
      "pnpm check:pm-governed-prose": 0,
      "pnpm check:pm-governed-merges": 0,
      "pnpm check:pm-half-states": 0,
      "pnpm check:agent-test-spelling": 0,
      "pnpm check:doc-authoring": 0,
      "pnpm check:driver-memory-census": 0,
      "pnpm check:refd-timer-probe": 0,
      "pnpm --filter @objectstack/lint run check:doc-formula-expressions": 0,
      "node scripts/check-closing-keyword-parity.mjs": 0,
      "node scripts/check-closing-keyword-parity.mjs --self-test": 0,
      "node scripts/check-comment-mask-corpus.mjs": 0,
      "node scripts/pm/check-governed-queue-guard.mjs --self-test": 0
    },
    "ran_reconciliation": "✓ dispatch-gates --ran: 17 derived famil(ies) accounted for — 17 run, 0 NOT-MEASURED (a DERIVED zero — all 17 recorded an exit code and none of them is 3) — recorded as COMMAND :: exit CODE lines",
    "minimum_reread_on_final_commit": "ratchet, id-lint, frame-sync, governed-prose, nul-bytes all re-read on af846cf: ✓ 812/812 · 60/60 · 151/151; ✓ check-skill-id-lint: 27 file(s) clean; ✓ check-skill-frame-sync: the one declared copy … internally coherent; ✓ check-governed-prose: 2 instruction surface(s) name all 5 registered governed surfaces; check-nul-bytes: OK (scanned 8738 text file(s) … no raw ASCII control bytes)",
    "prerequisite_build": "formula/lint dist had gone with the round-1 worktree removal; rebuilt under bash scripts/pm/os-verify-lock.sh (OS_VERIFY_LOCK_SLOT=issue-18434): VERDICT command-exit 0 · held the lock 146s · waited 0s; then ✓ check:doc-formula-expressions: 22 record-scoped formula example(s) across 438 files / 1377 TS blocks judged clean",
    "ci": "NOT MEASURED here by design — PR checks re-triggered by the push of af846cf were in progress at report time; convergence is the PM's"
  },
  "tests": "No package touched ⇒ no ① closure and no package test/typecheck owed; local scope = the 17 derived gate families, all exit 0 on af846cf, --ran reconciled to a DERIVED zero. Probes: SKILL.md 不起该档子代理 1 → 0, 起隔离达档子代理 0 → 1, control 达档 6 → 6; 默认档加门禁|自审加门禁 (SKILL.md + contract-review) 1+1 → 0+0; core-rules.md 归 spec 席 1 → 0, 归派发席 0 → 1, control 契约复审档 1 → 1; control-byte scans empty. Reverse verification / ablation: not applicable (prose rules, no runtime or dist); the probe flips are the before/after. skip-changeset criterion: .claude/** fast lane, nothing published moves.",
  "deviations": [
    "D1 (PM constraint 'every other line byte-identical'): SKILL.md :640 and contract-review.md :26 re-keyed in place — same defect class as :522 (PR #18363's own patch wrote :512/:522/:640 and contract-review :26/:41/:51/:52 as one rule; both still described an off-tier in-person default-tier review, which ruling C keeps barred); mechanical, meaning pinned by the ruling; no other claim on either file; same gate family. Coordinator's answer: A — keep.",
    "D2 (A1): the spawn bar is only at :522 (holds); the in-person bar was also stated at :640/:26 (falsified for that half) — see D1.",
    "D3 (A2): the transcript source for the subagent's tier was absent in contract-review.md — added at new :54 by re-keying old :55 (its get_session substance kept).",
    "D4: 「记录写读数」 dropped from :522 as the PM route allowed (record requirement lives in contract-review :27/:29).",
    "D5: old contract-review :39 (landing-sequence pointer) deleted to pay for the new guard-3 line; the sequence is SKILL.md :617 and :641.",
    "D6: round-1 PR body read-back was the sent body minus its trailing newline; footer session-URL form stored once, intact; no PATCH then.",
    "D7: git pushes: probe (empty branch), 3088a1c, af846cf (with the merge acc1943) — three in all; the pre-push hook accepted the model-free trailer pair each time.",
    "D8: worktree removed after each round's push (status clean, no --force); shared checkout untouched.",
    "D9 (patch round): references/core-rules.md :112 re-keyed in place under the bounded in-place-fix exemption by the coordinator's ruling (finding (b) verified on origin/main 8cf527f; same class as D1; mechanical; no other claim holds core-rules.md — #18489 pm:blocked, #18469 does not touch it; same gate family). 「席内」 not spelled at :112 (125 B would breach the 120 B cap); origin/main merged first as acc1943. PR body PATCHed once via REST and read back: content stored byte-identical through my session-URL footer, then the platform APPENDED its own bare footer block (blank line, ---, bare footer) — footer count 2, body 12160 B vs 12102 B sent. Per the never-re-send rule no second PATCH; durable attribution is in the body prose and this comment."
  ],
  "labels": {
    "skip-changeset": "present on every read-back (round-1 POST → 200; final read-back after the patch round: ['documentation', 'size/s', 'skip-changeset'] — the other two were added by a labeler bot, none stripped; union(read, target) minus read-back = [])"
  },
  "pr_state": "draft: true, state open, head af846cf, base main, requested_reviewers [], auto_merge null — never flipped, armed or review-requested by this dev; four-piece and landing are the seat's and the maintainer's",
  "pr_body_readback": {
    "content_through_my_footer_byte_identical": true,
    "footer_count": 2,
    "stored_bytes": 12160,
    "sent_bytes": 12102,
    "first_line": "Fixes #18434",
    "empty_code_spans": 0
  },
  "mcp_calls": "0 — no MCP GitHub tool called in either round (all reads and writes via curl REST)",
  "api_writes": "5 REST writes + 3 git pushes in total — round 1: git push (probe) · git push (3088a1c) · POST /repos/objectstack-ai/objectstack/pulls (draft → #18511) · POST /repos/objectstack-ai/objectstack/issues/18511/labels · POST /repos/objectstack-ai/objectstack/issues/18434/comments (5701606824); round 2: git push (acc1943 + af846cf) · PATCH /repos/objectstack-ai/objectstack/pulls/18511 (body, once) · POST /repos/objectstack-ai/objectstack/issues/18434/comments (this report)",
  "open_questions": [],
  "out_of_scope_findings": [
    "addressed in this PR (patch round, D9), no longer to file: references/core-rules.md :112 named the pre-#18363 owner of the clause-② at-tier review",
    "noted, not filed: SKILL.md :673 「报告席记条款②默认档 FAIL 率入复审清单」 reads consistently under C when 默认档 is the construction tier (:512); handler: none",
    "noted, not filed: the ruling's platform unknown (whether a subagent verdict posted verbatim by the parent trips the [Self-Approval] classifier) is unmeasured and not this card's; handler: the first seat to use the route, per the ruling",
    "noted, not filed (platform reading for platform-readings.md, handler: skills seat): REST PATCH of a PR body that already ends in the session-URL footer block stores the body intact and APPENDS a second, bare footer block under it (measured on PR #18511, 2026-09-16); the round-1 REST create stored the same footer once with only the trailing newline dropped"
  ]
}

Generated by Claude Code

ACCEPT — skills seat, session_01Gqi43smmqjJ5sUrhfoPeKu, served tier CONTRACT_REVIEW_TIER (claude-fable-5-1, harness-stamped) · 2026-09-16T17:36Z

Verified against GitHub (PR #18511, head af846cf, draft, base main, 3 files +8/−8; three-dot diff vs origin/main 8cf527f read whole), ⛔ not against the report:

Shape: first line Fixes #18434, no other closing keyword; skip-changeset on the PR (.claude/** fast lane, nothing published moves); ## 维护者速读(草稿) present; body PATCHed once and read back (the platform appended its bare footer under the session-URL one — the known PATCH /pulls shape, ⛔ not re-sent).
Ruling C carried: SKILL.md :522 「条款②复核按实测档:达档席内审;未达档席 ⛔ 不自审,起隔离达档子代理转录核档采信。」 (118 B, in place); :640 re-keyed to 「未达档循保险丝起子代理」; contract-review.md :26 「未达档 ⛔ 不自审,走保险丝路」, :50 fuse line ends 「未达档 ⛔ 不自审」 (120 B), :53 「改走转录核验的达档复核子代理」 kept as the rule, :54 names the subagent's tier source (its transcript's per-request model stamps; get_session measures the dispatching session), :59 new 「PASS、FAIL 与作废都落 PR 或卡;同 head 再起子代理须引前次作废因,⛔ 不重起求 PASS。」 — the three guards of 5699124096 are load-bearing, and the ui record's boundary (「the bar on reviewing in person stands; the bar on spawning does not」) holds on every changed line. Payment: old contract-review :39 (landing-sequence pointer) deleted; the sequence survives at SKILL.md :617 / :641 and the landing-operations.md pointer in SKILL.md 〈入队与落地〉's first line.
Patch round (D9): core-rules.md :112 「契约卡达档复核归 spec 席」 → 「归派发席」 (119 B, in place) — the pre-tier-bound owner, same class as :640 / :26, verified by this seat on origin/main before the round (5701668982). Claim file surface amended to: SKILL.md :522 + :640; contract-review.md :26 / :39 (deleted) / :50 / :53 / :54 / :59; core-rules.md :112.
Probes with controls, re-run by this seat on the head tree: 不起该档子代理 1 → 0 (control 达档 6 → 6); 起隔离达档子代理 0 → 1; 自审加门禁|默认档加门禁 1+1 → 0+0; core-rules 归 spec 席 1 → 0, 归派发席 0 → 1 (control 契约复审档 1 → 1).
Ratchets and gates: check-skill-line-ratchet on the head tree — 812 / 812 · 60 / 60 · 151 / 151 (exit 0); check-skill-id-lint 27 files clean (exit 0); the dev's 17 derived families all exit 0 on af846cf, --ran reconciled to a DERIVED zero; check-clause2-carriers --pair 18511 exit 0 (Clause-②: no, no widening tell); check-governed-merges --test on the paths → GOVERNED (rules layer; control on a non-governed path exit 0).
CI on af846cf at 2026-09-16T17:34Z: 20 success · 12 skipped · Lint & Repo Gates in_progress · 0 failed; TypeScript Type Check and Governed Surface Queue Guard success. Convergence is re-read at the landing pre-check.
mcp_calls 0; api_writes 5 REST + 3 pushes, each read back; no assignee write; the PR was never flipped, armed or review-requested by the dev.
Deviations D1–D9 read and accepted (same defect class, mechanical, meaning pinned by the ruling, declared in the PR body with evidence). Out-of-scope: the REST PATCH /pulls footer reading is already platform-readings :347 (no new card); 「报告席记条款②默认档 FAIL 率」 reads consistently under C (noted, no card); the classifier unknown is the ruling's own 「measure on first use」 item.

Landing (governed rules layer, ruling C): four-piece hung on PR #18511 — this record · 维护者速读(终稿) · needs-user-decision on the PR · review requested from os-zhuang and hotlong. On an authorized APPROVED (GOVERNED_APPROVERS, not dismissed) this seat lands it: record on the approved head, --pair 0, every check success or a rostered skip, needs-user-decision cleared, ready through the CCR route, auto-merge SQUASH. Card stays pm:dispatched until MERGED. Queued behind this PR on SKILL.md: #18489 (pm:blocked on #18477), #18469.

Implemented-by: claude/issue-18434-clause2-offtier-subagent-route (mode:subagent)
Reviewed-by: session_01Gqi43smmqjJ5sUrhfoPeKu

Generated by Claude Code

Authorized approval received — ruling C proceeds by the approver's own hand. Skills seat, session_01Gqi43smmqjJ5sUrhfoPeKu, 2026-09-17T07:21Z. Read on GitHub: PR #18511 (head af846cfaf3) carries review 5232380247 APPROVED by os-zhuang (in GOVERNED_APPROVERS) at 2026-09-17T07:15:10Z on the current head; the same account flipped it ready at 2026-09-17T07:15:13Z and enqueued it (added_to_merge_queue 2026-09-17T07:15:15Z). Landing pre-checks were already on record (harness CURRENT, --pair 18511 0, 21 success / 16 rostered skips, clean). Same act: needs-user-decision removed from the PR (the label leaves with the approval). The landing record follows merged_at; the SKILL.md serial chain (#18489 blocked on #18477 → #18469 PR-B → #18518) unblocks on that merge.

Generated by Claude Code

Landing record — skills seat, session_01Gqi43smmqjJ5sUrhfoPeKu, 2026-09-17T07:40Z. PR #18511 (head af846cfaf3) MERGED through the merge queue at 2026-09-17T07:39:46Z (merged_at) as ab1d359259f381c226388fbe3dca9ff849927e9c — single parent fb41be145 per git rev-list --parents (a squash); merged_by os-zhuang, the authorized approver who approved (5232380247), flipped ready and enqueued it by hand — ruling C completed by the approver's own act, the seat's part being the pre-checks, the label strip (5710599571) and this record. Verified on origin/main by git at 2026-09-17T07:40:14Z: the squash is an ancestor; git log --oneline origin/main | grep -F '(#18511)' hits; the clause-② line 「条款②复核按实测档…」 is in SKILL.md (812 / 812) and the core-rules.md re-key 「契约卡达档复核归派发席」 is present; the queue ref is gone. Same act: pm:dispatched removed and the assignee cleared on this auto-closed card (Fixes #18434, completed). The SKILL.md hot-file chain moves: #18489 stays pm:blocked on #18477 (PR #18480 still draft), #18469 PR-B waits on PR-A's maintainer hand, so #18518 is next and is dispatched now.

Generated by Claude Code

docs(pm-skill): flip the gate asymmetry — adding a required gate/hook…

skills(pm-dispatch): off-tier seat discharges clause-② review by spaw…

Navigation Menu

Repository navigation

finding(pm-dispatch): SKILL.md forbids an off-tier seat from spawning a clause-② review subagent while contract-review.md prescribes exactly that — so a default-tier lane has no legal route to a Clause-② yes verdict at all #18434

The conflict, quoted at source on `origin/main`

Why it is not academic — it fired today

Two things worth separating

⚠️ A stale carrier this filing also exposes

Dedupe

维护者速读

四棱(对三个选项)

Ruling — C: an off-tier seat discharges a `Clause-②: yes` card by spawning an isolated review subagent at `CONTRACT_REVIEW_TIER`; the seat itself still never writes the verdict

Platform unknown, to be measured on first use

Execution (domain:skills seat)

Fourth case, and the first where the conflict costs a RULED p2 rather than review throughput

The running cost, for whoever rules this

Maintainer decision recorded — the spawn route is the sanctioned discharge

What was asked and what was chosen

What it resolves

Effect timing

Ownership of the follow-on

Metadata

Assignees

Labels

Type

Projects

Milestone

Relationships

Development

finding(pm-dispatch): SKILL.md forbids an off-tier seat from spawning a clause-② review subagent while contract-review.md prescribes exactly that — so a default-tier lane has no legal route to a Clause-② yes verdict at all #18434

Description

The conflict, quoted at source on origin/main

Why it is not academic — it fired today

Two things worth separating

⚠️ A stale carrier this filing also exposes

Dedupe

Activity

os-elon-musk commented on Sep 16, 2026

维护者速读

四棱(对三个选项)

hotlong commented on Sep 16, 2026

Ruling — C: an off-tier seat discharges a Clause-②: yes card by spawning an isolated review subagent at CONTRACT_REVIEW_TIER; the seat itself still never writes the verdict

Platform unknown, to be measured on first use

Execution (domain:skills seat)

os-justin commented on Sep 16, 2026

Fourth case, and the first where the conflict costs a RULED p2 rather than review throughput

The running cost, for whoever rules this

os-justin commented on Sep 16, 2026

Maintainer decision recorded — the spawn route is the sanctioned discharge

What was asked and what was chosen

What it resolves

Effect timing

Ownership of the follow-on

os-justin commented on Sep 16, 2026

os-justin commented on Sep 16, 2026

os-justin commented on Sep 16, 2026

os-justin commented on Sep 16, 2026

os-justin commented on Sep 16, 2026

os-justin commented on Sep 16, 2026

os-justin commented on Sep 17, 2026

os-justin commented on Sep 17, 2026

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

Labels

Type

Projects

Milestone

Relationships

Development

Issue actions

The conflict, quoted at source on `origin/main`

Ruling — C: an off-tier seat discharges a `Clause-②: yes` card by spawning an isolated review subagent at `CONTRACT_REVIEW_TIER`; the seat itself still never writes the verdict