The engine opened this item itself — you didn't create it.
What this is. A conformance audit of the build against the locked engine-planning design confirmed the divergences below (re-verified against current main) and grouped them into one build-session-sized unit for the lifecycle subsystem.
Across three deployed lifecycle flows -- close-turn, external-contribution submit, and the product-design spec-lock -- the operator-facing legibility, consent, and advisory surfaces exist on paper but never actually reach the operator, all the same 'narration/consent parked in a doc with no standing-context home or live wire' failure. In close-turn: the recording posture that POPULATES the trust-spine gate is documented only in on-demand runbooks/policy (absent from the deployed floor, boot, and conduct defaults), so a cold session is never told that raising a concern means running close.py record, the recorded subset stays empty, and the gate mechanically no-ops; the repeated-pushback loop sentence is authored-then-dead-code, the clean-turn summary depends on unwired spontaneous narration, the cap-stop rides a non-guaranteed stderr channel, and a stale test asserts a dead behavior. In external-contribution submit: the spec's deliberate SOFT section-6 leak nudge is turned into an unbypassable halt with no override, its name-based predicate misdiagnoses an upstream product's own CLAUDE.md/CODEOWNERS as an engine leak, the operator runbook tells a fork-plus-brownfield engine-mechanic story the spec rules out, and submitted-is-not-accepted has no status-check tool (narration parked in a doc). In product-design: even with design-review installed, the spec locks on validation-green + operator acceptance alone -- the four advisory lenses are never invoked and no surface records product-design as their second consumer, so an audit can't see the advisory tie. A single build session gives these narration/consent surfaces standing-context homes and live wires (relay/narration instruments, a status-check surface, a soft-tier + disambiguated predicate, and the advisory-lens invocation + consumed-by record).
Findings in this unit:
-
U18: Give the recording posture a standing-context home (deployed floor / boot / conduct defaults) so a cold session knows raising a concern means running close.py record and the trust-spine gate stops no-op'ing.
-
U18: Wire the repeated-pushback loop line and the clean-turn disposition summary into narration (via the must-push relay); route the cap-stop announcement through the AI relay instead of best-effort stderr.
-
U18: Fix the stale close test name/comment that assert the dead 'import fails -> silent no-op' behavior (memory has shipped).
-
U20: Make submit()'s section-6 leak nudge a soft, operator-decidable tier (not an unbypassable halt with no override).
-
U20: Disambiguate an upstream product's own foundation-named files (CLAUDE.md / .github/CODEOWNERS) from genuine engine leaks so a true product contribution is not misdiagnosed and blocked.
-
U20: Rewrite the engine-mechanic operator runbook to the separate-workspace variant (drop the fork-plus-brownfield story the spec rules out).
-
U20: Add a status-check narration surface for submitted-is-not-accepted so where-does-it-stand is not parked in a doc.
-
U13: Wire product-intake's spec-lock ceremony to invoke the design-review quartet advisorily when installed.
-
U13: Record product-design as the reciprocal second consumer in the plan-review personas' consumed-by record so no installed lens dangles.
-
Spec authority: systems/lifecycle/close/README.md 'The finding-disposition gate' + 'Bounded, legible, and leak-proof' bullets 3-4; systems/lifecycle/external-contribution/README.md #Keeping the contribution clean + #The operator's view + #The engine-mechanic; modules/product-design/README.md:98-111; scenarios/product-design-intake.md:47-49; decision-log.md D-072, D-107, D-244(3), D-250
-
Quality attributes: Trustworthiness-for-a-non-engineer, Auditability, Cold-start-readiness, Degradability
What happens next. A single build session should resolve every item in the checklist above, each fixed to full spec capability (principles §20). The engine opened this item for your review; nothing merges without the protected-branch gate.
More detail.
The engine opened this item itself — you didn't create it.
What this is. A conformance audit of the build against the locked engine-planning design confirmed the divergences below (re-verified against current
main) and grouped them into one build-session-sized unit for the lifecycle subsystem.Across three deployed lifecycle flows -- close-turn, external-contribution submit, and the product-design spec-lock -- the operator-facing legibility, consent, and advisory surfaces exist on paper but never actually reach the operator, all the same 'narration/consent parked in a doc with no standing-context home or live wire' failure. In close-turn: the recording posture that POPULATES the trust-spine gate is documented only in on-demand runbooks/policy (absent from the deployed floor, boot, and conduct defaults), so a cold session is never told that raising a concern means running close.py record, the recorded subset stays empty, and the gate mechanically no-ops; the repeated-pushback loop sentence is authored-then-dead-code, the clean-turn summary depends on unwired spontaneous narration, the cap-stop rides a non-guaranteed stderr channel, and a stale test asserts a dead behavior. In external-contribution submit: the spec's deliberate SOFT section-6 leak nudge is turned into an unbypassable halt with no override, its name-based predicate misdiagnoses an upstream product's own CLAUDE.md/CODEOWNERS as an engine leak, the operator runbook tells a fork-plus-brownfield engine-mechanic story the spec rules out, and submitted-is-not-accepted has no status-check tool (narration parked in a doc). In product-design: even with design-review installed, the spec locks on validation-green + operator acceptance alone -- the four advisory lenses are never invoked and no surface records product-design as their second consumer, so an audit can't see the advisory tie. A single build session gives these narration/consent surfaces standing-context homes and live wires (relay/narration instruments, a status-check surface, a soft-tier + disambiguated predicate, and the advisory-lens invocation + consumed-by record).
Findings in this unit:
U18: Give the recording posture a standing-context home (deployed floor / boot / conduct defaults) so a cold session knows raising a concern means running close.py record and the trust-spine gate stops no-op'ing.
U18: Wire the repeated-pushback loop line and the clean-turn disposition summary into narration (via the must-push relay); route the cap-stop announcement through the AI relay instead of best-effort stderr.
U18: Fix the stale close test name/comment that assert the dead 'import fails -> silent no-op' behavior (memory has shipped).
U20: Make submit()'s section-6 leak nudge a soft, operator-decidable tier (not an unbypassable halt with no override).
U20: Disambiguate an upstream product's own foundation-named files (CLAUDE.md / .github/CODEOWNERS) from genuine engine leaks so a true product contribution is not misdiagnosed and blocked.
U20: Rewrite the engine-mechanic operator runbook to the separate-workspace variant (drop the fork-plus-brownfield story the spec rules out).
U20: Add a status-check narration surface for submitted-is-not-accepted so where-does-it-stand is not parked in a doc.
U13: Wire product-intake's spec-lock ceremony to invoke the design-review quartet advisorily when installed.
U13: Record product-design as the reciprocal second consumer in the plan-review personas' consumed-by record so no installed lens dangles.
Spec authority: systems/lifecycle/close/README.md 'The finding-disposition gate' + 'Bounded, legible, and leak-proof' bullets 3-4; systems/lifecycle/external-contribution/README.md #Keeping the contribution clean + #The operator's view + #The engine-mechanic; modules/product-design/README.md:98-111; scenarios/product-design-intake.md:47-49; decision-log.md D-072, D-107, D-244(3), D-250
Quality attributes: Trustworthiness-for-a-non-engineer, Auditability, Cold-start-readiness, Degradability
What happens next. A single build session should resolve every item in the checklist above, each fixed to full spec capability (principles §20). The engine opened this item for your review; nothing merges without the protected-branch gate.
More detail.