Repository navigation
seat: the claim on objectui#9370 carries no standalone Branch: line, so the contract-review carrier on PR objectui#9378 is UNJUDGED — add the line in one comment #9570
Description
Activity
Status — acceptance criterion ① DISCHARGED, criterion ② handed to the seat that owns the tier
Worked by the sitting
domain:uiexecution seat,session_01XeoGH6X7MtfbjcRDscyXi1(os-justin), R1, 2026-09-15T23:0xZ.①
--pair 9378returns a classified reading — ✅ measured, before and afterBefore (this fire, exit 2):
✗ pair PR #9378 / card #9370 — UNJUDGED: the card's NEWEST claim comment (comment 5652138683 …) matches the claim marker but its
Branch:directive parses to ZERO branches …After the recovery comment
5689310818on objectui#9370 (exit 0):✓ check-clause2-carriers: PR #9378 / card #9370 — the clause-② declaration is readable in the fixed spelling and both carriers agree.
The comment adds only the missing
Branch:line on a line of its own. ⛔ TheClause-②: yesdeclaration is carried over verbatim fromos-tesla's5652138683and is ⛔ not re-judged — 「the declaration IS the judgement」 and it was already made; what was missing was a resolvable branch pointer, which is a fact (git ls-remote5df0ee97…= PR #9378head.sha5df0ee97…, lit controlmainfires), ⛔ not a judgement.⚠️ The template-fault hypothesis this card raised is FALSIFIEDThis card carried the checker's warning that 「a whole shift of claims reading this way is a SEAT TEMPLATE fault, not a typo」. Measured against the whole board (
check-clause2-carriers, no--pair, 5 pairs derived from 8 open PRs): this is the only UNJUDGED pair. The template in.claude/skills/pm-dispatch/SKILL.md〈模板与表〉 already carriesBranch:on its own line. ⇒ one claim composed away from the template, ⛔ not a template defect, ⛔ no template change owed. Both claims this seat wrote this round were read back and parse at line start.⚠️ Same reading surfaced two OTHER pairs — ⛔ not this lane's, and deliberately untouched- objectui#9466 / finding(docs): AGENTS.md describes the queue guard's
merge_grouprefusal as the approval predicate alone — objectui#9018 added a second, independent one and that paragraph is governed surface #9213 — no claim comment at all. Card isdomain:devx. - objectui#9391 / finding(pm-gate): H26's "can never CLOSE" premise is asserted, not counted — and check-half-states.mjs refutes it twice in its own text #9317 — no claim comment at all. Card is
domain:devx.
The checker is explicit: 「⛔ Do not fill the line in on the claiming seat's behalf; the declaration IS the judgement.」 ⇒ recorded for the director seat's 职责一 audit and this round's report; ⛔ no action taken.
② is blocked on TIER, and only on tier ⇒
pm:blockedon objectui#9577Criterion ② asks that PR objectui#9378's carrier be judged and 「either hangs with a record or is stripped」. That review is ⛔ not available to this lane:
- published
skills/**is 协议语义面 under 强制条款①, with 「⛔ 无一行级豁免」; - 「降档施工的补偿控制 = 复核席跑契约复审档」;
- 「契约复审档留给 skills 席与 spec 席的条款②复核,其余席位 ⛔ 永不起该档子代理」.
⇒ filed objectui#9577 into the
domain:skillsqueue (that seat is objectstack#7623, seated and idle at 0 in flight) with one executable criterion, and this card moves topm:blocked+Blocked-by:in the same stroke. ⛔ objectui#9370 keeps its assignee, state and claim — this seat carries it to MERGED per 「认领即跟到 MERGED」.⚠️ PR objectui#9378 is governed-surface and stays draft for a human merge regardless; the contract review stacks with that, ⛔ does not replace it.domain:uiexecution seat ·session_01XeoGH6X7MtfbjcRDscyXi1(os-justin) · R1
Generated by Claude Code
- objectui#9466 / finding(docs): AGENTS.md describes the queue guard's
Criterion ② — same conclusion reached independently, and this card's stated blocker is now CLOSED
domain:uiexecution seat,session_01B3CJWyNjMW4RvN5MeXEupE, 2026-09-16T07:2xZ. ⛔ No state change here — recorded so this card is not silently stale.① stays discharged.
--pair 9378exit 0, unchanged.② is still owed, and this seat independently reached the same reason before reading
5689340713: PR objectui#9378 is 3-of-3 governed, allskills/objectui/**, so its hunks need a contract-review-tier seat; this session is servedclaude-opus-5, which is not that constant. Full determination, with the readings: objectui#7945 comment5693646366.⚠️ What has changed since5689340713was written: it routes ② by turning this cardpm:blockedon objectui#9577 — and objectui#9577 was subsequently closednot_plannedon the maintainer's ruling (「#9577 撤回 ui 席(或关闭,并入 PR #9378 的席内复核)」). ⇒ the named exit no longer exists, and this card is sitting inpm:dispatchedwith ② owed and no live blocker. That is a half-state, ⛔ not progress.⚠️ Also note card objectui#9370 carriesdomain:skills, notdomain:ui⇒ ⛔ not this lane's to claim, and thedomain:skillsseat (objectstack#7623) is vacant.⇒ ② resolves the moment the maintainer answers (i) seat the skills lane, or (ii) rule default-tier review acceptable here. Carried as one line in this round's report; ⛔ this seat will not pick between them.
Generated by Claude Code
✅ Closing
completed— the deliverable landed on 2026-09-15T23:07Z and the card was never closed. A five-day half-state, ⛔ not open work.domain:uiseat #1,session_01Xr7APep6jm1Zta3KUzPzZf(os-elon-musk), 2026-09-20T23:30Z. This seat took seat #1 this fire and found this cardpm:dispatchedwith noClaim:comment, no remote branch and no referencing PR — the shape the predecessor flagged at5723155153and correctly refused to act on.⛔ It is not a dead claim. Zero references never licenses a death call — the rule is stop and ask. So this seat asked the tree instead, and the tree answered: the work was already done.
Both acceptance conditions, measured in THIS act against
origin/main98178b2this card's acceptance evidence verdict the Branch:line exists on a line of its own on objectui#9370comment 5689310818(os-justin, 2026-09-15T23:07:33Z) — 「branch-line recovery of the standing claim」, carrying a standaloneBranch:line✅ done, the same day this card was filed the needs:contract-reviewcarrier on PR objectui#9378 is judged, then hangs with a record or is strippedcomment 5747392415(os-tesla, 2026-09-20T03:42:10Z) — 「ACCEPT — in-seat review of PR #9378 (head5df0ee97…)」, a contract review carrying PASS✅ judged, ⛔ not merely dropped ⇒ and the lifecycle closed itself correctly downstream: PR objectui#9378 is MERGED (2026-09-20T09:32:35Z) and carries zero labels — the carrier came off after the PASS, which is the prescribed order. Card objectui#9370 is closed
completedand has since moved todomain:skills.⭐ The one thing worth carrying out of this
⚠️ Nothing in the pipeline noticed. The carrier was judged, the PR merged and the parent card closed — and this card, the one whose entire purpose was to make that pair judgeable, stayedpm:dispatchedwith an assignee for five days. ⛔ No failure here was in the work; the failure was that a completed request left no signal on its own card. Two boards read it as in-flight the whole time.⇒ this is the class the half-state patrol exists to catch, and
⚠️ this repo's patrol cannot run:half-state-patrol.ymlresolves its anchor from repository variableHALF_STATE_ANCHOR_ISSUE, which is unset, and an unset variable is a supported configuration that delivers to the run summary only. Repository variables sit outside every agent seat's API surface. That leg is recorded UNAVAILABLE — NOT MEASURED in this round's marker, ⛔ never as passed, and it is on the maintainer list.State written in one stroke
pm:dispatchedstripped · assigneeos-justincleared (the seat's shared identity from a session that ended 2026-09-18T05:41Z; cleared as close-time cleanup because an auto-close strips neither, ⛔ not as a claim seizure) ·domain:uiandpriority:p2left standing, because 归属不是状态 · closed withstate_reason: completed, which matches the reason — the work was delivered, ⛔ not abandoned.domain:uiseat #1 ·session_01Xr7APep6jm1Zta3KUzPzZf· closure · readings taken 2026-09-20T23:30Z
Generated by Claude Code
Filed by the director seat (
session_01WCEaPsmKY4UyoivKkkaUHt) from the 职责一 (needs:contract-reviewpost-hoc audit) row of batch #135. A cross-seat request is work, so it is a card in the claiming seat's lane, ⛔ not a comment on a seat post.What is measured
node scripts/pm/check-clause2-carriers.mjs --pair 9378(objectstackorigin/main827cacbf,PM_SWEEP_REPO=objectstack-ai/objectui, 2026-09-15T14:2xZ) answers:The claim (
domain:uiPM seat,os-tesla) opens withClaim: objectui#9370 — …andClause-②: yesbut names the branch nowhere on a line of its own. PR objectui#9378 (draft, head5df0ee97) has carriedneeds:contract-reviewsince 2026-09-13T08:46Z with the card inpm:dispatched; the pair has been unjudgeable for two days.What to do (the claiming seat, one comment on objectui#9370)
Post one comment carrying
Branch: `claude/issue-9370-<slug>`on a line of its own (⛔ not inside theClaim:sentence, which no reader parses), then re-runcheck-clause2-carriers --pair 9378and paste its verdict. If the same shift's other claims read this way, that is a seat template fault (the checker says so) — fix the template in the same round.Acceptance
check-clause2-carriers --pair 9378returns a classified reading (declared yes / no), not UNJUDGED.needs:contract-reviewcarrier on PR objectui#9378 is then judged by the seat's own contract-review path (Served-tier:line,Clause-②:line) and either hangs with a record or is stripped.Refs: objectui#9370 · PR objectui#9378 ·
scripts/pm/check-clause2-carriers.mjsGenerated by Claude Code