forked from mosaicstack/stack
mos-dt-0andClaude Opus 5
d0a510d28d
SCOPE (Mos): D-38 (bind evidence to subject) and D-40 (type-strict discriminator inputs) land IN the RM-02 PR — cheap registry-coverage clauses, satisfiable now, and RM-02 literally IS the registry, so codifying what its own delivery learned about how gates fail is the coherent move. D-42 splits, and the reason is sharper than "needs experimentation": landing its clause in-PR today would give the registry a clause with NOTHING to satisfy it, so the registry would go red on its own clause and couple the keystone's landing to infra work. Wrong coupling. So (a) the infra experiment proving the pin enforces via the negative case, in Mos's D-37/D-41/D-42 cluster; (b) the registry clause "provider-side enforcement requires an OBSERVED negative control", in a follow-up RM-02 increment once (a) gives it something to check. Named owner, not a vacuous check and not a silent omission. D-43 point 3 elevated to the PRIMARY requirement on RM-34, with the table that makes it plain: code has rev-974, gates have the merge-gate, CI has the JSON scan, and the control plane has NOTHING. Every other layer earned a verifier from a live failure; the board never did, and it is the artifact every other decision is staged from. "Validate the checkpoint" must mean re-derive the board's claims from ground truth — not that the file parses or that a successor can read it. It belongs to the coordinator-daemon deliverable: the control plane needs its own verifier the way every other layer got one. Today's catch was discipline, not mechanism. Interim rule binding on BOTH seats until that mechanism exists, and Mos adopted it against himself: re-derive a board claim from ground truth before any load-bearing use. The orchestrator does it before dispatch; the coordinator does it before acting on or relaying a board claim that gates a decision. D-11b addendum: the false-NEGATIVE twin. /user returns 403 on a least-privilege seat token (no read:user) and reads exactly like an unprovisioned seat. The real assertion is the DIFFERENTIAL — authenticated push=true vs unauthenticated push=false proves the token caused the difference. A single endpoint can be true for anyone or refused for an unrelated scope reason. Would have escalated a working seat as unprovisioned and stalled the keystone on a phantom. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <[email protected]>