Ran the humanizer rules over 79 prose files in the active specs (brief,
design, requirements, research and narrative docs). Removed em dashes,
significance inflation, forced rule-of-three, bold-label list items and
filler. Skipped tasks.md checklists and the retired specs (harnessx-*,
openrouter-sast-harness, unseen-repo-evaluation).
Every number, path, command, hash and identifier was preserved: checked
each file against HEAD for drift in numbers, inline code and code fences,
zero drift across all 79 files.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <[email protected]>
The design turns on an asymmetry the session measured: two of the three
matcher bugs needed no judgement at all -- once the first was understood,
the others were the same fix carried across. So the automation that pays is
propagation and memory, and the model is confined to the one step that
needs inference: naming what a group of counter-examples has in common.
Two prohibitions are enforced by tests rather than by convention.
No module under feedback/ may import a writer for semantic/facts,
semantic/obligations or ruleset/. The boundary between evolving the
QUESTION and authoring the FACTS is the whole design, and a comment saying
so is not a boundary.
And `evaluation_set(recipe, dismissals, *, split)` has no "all" -- no
argument returns both splits, and no code path returns holdout rows during
optimisation. The missing argument IS the design: the 2026-09-05 leak was
possible because reading the holdout was merely discouraged, and five of
eleven candidate shapes were taught by the pairs they then recovered.
A dismissal is recorded AT a rung. "Not a defect at suspicion" must not
silence the same site when the graph later entails it -- that is a
promotion and deserves a fresh look, which is also what keeps a dismissal
file from becoming a graveyard.
Risk recorded rather than glossed: the evidence base is two repositories,
one of which has never produced a true positive. The ledger and the
dismissals are useful immediately; the evolution should not be trusted
until contributor-scan 2.15 or 5.2 lands a checkout that can produce one.
Phase: design, generated, not approved.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <[email protected]>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01T7XD7x5KonMdmGRkp63EQG
