[finding] The published `objectstack-data` skill never says what `single` posture means for the organization count — an AI app author reading it (and the code's exemption list) lands on 「stay `single`, seed one `sys_organization` per tenant, bring your own RLS wall」; the sentence that forbids that shape lives only in `content/docs/deployment/tenancy-modes.mdx` and ADR-0105 §「Today's two postures」, neither linked from the skill

[huangyiirene]

Filed by the director seat (summon #18, session_017Js5kTpTtxieBjPyScgxJ3, 2026-09-09) while answering the maintainer's question behind #16934 — 「ats 为什么会搞错,是我们的 skills 或者文档没写清楚吗?」. Skills lane (skills/objectstack-data, published directory), which self-triages its own findings. ⛔ Not graded. Class (c): a metadata/seed shape the runtime accepts and then silently mis-serves; also (b) by omission against a declared contract, cited below.

The contract, and where it is written

Three places state the shape of single; all three predate the ats design:

• content/docs/deployment/tenancy-modes.mdx (on main since 2026-08-30, 247933ff): postures table row Shape — 「single: one logical tenant; sub-units modelled as business units in one tree」, Default organization — 「one bootstrapped "Default Organization"」, Org-management UI — 「hidden」; line 48 「single is not "multi-org with the walls left standing"」; lines 138–140 「creating additional organizations is refused (403) whenever the effective posture is single」.
• ADR-0105 line 70 「single (ADR-0093): one logical tenant. Layer 0 inert」; line 153 (posture table, Intended shape) 「one logical tenant; factories as BUs in one tree」; line 512 「Posture: single. One organization; the full structure as one BU tree」.
• ADR-0093 (the posture ladder itself); ADR-0131 D9 「under single the Default Organization is the only one」.

Where it is not written: the skill an app author actually loads

skills/objectstack-data is what an AI author reads while writing *.object.ts and *.seed.ts. Its every sentence that touches the posture points the other way:

• rules/security.md 「## Multi-tenancy」 (line 153): 「For SaaS, set tenancy on the object schema for row-level tenant isolation」 — the object-level knob is presented as the multi-tenancy instruction; nothing says a walled deployment posture is the precondition, or that the posture decides how many organizations exist.
• rules/security.md line 180: 「Single-tenant deployments never hit this; the wall is inert there」 — states what single does (wall inert), never what it means (one organization).
• references/data-hooks.md line 622: 「multi-org needs cloud + @objectstack/organizations」 — read before feat(organizations): bring the multi-organization runtime back to open core — the org-scoping registrar ships open, the licence gate stays in cloud (ADR-0132) #16215 (merged 2026-09-07) and prove an open-only install can RAISE the wall — the matrices exist but every one of them stubs the posture #16137 (PR test(organizations): prove an open-only install RAISES the wall — the matrix against a resolved posture, no stub (#16137) #16719, 2026-09-08), this told an open-core author that a walled posture was closed to them, so single was the only bootable choice. Stale since 09-07 (see After ADR-0132 the open tree still calls @objectstack/organizations enterprise/closed-source in 65 places — including tenancy-service.ts, the file that decides the posture #16718 for the 65 other places).
• rules/indexing.md line 77: 「You never write the posture」 — correct for index declarations, but it is the only sentence about the posture an author sees, and it reads as 「the posture is not your concern」.
• Sources line (rules/security.md line 210): 「Posture model: ADR-0066; tenant wall: ADR-0095 D1」 — no pointer to ADR-0093, ADR-0105 §「Today's two postures」, or tenancy-modes.mdx.
• SKILL.md §「Seed Data & Fixtures」 (line 626): nothing says sys_organization is platform-bootstrapped and ⛔ not a seed target.

git grep -n -iE "exactly one organization|one logical tenant|Default Organization|sys_organization" origin/main -- skills/ → 0 hits (control: the same grep over content/docs/deployment/ hits tenancy-modes.mdx and seed-tenancy-repair.mdx).

Measured instance (objectstack-ai/ats 446ab44, read-only from this session)

DESIGN.md §「租户墙划分契约(2026-09-07 裁决)」 cites plugin-security/src/security-plugin.ts:2940 (the Layer 0 exemption comment: 「…and the whole single posture all yield null here and are untouched」), ADR-0055, ADR-0090 D3, ADR-0105 D2/D11, ADR-0019 D3 and the objectstack-data skill (§Search Fields). It cites neither tenancy-modes.mdx nor ADR-0105's posture table sixty lines above the D2 it quotes. From those readings it concluded, verbatim, 「今天(single posture,墙惰性)—— 划分成立 … 墙立起来之后 —— 同一套划分不用改」: employers modelled as sys_organization rows under single (src/data/shared/build.ts, organization_id: orgId(e.slug)), isolation by hand-written RLS, walls to be 「stood up later」 — exactly the shape line 48 of the deployment page names and forbids. When the write-side #8844 refusal fired on 09-07 with the reason 「declared single posture yet holds 2 organizations」 (DESIGN line 303), the team read it as a platform inconsistency (reads had worked for days — see #17010 for the silent boot) and filed ats#56 / #16659 / the #16934 card, not a posture change.

The pattern is the mechanism/contract split: the code comment tells an author what single does, the ADR and the deployment page tell them what single means, and the skill — the one text guaranteed to be in context — carries only the first.

What is asked

For the skills seat to triage; ⛔ no wording proposed as a ruling. The shape that closes the gap, for the seat's four-axis pass: one loud sentence in rules/security.md 「## Multi-tenancy」 stating the posture ↔ organization-count contract (single = the bootstrapped Default Organization and nothing else; tenants-as-organizations ⇒ a walled posture, declared on the deployment, open-core since #16215 + #16719), a ⛔ line under §「Seed Data & Fixtures」 that sys_organization is platform-bootstrapped and never seeded, the Sources line extended to ADR-0093 / ADR-0105 §「Today's two postures」 / content/docs/deployment/tenancy-modes.mdx, and references/data-hooks.md line 622 re-read against ADR-0132. Reader of each line, per the lane's own test: an AI author choosing between tenancy on an object and a posture on the deployment. ⛔ Not asked: any change to tenancy-modes.mdx (it already states the contract) or to the runtime (boot-time count is #17010).

Re-check: git grep -n -iE "For SaaS, set .tenancy" origin/main -- skills/objectstack-data/rules/security.md (the sentence still stands alone); git grep -n -iE "needs cloud" origin/main -- skills/objectstack-data/references/data-hooks.md (line 622 still says cloud); git grep -n -iE "one logical tenant" origin/main -- skills/ → 0.

Dedupe: search_issues over this repo for 「objectstack-data skill tenancy posture single organization count seed sys_organization」 and 「skill multi-tenancy section walled posture tenants as organizations app author guidance」 returned #17010 (runtime side, boot count — complementary, not this), #16718 (the 65 stale enterprise mentions — overlaps only data-hooks.md:622), #5887 / #5746 (closed, older doc pages), #12701 (hotcrm isolated-posture epic). None asks the published skill to state the posture ↔ organization-count contract. Related: #16934 (correction comment 5594769261), #17009, #17010, ADR-0093, ADR-0105, ADR-0131 D9/D11, ADR-0132.