docs(pm-dispatch): name what IS and is NOT build-tier evidence in the downgrade fuse - #17199

Fixes #17139

One line added to .claude/skills/pm-dispatch/references/contract-review.md under 〈降档保险丝(机读)〉, naming what IS admissible evidence of the tier a build ran at and what is NOT. Docs-only, governed surface, no package touched.

Added (118 bytes measured, under the 120-byte per-line pin):

- 施工档只取 harness `model` 盖章或认领 Container & model 行;`Co-Authored-By` = 署名常量 ⛔ 非证据。

It carries both halves of the director seat's instruction: the two admissible sources (the harness model stamps; the claim's Container & model: line) and the exclusion (the Co-Authored-By trailer is a session-attribution constant, never evidence of tier). 施工档 is this corpus's own term for the tier work was built at (references/lanes/cli.md: 「只定复核档不定施工档」), the counterpart to 服役档 already used three lines above. The card's working spelling measured 145 bytes and did not fit, so the spelling was tightened; both halves survive intact and no model identifier appears in it.

Placed directly after 「转录档位核验:… harness 逐消息盖章的 model 字段。」 — that line names the harness stamp as a reading; the new line closes the set around it and names the artefact that is not in it.

Line budget — paid by deletion, not by re-wrap

The file sits at its ratchet ceiling: check-skill-line-ratchet reads it at 60 lines (ceiling 60; headroom 0) both before and after. The added line is paid by deleting one line inside the same file:

- 外部评审链是可选事后审计:分诊定时轮与总监席召唤 ⛔ 不是放行必要条件。

Why it was the redundant one:

• Its rule is already stated in SKILL.md 〈入队与落地〉: 「外部评审链降为可选事后审计,非放行前提。」 The rules-only rewrite convention for this corpus is one rule per line, no rule already stated in SKILL.md — the ratchet's own ceiling comment states it, and this file's first line scopes itself to 载体纪律、归属资格与降档保险丝.
• Its extra specificity — which chains — is stated in references/lanes/director.md, where those chains' duties live: :31 「裁决仍被尊重但非放行必要条件」 and :71 「契约复核的放行归派发席席内,定时轮与本席降为可选事后审计」.
• check-skill-line-ratchet.mjs's own header had already classified this bullet as a restatement, rejected as payment then only because a byte trim (−24 B) could not move a LINE ratchet. After the rules-only rewrite the bullet is exactly one line, so deleting it banks the line the ratchet prices.
• director.md:71 defers to this file (「../contract-review.md 为准」) for 契约复核的放行归属 — that deferral still resolves: 放行 = 清标即落地 and 落地前检三条 are untouched here.
• It is not pinned by any gate: 外部评审链 / 事后审计 / 放行必要条件 appear in no gate assertion (only in a check-skill-line-ratchet.mjs narrative comment). A per-line scan of the file against every file under scripts/ and .claude/ shows the pinned lines are elsewhere — L16/L19/L20/L23 (check-half-states, check-clause2-carriers), L29/L44 (check-clause2-carriers) — and none of them is the deleted line or a line in the edited section.

No ceiling raise, no re-wrap, no edit to check-skill-line-ratchet.mjs, no SKILL.md edit.

维护者速读(草稿)

改了什么 — 内部 PM 技能里的一份参考文档加了一行:说清「这次活是在哪个档位上干的」这件事,证据只认两处(harness 逐消息盖的 model 戳、认领评论里的 Container & model 行),并点名一个不算证据的东西(commit 的 Co-Authored-By 署名行)。同一份文档里删掉一行重复内容付账,总行数不变。

为什么改 — 这份文档原本只写了「档位怎么读」,从没写「哪些东西不是档位证据」。commit 的署名行里带模型名,没读过 AGENTS.md 那条署名规则的人会把它当档位盖章;这个误读真的发生过一次,拦住了一个 PR 并导致撤回。规则缺口的代价是重复的返工,补一行就堵住。

风险与代价(含回滚) — 风险很低:纯文档、不发布、不进产品,任何包都没碰,不需要 changeset。代价是文档预算:文件已经顶到 60 行天花板,新增一行必须删一行,这里删的是 SKILL.md 已经写过、总监席车道文件也写过的那条「外部评审链是可选事后审计」。若判断删错,回滚就是 revert 这一个提交,单文件一行进一行出,没有连带。

席位意见 —

你要做的 — 读一遍新增那行和被删那行,确认这个交换你认可,然后合并这个 PR(受管面,走人工合并)。

Acceptance notes

Gates — all 14 families dispatch-gates.mjs derives for this change set, run locally, exit code captured before any pipe:

Reconciliation: dispatch-gates.mjs --ran reads 14 derived, 14 run, 0 NOT-MEASURED, 0 UNRUN.

check:doc-formula-expressions first exited 3 — PREREQUISITE NOT MET (@objectstack/formula / @objectstack/lint not built), which is NOT MEASURED, not a finding. It was re-run green after turbo run build --filter=@objectstack/formula --filter=@objectstack/lint under the shared verify lock (VERDICT command-exit 0 · held the lock 289s).

Self-tests run where the gate carries one: check-half-states --self-test (2976 cases), check-widening-tells --self-test (150 cases), check-clause2-carriers --self-test (299 cases) — all exit 0. Repo-wide pnpm lint is CI's run, not owed here; the diff adds no source file.

Control-character self-scan beyond the gate, on the edited file: grep -naP over the C0 range plus DEL → no match.

PM mechanism assumptions, measured:

• A holds. The 60-line ceiling and the 120-byte per-line pin are both check-skill-line-ratchet.mjs (MAX_LINE_BYTES = 120; ['.claude/skills/pm-dispatch/references/contract-review.md', 60]). Measured before and after; the verdict line is quoted above.
• B holds, and it changes nothing here. check-half-states.mjs and check-clause2-carriers.mjs do pin strings inside this file — but in 载体纪律 (L16/L19/L20/L23) and 复核归属 (L29/L44), never the deleted line and never a line in 降档保险丝. check-widening-tells.mjs pins none of this file's lines. The edited section carries no gate-pinned string.
• C is stale in the safe direction. 7337179d is no longer the tip: origin/main is c3756ff0, 4 commits ahead, none of which touches this file. Work is based on c3756ff0; the target section's line numbers were re-read from that tree rather than from the card.

Scope: nothing else changed. No changeset — .claude/** publishes nothing (no package files[] ships it), so skip-changeset is the honest label; no changeset gate demanded one in the run above.

Out-of-scope, noted and not filed: check-skill-line-ratchet.mjs's ceiling narrative still describes the 外部评审链 bullet as a rejected payment candidate. That text is a record of a past raise, not a live claim about the tree, and the ratchet reads line counts rather than that prose — history, not a defect. 承接者:无 — no PR or person has reason to open that comment block for this reason.

Generated by Claude Code