User-run against the exact 6dc7ba51 Release binary with the retail UI; user
verdict "all works". The probe proves the run actually exercised the arm: 16
[remote-teleport] lines over 7 creatures, all hookRan=True placement=Committed,
every guid in the 0x8xxxxxxx creature range rather than the 0x50xxxxxx player
range — so the corrected creature-target recipe reached the NPC-guid branch
where all three NPC-arm MAJORs lived.
Recorded as a partial pass, not a blanket one: all 16 lines are
cause=teleport-ts and cause=cellless was never observed, so the cell-less half
of the same arm remains test-covered only. Folding that into "gate passed"
would repeat 4b-2's #309 shape, where every park probe shared one cause and the
unexercised cause went unrecorded.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
The pinned contract plus the four review documents behind 6dc7ba51:
round 1 (retail FAIL 3 MAJOR / architecture FAIL 2 MAJOR) and round 2
(both PASS on the fixed diff).
Process findings worth carrying into the remaining routes:
1. The contract's 13 explicit "what must REMAIN true" invariants were the
fix for 4b-2's round-1 defect (a contract that said what must change but
not what must stay). They did NOT prevent a round-1 FAIL here. What the
round-1 MAJORs actually shared was a STRUCTURAL cause the invariant list
could not express: two parallel inline copies of the same routing tail.
An invariant list constrains behaviour; it cannot see duplication.
2. Both reviews independently found the same NPC synth-velocity defect
(retail R3 = architecture A2). Independent convergence on one finding is
the strongest signal this process produces — weight it accordingly.
3. The specified two-client gate could not have observed three of the four
MAJORs: it teleported a player character, and all three live on the NPC
arm. Caught by both reviewers before the gate ran, not after. Check that
a gate can structurally see the defect class it is gating.
4. A reviewer named a symbol that does not exist (RuntimeCollisionReportingState
.ForceEnd is a private helper, not the public entry point). The implementer
silently substituted the correct one (LeaveWorld) while reporting "no
disagreements with either review". Verify implementer claims against source
even when they report full agreement.
5. A new test asserted only what must NOT happen, so an emptied
ApplyWireAirborneLeftoverBookkeeping passed every test in the tree. Caught
in round 2 and closed with positive assertions, sabotage-verified. Negative
assertions alone cannot detect a deleted write.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
