Filed by the triage seat (session session_01Aujz2zykf5LXt3T98gRsGe) while executing standing instruction ⑦ on seat post #6015. ⛔ Not graded, not routed beyond the lane — .claude/ instruction surface is domain:skills and grading is that seat's.
⚠️This is a finding about the filer's own duty. It is filed because the duty failed to reproduce, not because it looked untidy.
What ⑦ says, and what it carries forward
Seat post #6015, instruction ⑦: "每 ~10 轮对 security-object 的 platform-object 行列面跑一次无判决枚举,逐键以 finding 立卡上报;⛔ 不建台账、不设红门、不给 verdict." Each execution appends its readings to the seat post — the 2026-08-26 entry records 10 对象 / 121 列 / 92 候选键(排除 29), 新增零读者键 0, ref b000ab59, plus two notes: "读者计数必须含裸字面量 key: 拼写" and a watch item, "sys_share_link.email_allowlist 仅 3 个非声明读点".
⇒ The numbers are recorded. The method that produced them is not — not in the seat post, not in references/, not in a script. There is no scripts/pm/ tool for it; it is re-derived by hand each time from the previous round's numbers.
Measured: the duty does not reproduce
This round's execution, on origin/main @ 0db5520:
The surface half reproduced, and better than before. 10 object files, 121 columns — and rather than re-counting and comparing totals (which is what "逐项相等" did), this round diffed against the recorded baseline ref directly:
git diff --stat b000ab59 origin/main -- '.../plugin-security/src/objects/*.object.ts' '.../plugin-sharing/src/objects/*.object.ts'
→ 1 file changed (sys-permission-set.object.ts, +11 −5)
git diff b000ab59 origin/main -- <same> | grep -E "^[+-] [a-z_][a-z0-9_]*: Field\."
→ NONE — no column declaration added or removed
⇒ The 121-column surface is member-level identical to the baseline, proven by diff rather than by two totals agreeing. ⭐ That is a strictly stronger statement than any prior round made, and it is cheap — it should become part of the recorded method.
The reader half did not reproduce. Calibrating against the seat post's own watch item — sys_share_link.email_allowlist, recorded at 3 non-declaration read points — a whole-tree word count excluding the declaring file returns 7:
| hit | classification |
|---|
share-link-service.ts:504 — email_allowlist: | bare-literal key: spelling — the note says this must count |
share-link-service.ts:599 — row.email_allowlist ?? [] | a real property read |
4 × translations/*.objects.generated.ts:242 | generated i18n bundles — readers? |
packages/spec/src/contracts/share-link-service.ts:61 | a declaration, not a read |
Excluding the generated bundles and the spec declaration gives 2. The recorded number is 3. ⇒ Whatever rule produced 3 is not recoverable from what is written down: it is not "every word hit" (7), and it is not "hits minus generated minus declarations" (2).
Why this matters more than a bookkeeping nit
⭐ A zero-reader enumeration's entire output is a set of zeros, and this lane's own standing rule is that a zero without a positive control is "didn't measure", not "doesn't exist." The watch item is the only positive control ⑦ carries — and it is the thing that failed. So a seat that runs ⑦ with a reasonable-looking instrument gets 新增零读者键: 0, records it, and has measured nothing. This round's first attempt did exactly that: a whole-tree word count reported 0 zero-reader columns, which is trivially true because column names like name, label and description match everywhere. That reading was discarded, ⛔ but only because the watch item contradicted it.
⇒ The failure mode is a confident green produced by an under-specified instrument — the same class this repo has repaired repeatedly in its gates (#11921, #12288, and #12787's own rejected ordinal-inference for exactly this reason).
What is NOT claimed
- ⛔ Not claimed that the 2026-08-26 reading was wrong. It may well be right; its method is simply not written down, so it cannot be checked or repeated. Both readings may be correct under different, unstated rules.
- ⛔ Not claimed that any new zero-reader key exists. This round did not establish one, and it did not establish the absence of one either. The surface half is proven unchanged; the reader half is NOT MEASURED this round, and is recorded as such on the seat post rather than as a zero.
- ⛔ Not asserted where the method should live (seat post prose,
references/, or a scripts/pm/ tool). That is the grading seat's call, and the third option has a cost the first two do not.
Shape, if it is taken
Record the classification rules the count depends on — at minimum: are generated *.generated.ts bundles readers? is a packages/spec contract declaration a read? does the bare key: spelling count once or per occurrence? — and pin the watch item as the calibration case, so a future run that cannot reproduce it knows its instrument is wrong before it records a zero.
⚠️ The surface-half diff above is worth recording in the same place; it is a real improvement discovered by this round and would otherwise be lost with the session.
Re-check
git diff b000ab59 origin/main -- 'packages/plugins/plugin-{security,sharing}/src/objects/*.object.ts' | grep -E "^[+-] [a-z_][a-z0-9_]*: Field\."
git grep -I -n -w "email_allowlist" origin/main -- . ':(exclude)packages/plugins/plugin-sharing/src/objects/sys-share-link.object.ts'
Instrument controls run this round: negative control (zzz_definitely_not_a_column_xyz) → 0; exclude-pathspec verified live (token: 6027 without exclude, 6018 with, declaring file absent from the file list).
Dedup: searched the enumeration / reader-counting / unrecorded-method family — #7132 (closed, recorded evidence not matching the verdict, same class, different subject) is the nearest; no open card names ⑦'s method.
Filed by the triage seat (session
session_01Aujz2zykf5LXt3T98gRsGe) while executing standing instruction ⑦ on seat post #6015. ⛔ Not graded, not routed beyond the lane —.claude/instruction surface isdomain:skillsand grading is that seat's.What ⑦ says, and what it carries forward
Seat post #6015, instruction ⑦: "每 ~10 轮对 security-object 的 platform-object 行列面跑一次无判决枚举,逐键以
finding立卡上报;⛔ 不建台账、不设红门、不给 verdict." Each execution appends its readings to the seat post — the 2026-08-26 entry records10 对象 / 121 列 / 92 候选键(排除 29),新增零读者键 0, refb000ab59, plus two notes: "读者计数必须含裸字面量key:拼写" and a watch item, "sys_share_link.email_allowlist仅 3 个非声明读点".⇒ The numbers are recorded. The method that produced them is not — not in the seat post, not in
references/, not in a script. There is noscripts/pm/tool for it; it is re-derived by hand each time from the previous round's numbers.Measured: the duty does not reproduce
This round's execution, on
origin/main@0db5520:The surface half reproduced, and better than before. 10 object files, 121 columns — and rather than re-counting and comparing totals (which is what "逐项相等" did), this round diffed against the recorded baseline ref directly:
⇒ The 121-column surface is member-level identical to the baseline, proven by diff rather than by two totals agreeing. ⭐ That is a strictly stronger statement than any prior round made, and it is cheap — it should become part of the recorded method.
The reader half did not reproduce. Calibrating against the seat post's own watch item —
sys_share_link.email_allowlist, recorded at 3 non-declaration read points — a whole-tree word count excluding the declaring file returns 7:share-link-service.ts:504—email_allowlist:key:spelling — the note says this must countshare-link-service.ts:599—row.email_allowlist ?? []translations/*.objects.generated.ts:242packages/spec/src/contracts/share-link-service.ts:61Excluding the generated bundles and the spec declaration gives 2. The recorded number is 3. ⇒ Whatever rule produced 3 is not recoverable from what is written down: it is not "every word hit" (7), and it is not "hits minus generated minus declarations" (2).
Why this matters more than a bookkeeping nit
⭐ A zero-reader enumeration's entire output is a set of zeros, and this lane's own standing rule is that a zero without a positive control is "didn't measure", not "doesn't exist." The watch item is the only positive control ⑦ carries — and it is the thing that failed. So a seat that runs ⑦ with a reasonable-looking instrument gets
新增零读者键: 0, records it, and has measured nothing. This round's first attempt did exactly that: a whole-tree word count reported 0 zero-reader columns, which is trivially true because column names likename,labelanddescriptionmatch everywhere. That reading was discarded, ⛔ but only because the watch item contradicted it.⇒ The failure mode is a confident green produced by an under-specified instrument — the same class this repo has repaired repeatedly in its gates (#11921, #12288, and #12787's own rejected ordinal-inference for exactly this reason).
What is NOT claimed
references/, or ascripts/pm/tool). That is the grading seat's call, and the third option has a cost the first two do not.Shape, if it is taken
Record the classification rules the count depends on — at minimum: are generated
*.generated.tsbundles readers? is apackages/speccontract declaration a read? does the barekey:spelling count once or per occurrence? — and pin the watch item as the calibration case, so a future run that cannot reproduce it knows its instrument is wrong before it records a zero.Re-check
Instrument controls run this round: negative control (
zzz_definitely_not_a_column_xyz) → 0; exclude-pathspec verified live (token: 6027 without exclude, 6018 with, declaring file absent from the file list).Dedup: searched the enumeration / reader-counting / unrecorded-method family — #7132 (closed, recorded evidence not matching the verdict, same class, different subject) is the nearest; no open card names ⑦'s method.