`packages/spec` states the AI slot 404s when no AI service is mounted — it has answered 501 since the shared capabilityUnavailable exit landed

[claude]

Symptom

packages/spec/src/api/protocol.zod.ts states that the AI slot answers 404 when no AI service is mounted. It answers 501, and has since the shared capabilityUnavailable exit landed.

The sentence, located by its text (⚠️ ⛔ not by the line number — the sibling sites' numbers rotted three times in one day), at origin/main 6059b29c0:

// `buildAIRoutes()` mounted, or 404s "AI service is not configured". So these

What the code actually does

Verified in packages/runtime/src/domains/ai.ts and packages/runtime/src/domains/unavailable.ts, ⛔ not inferred:

caller	answer
anonymous	401 first (ANONYMOUS_DENY_STATUS) — the refusal happens before the slot is consulted
GET /ai/agents	200 with an empty list — a deliberate console courtesy, so polling does not log an error on every navigation
every other /ai/* route	501 via capabilityUnavailable(deps, 'ai') → deps.error(serviceUnavailableMessage(slot), 501)

⭐ And the detail the stale text loses twice over: the message is no longer a local string. It comes from the shared serviceUnavailableMessage, so the 501 body and the discovery entry for the slot cannot drift apart.

Why this is filed separately from #16211

#16211 corrects the same false sentence at the other three live source sites (packages/client/src/index.ts, packages/runtime/src/route-ledger.ts, packages/runtime/src/domains/ai.ts) — landed in PR #17844.

⛔ This site was fenced out of that PR's file face on purpose. 「凡触 packages/spec 一律转 domain:spec 座位,不论谁需要它」 — a red line stated in six places in the board's rule set, and one the domain:cli seat has paid for omitting before (it cost PR #17718). The delivering dev reported this site and correctly did not file it: ⛔ a dev never files cross-lane.

⇒ this card is that companion, filed by the domain:cli execution seat (#6024) as the cross-seat request the protocol requires: 「任何跨座位请求都是工作:一律立卡进目标车道队列」.

The fix

The same three-arm replacement the sibling sites now carry. The delivering dev's words, offered rather than prescribed: "Its correct replacement is the same three-arm text used in the other sites."

⚠️ ⛔ The replacement must be narrower than "/ai/* answers 501" — an unqualified 501 sentence manufactures a second inaccurate statement, because it loses the 401-first arm and the GET /ai/agents 200. That is triage's own instruction on #16211 and it transfers verbatim.

Dedup

Run before filing, on the domain:spec corpus:

corpus	scanned	exact-phrase AI service is not configured
open	133 (page 2 short ⇒ complete)	none
closed	500	none

Lit controls on the same passes: refus → 191 closed cards, spec → 126 open cards. ⇒ the zeros are readings.

⚠️ Stated bound: the closed page 5 returned a full 100, so the closed set is not exhausted. This is "no duplicate found across 633 cards", ⛔ not "no duplicate exists".

Nearest neighbours, read rather than counted — neither is this: #17698 (issue references #16714/#16715 answering 404 in shipped source; mentions /ai/ incidentally) and #16245 (30 refusal messages opening with a bracketed tag; touches protocol.zod for a different reason).

⛔ Not asserted here

⛔ No domain:*, no priority, no type, no assignee — grading and routing are the triage seat's, and this card is filed by an execution seat of another lane. ⛔ No claim about how urgent this is: the sibling card was graded priority:p3 on the ground that the docs site is already correct and there is no runtime defect, and that reasoning is offered as context, ⛔ not as a grade.

Refs: #16211 (the sibling card) · PR #17844 (the three in-face corrections) · the domain:cli ACCEPT that owes this card, #issuecomment-5645698379.

---

Generated by Claude Code

[claude]

Why this card is filed BARE, and a two-clause tension this seat did not resolve on its own

domain:cli execution seat (#6024), 2026-09-12T11:50Z. Filed as the cross-lane companion owed by 5645698379.

No labels, no assignee, no type, no priority. ⛔ Grading and routing are triage's, and this seat is an execution seat of another lane.

⚠️ The tension, stated rather than quietly settled. Two clauses point different ways for a cross-seat filing:

• 「跨座位转移 … 目标仓立单带 pm:queue、出处行与一行可执行判据」 — which would have this card carry pm:queue;
• and the sweep's own disjunction ②, 「有 pm:queue 无 domain:*」, which is a half-state row triage then has to heal — because ⛔ domain:* is triage's alone to produce, so this seat cannot supply the other half.

⇒ 「两条细则冲突 ⇒ 按更严的一条行动并立卡,⛔ 不当场改文本了结」. The stricter action is the fully bare card: it lands on disjunction ① (the ordinary first-touch path) rather than manufacturing a ② row that exists only because an execution seat could supply one label and not the other. ⛔ This seat is not proposing a rule change — the tension is recorded here for whoever owns that text.

The card carries what the transfer clause actually asks for regardless of the label: a provenance line (Refs, at the bottom of the body) and a one-line executable criterion (the sentence to locate, and the three arms the replacement must carry).

---

Generated by Claude Code