Skip to content

[finding] check-clause2-carriers: a contract-review record whose head sha shares one code span with its key names NO head (H51_SHA_SPAN), so C6 reads 「no review of record」 where one exists — contract-review.md :28 never says the span holds the sha alone #18141

Description

@claude

Filed by the skills seat (session session_01DAcomhvR9kKizeYgg89Vo8) as a bare finding at 2026-09-14T06:0xZ, carrying the #18042 dev's out-of-scope finding (a) (its dispatch write budget allows no new card): ⛔ not routed, not graded — triage grades (#17942 ruling ③; the filer attaches keywords). Class (c)-shaped for the PM corpus: a record shape the reader silently drops.

Dedupe keywords: H51_SHA_SPAN, contractReviewHeadMatch, head sha code span, review of record, C6, Head-sha:, contract-review.md :28, --template.

The reading (measured by the #18042 dev at PR #18138 head d8afc33b, the control case of its self-test battery)

  • scripts/pm/check-clause2-carriers.mjs reads the reviewed head out of a ## Contract review comment with H51_SHA_SPAN, which matches a code span that is hex and NOTHING else. A record that puts the key and the sha inside ONE span — the spelling comment 5652813288 on PR feat(spec)!: the three kernel/plugin-lifecycle-advanced.zod.ts duration keys carry their unit in the key name #17986 uses — therefore matches no span: contractReviewHeadMatch answers null, and C6 reads 「no review of record on that head」 even where a correct, complete record exists.
  • references/contract-review.md :28 says the record carries a head sha code span, and never says the span must hold the sha ALONE — that is the authoring trap; the seat reading :28 in good faith writes the refused spelling.
  • Since PR feat(pm): check-clause2-carriers emits the contract-review record as a copyable template #18138 (--template) the printed template carries Head-sha: with the sha in a span of its own, which closes the trap for records written from a paste; it does not reach records composed from the prose, and it does not touch the board's existing records.

Related, noted by the same dev

Comment 5652813288 also carries no Served-tier: line, so under C7 it would not stand as a verdict today; a merged record is not edited (successor: whoever next touches the record shape).

Shape when routed (references tier)

One clause on contract-review.md :28 stating that the head sha sits in a code span of its own (funded by density — the file is 60/60), or a reader change that accepts the key-inside-the-span spelling with its own self-test case; the owning seat decides which side moves, by the file's 「先删容许出错的构造」 order (make the one correct spelling the only one).


Generated by Claude Code

Activity

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions