# Phase 160: Hypothesis Route Transition Clearance Surface

## Status

complete

## Goal

Close the next post-`v1.85` gap by turning transition escalation into an
operator-visible transition-clearance surface.

## Background

AITP already has:

- question-level `competing_hypotheses`
- bounded `route_activation`, `route_reentry`, `route_handoff`, and
  `route_choice` visibility
- bounded `route_transition_gate`, `route_transition_intent`,
  `route_transition_receipt`, `route_transition_resolution`,
  `route_transition_discrepancy`, `route_transition_repair`, and
  `route_transition_escalation` visibility

But it still lacks one explicit place to say:

- whether an escalated route-transition issue is still blocked on an operator
  checkpoint or has been cleared
- which checkpoint lifecycle state kept the transition blocked or released it
- how that clearance relates back to the current escalation state
- how that clearance coexists with the current helper mechanisms

## Requirements

- derive one bounded route transition-clearance summary from route transition
  escalation plus operator-checkpoint lifecycle context
- expose route-transition clearance through runtime/read-path/replay surfaces
- keep the transition-clearance surface coexistence with current
  transition-escalation and helper mechanisms
- add one isolated acceptance lane for the bounded transition-clearance path

## Depends On

Phase 159 (`v1.85` route transition-escalation visibility must remain closed
and available as the base layer)

## Deliverables

1. hypothesis route transition-clearance runtime surface
2. replay/read-path visibility for explicit bounded transition-clearance state
3. isolated acceptance and aligned docs/tests

## Plans

- [x] `160-01`: add route transition-clearance summary to runtime/replay
  surfaces and isolated acceptance
