# Phase 164: Hypothesis Route Transition Authority Surface - Discussion Log

> **Audit trail only.** Do not use as input to planning, research, or execution agents.
> Decisions are captured in CONTEXT.md.

**Date:** 2026-04-12
**Phase:** 164-hypothesis-route-transition-authority-surface
**Areas discussed:** transition-authority visibility, relation to commitment, bounded scope

---

## Surface Placement

| Option | Description | Selected |
|--------|-------------|----------|
| extend the existing route ladder with explicit transition authority | preserves one visible operator truth path | ✓ |
| invent a separate authority subsystem | would fragment the operator model | |

## Relation To Existing Mechanisms

| Option | Description | Selected |
|--------|-------------|----------|
| coexist with current route transition-commitment and helper mechanisms | keeps current execution surfaces intact | ✓ |
| auto-trigger fresh runtime mutation from the new authority surface | widens scope too far | |

## Scope

| Option | Description | Selected |
|--------|-------------|----------|
| declarative transition-authority visibility | closes the immediate gap cleanly | ✓ |
| actual route mutation or scheduler auto-assertion | too wide for the immediate next milestone | |
