Analysis complete. Working through the phases:

- **Phase 1–2:** Completed task fn-9.1 spec said serialize with a `user_id` wire key; done summary + actual code (`src/api/serialize.py`) ship `{"uid": user["id"], ...}`. Confirmed drift.
- **Phase 3:** Drift — wire key `user_id` (spec) → `uid` (built).
- **Phase 3b:** Husk short-circuit — `GLOSSARY_JSON.total_terms == 0`, `DECISIONS_JSON.count == 0`, `STRATEGY_CONTENT == {}`. All three hold → entire section skipped.
- **Phase 4:** Downstream fn-9.2 (`.flow/tasks/fn-9.2.md`) hard-codes `{"user_id": 7, "name": "ada"}` as its expected payload — stale against the shipped `uid` key.
- **Phase 4b:** CROSS_SPEC false → skipped.
- **Phase 5:** DRY_RUN true → report only. Parent spec fn-9 has no `## Requirement coverage` table → traceability sub-step skipped.

---

Drift detected: yes
- fn-9.1 shipped wire key `uid` instead of spec's `user_id` (payload-size review, per done summary + `src/api/serialize.py:2`)

Would update (DRY RUN):
- fn-9.2 (`.flow/tasks/fn-9.2.md`, line 11): change expected payload `{"user_id": 7, "name": "ada"}` → `{"uid": 7, "name": "ada"}`; add breadcrumb `<!-- Updated by plan-sync: fn-9.1 used uid not user_id -->`

Would update traceability:
- None — parent spec fn-9 has no `## Requirement coverage` table.

No glossary renames, decision overrides, or strategy drift — all three project-anchor inputs are husk/empty.

No files modified.