# ε cdd-iteration — cycle/396

**Issue:** [cnos#396](https://github.com/usurobor/cnos/issues/396).
**Mode:** docs-only mapping cycle. Per ε hygiene, empty findings are recorded explicitly.

## Findings

**None.**

This was a docs-only mapping cycle producing one new Markdown file under `src/packages/cnos.cdr/docs/`. No tooling, no schema, no build/test surface was touched. The cycle had no review-oracle ambiguity, no β-α dispatch round (β-α-collapsed-on-δ), no protocol-shape disagreement, no out-of-band coordination friction. The δ-pinned implementation contract was unambiguous and the work fit cleanly within it.

The two survey-discovered cph artifact classes (coherence-log, intra-wave status.md) were handled per δ's refusal-condition guidance (extend the mapping table; note the addition) — this is the codified path, not an iteration-finding signal.

## Protocol-gap signals (across receipt-stream)

**None surfaced this cycle.** The mapping itself is a *retroactive coherence check* on cnos.cdr v0.1; the result is that cnos.cdr v0.1's surface is sufficient for cph's current practice. A future cycle that surfaces a cph artifact class with **no** cnos.cdr surface would trigger Sub 1 ([cnos#390](https://github.com/usurobor/cnos/issues/390)) reopen per `beta-review.md`'s non-blocking observation 4; no such finding from this cycle's survey.

## Non-findings (worth recording)

- Per δ's contract, the WebFetch refusal condition was monitored — WebFetch did return cph file contents (raw.githubusercontent worked for PROJECT.md, ROADMAP.md, wave artifacts, field reports, dataset docs, coherence-log, cph#32). The `api.github.com` endpoints returned 403; this is the documented behavior and was worked around using the HTML tree view (which succeeded for directory listings).
- The cph#32 issue title (`Author Stream-B α + β SKILL drafts ... — step 2 of 2-stream split #32`) initially appeared to mis-match the contract's description ("data-mounted-gate failure pattern"); reading the issue body confirmed the failure pattern is **the rationale for** the Stream-B split, so the contract is consistent with cph#32's content.
- cph has no top-level `CDR.md` — this is the expected post-uplift state per the parent cycle (cnos#376) itself; documented in row 2 as an empirical observation, not a finding.

## Verdict

No ε action required. No protocol patch to file. No follow-on Sub to spin.
