---
cycle: 344
role: alpha
status: closed
merge-commit: 73019108
---

# Alpha Close-Out — Cycle #344

## Cycle Summary

**Issue:** #344 — `cdd: New skill cdd/activation/SKILL.md — bootstrap cdd in an existing repo (CI, notifications, secrets, identity)`

**Mode:** docs-only (design-and-build). Design converged in issue body with 24 sections specified and 37 open questions, each with a recommendation. No code changes; all deliverables are Markdown skill files and cnos marker files.

**Branch:** `cycle/344` → merged to `main` at `73019108`

**ACs delivered:** 6/6 (A.AC1–A.AC6). All passed at R2.

**Review rounds:** 2 (R1: REQUEST CHANGES — 3 findings; R2: APPROVED — all findings resolved, no new findings).

**Artifacts shipped:**

| File | Action |
|------|--------|
| `src/packages/cnos.cdd/skills/cdd/activation/SKILL.md` | Created (623 lines, §1–§24) |
| `src/packages/cnos.cdd/skills/cdd/CDD.md` | Cross-reference inserted §0 |
| `src/packages/cnos.cdd/skills/cdd/operator/SKILL.md` | Cross-reference inserted Algorithm preamble |
| `src/packages/cnos.cdd/skills/cdd/post-release/SKILL.md` | Cross-reference inserted Step 5.6b |
| `.cdd/CDD-VERSION` | Created |
| `.cdd/DISPATCH` | Created |
| `.cdd/CADENCE` | Created |
| `.cdd/OPERATORS` | Created |
| `.cdd/MCAs/INDEX.md` | Created |
| `.cdd/skills/README.md` | Created |
| `.cdd/iterations/cross-repo/README.md` | Created |

---

## Review Findings

Three findings surfaced across R1; all resolved before R2 approval.

### F1 (D) — post-release/SKILL.md §5.6b cadence contradiction

**Source:** β R1 finding F1.
**Fix commit:** `ca34cd1b`

The diff inserted a pointer to `activation/SKILL.md §22` ("every cycle produces `cdd-iteration.md`") in post-release/SKILL.md §5.6b without removing the adjacent existing sentence "Empty cycles produce no file." The two instructions were left in the same section body, pointing at contradictory cadence policies with no tiebreaker for an operator reading both.

Root cause: α's peer enumeration stopped at the insertion site. The insertion was correct; the paragraph it landed in was not re-read for internal consistency after the insert.

Fix: removed "Empty cycles produce no file" from §5.6b; replaced with text consistent with activation §22 and OQ #35 decision.

### F2 (B) — activation/SKILL.md §14 stale line count (847→623)

**Source:** β R1 finding F2.
**Fix commit:** `54b1d3a2`

The §14 illustrative template quoted `wc -l activation/SKILL.md → 847`. The actual file at HEAD was 623 lines. The measurement was from a draft-phase estimate that was not refreshed at pre-review.

Root cause: measurement-bearing template text written during early drafting; not treated as a peer of the final artifact at pre-review gate. The alpha/SKILL.md §2.3 intra-doc repetition rule applies: every occurrence of a quoted measurement is a peer, and each must match the observable state at review time.

Fix: updated both occurrences in §14 (table row and `claims.md` structure block) to 623.

### F3 (A) — activation/SKILL.md §23 step 18 missing governing section reference

**Source:** β R1 finding F3.
**Fix commit:** `54b1d3a2`

§23 step 18 ("Populate `.cdd/iterations/INDEX.md`") lacked a governing section reference in parentheses. All other 19 steps reference a governing section (§3, §4, §8, …). α declared this as §Debt item 3 ("intentional; steps 18–19 are process steps, not section-specific outputs") and did not fix it pre-review. β classified it as A-severity finding rather than acceptable known debt.

The distinction: §23's introduction says each step references its governing section. Step 18 governs INDEX.md initialization, which derives from §3 (scaffold) as the structure that initializes the INDEX.md. The §3 reference was appropriate; α had not added it.

Fix: added `(§3)` to step 18, consistent with all other steps.

### Bonus fix — CDD.md ROLES.md link lychee-incompatible

**Source:** α-identified during R1 fix round; not a β finding.
**Fix commit:** `ebd2e63f`

CDD.md used a root-relative path `/ROLES.md` for its ROLES.md link. lychee (the CI link checker) requires relative paths from the file's own location. Changed to `../../../../ROLES.md`.

---

## Friction Log

**1. OQ resolution volume.** The issue carried 37 open questions, each with a recommendation. All 37 were decided by α. The issue's structure (recommendation attached to each OQ) reduced friction significantly — α could follow most recommendations directly without independent analysis. The one deviation (OQ #35: every cycle writes cdd-iteration.md) required explicit rationale and created a known cross-surface conflict with epsilon/SKILL.md §1, declared as §Debt item 1.

**2. Bounded dispatch / close-out re-dispatch.** α exited after signaling R2 review-readiness. This close-out was written at a separate re-dispatch session. The bounded-dispatch path is the declared standard (alpha/SKILL.md §2.8); the re-dispatch friction was expected and not a gap.

**3. F3 debt-vs-finding classification.** α declared §23 step 18 as known debt with an explicit rationale before review. β assessed it as a finding (A-severity). The boundary between "acceptable known debt" and "required fix for a checklist-prescribing document" is a judgment surface; β's read (the §23 introduction establishes a uniform pattern; step 18 broke it) was consistent with the skill text. No residual gap — the fix was straightforward and the classification difference is within normal review-loop variation.

**4. Docs-only cycle / no CI.** Pre-review gate row 10 (branch CI green) required an explicit declaration rather than a passing check result. The prescribed form ("explicit declaration per gate row 10") was used. No friction beyond the declaration itself.

---

## Observations and Patterns

**1. Intra-doc measurement drift (F2).** F2 is the same class as the intra-doc repetition drift documented in alpha/SKILL.md §2.3 (derives from #266 F3/F3-bis). A measurement that was accurate at draft time became stale by review time without a refresh step. Template text that quotes live measurements is structurally distinct from template text that quotes static prescriptions: live measurements require a pre-review re-check against the artifact they describe. Same pattern class; two occurrences this cycle.

**2. Insertion-site paragraph audit gap (F1).** F1 is an intra-paragraph conflict class: the new pointer text was correct; the surrounding paragraph it was inserted into was not re-read for internal consistency after the insert. The alpha/SKILL.md §2.3 intra-doc repetition rule's grep-every-occurrence discipline applied here would have caught the conflict — the "Empty cycles produce no file" sentence was a peer of the new pointer. Not caught at pre-review.

**3. OQ #35 policy establishment.** The activation skill establishes "every cycle writes `cdd-iteration.md`" as the authoritative cadence policy (OQ #35), deviating from epsilon/SKILL.md §1 ("empty cycles produce no file"). This creates a known cross-surface conflict (§Debt item 1). The deviation is documented in self-coherence.md §OQ-Decisions. The conflict is visible in the skill tree at two points: epsilon/SKILL.md §1 (retained prior policy) and activation/SKILL.md §22 (new authoritative prescription). A follow-on cycle targeting epsilon/SKILL.md §1 closes this.

**4. Docs-only self-activation.** The cycle simultaneously authored a "how to activate" skill and activated cnos itself. The two tasks were interdependent: §24 verification (A.AC6) ran against marker files α was creating in the same cycle. This worked without conflict because the marker files are configuration, not behavior — creating them is idempotent, and §24 is a presence check. No friction from the simultaneity.

---

## Engineering-Level Reading

**Bootstrap gap closed.** Before this cycle, cdd had no canonical "how to turn cdd on in this repo" entry point. Every prior tenant (including cnos itself) re-derived the bootstrap sequence — `.cdd/` scaffold, version pin, labels, identity, CI, notifications, secrets prescription — from memory or prior cycle docs. `activation/SKILL.md §1–§24` is now the single authoritative sequence. The 20-step §23 checklist provides a runnable ordering with explicit verification lines; no forward dependencies.

**§22 is the highest-consequence section.** The cdd-iteration cadence decision (OQ #35: every cycle writes `cdd-iteration.md`) establishes a policy that affects ε's work product, post-release/SKILL.md §5.6b (updated this cycle), and the existing convention in epsilon/SKILL.md §1 (not updated; declared as §Debt item 1). The activation skill claims authority for this policy over the epsilon/SKILL.md prior convention. The authority claim is documented and the conflict is explicit. The follow-on epsilon harmonization cycle (§Debt item 1) closes the split.

**Transport-agnostic notification contract (§10).** The adapter contract (§10.2: 5 properties) and event vocabulary (§10.1: 4 events) are defined without Telegram-specific assumptions. Telegram appears only as "the reference adapter (Cycle B)." The contract supports any transport that implements the 5 properties. This was the primary architectural constraint for A.AC3.

**cnos as its own first tenant.** The §24 verification ran 9/9 OK at review time. cnos is now self-consistent against its own activation prescription. The 7 marker files present on main as of merge commit `73019108` are the observable evidence of this.
