<!-- sections: [verdict, contract-integrity, issue-contract, findings, ci-status, artifact-completeness, honest-claim, notes, merge-instruction] -->
<!-- completed: [verdict, contract-integrity, issue-contract, findings, ci-status, artifact-completeness, honest-claim, notes, merge-instruction] -->

# β Review — Issue #359

**Verdict:** APPROVED

**Round:** 1
**Review base SHA:** `23e28e45` (`origin/main` HEAD observed `2026-05-14`, synchronously re-fetched per `beta/SKILL.md` Role Rule 1)
**Review head SHA:** `701f8947` (`origin/cycle/359` HEAD)
**Branch CI state:** green — Build workflow `success` on HEAD `701f8947` (run created `2026-05-14T21:24:44Z`, `gh run list --branch cycle/359`)
**Dispatch configuration:** §5.2 single-session δ-as-γ per `.cdd/DISPATCH` (the cycle whose patch this verdict approves runs under the configuration the patch clarifies)
**Merge instruction:** `git merge --no-ff origin/cycle/359` into `main` with `Closes #359` in the merge commit

## §2.0.0 Contract Integrity

| Check | Result | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Status truth preserved | yes | self-coherence + gamma-scaffold both declare docs-only, base `23e28e45`; no draft/planned/shipped confusion |
| Canonical sources/paths verified | yes | `operator/SKILL.md §5.2` exists at line 297; `CDD.md §1.4` exists; downstream sites referenced in §AC3 resolve |
| Scope/non-goals consistent | yes | scope = "skill-patch: clarify §5.2 δ↔γ collapse scope"; diff is `operator/SKILL.md +4 / -0` plus γ + α self-coherence artifacts |
| Constraint strata consistent | yes | new paragraphs reinforce CDD.md §1.4 Triadic rule (protocol stratum); no new constraint stratum introduced |
| Exceptions field-specific/reasoned | n/a | no exceptions added |
| Path resolution base explicit | yes | `CDD.md §1.4` reference inside the new paragraphs resolves against the canonical CDD.md |
| Proof shape adequate | yes | AC evidence is text-presence (appropriate for skill-prose) plus downstream-reference enumeration via `rg` (reproducible) |
| Cross-surface projections updated | yes | downstream §5.2 sites (`release/SKILL.md §3.8`, `activation/SKILL.md §8`, `operator/SKILL.md §5.3`) inspected; none asserts α/β collapse, so patch leaves them coherent |
| No witness theater / false closure | yes | new paragraphs add substantive constraint (explicit violation shape), not ceremonial restatement of §1.4 |
| PR body matches branch files | n/a | no PR; `origin/cycle/359` is the coordination surface per `CDD.md §Tracking` |
| γ artifacts present (gamma-scaffold.md) | yes | `.cdd/unreleased/359/gamma-scaffold.md` present on `origin/cycle/359` (commit `88a573de`, `gamma@cdd.cnos`); rule 3.11b satisfied |

## §2.0 Issue Contract

### AC Coverage

| # | AC | In diff? | Status | Notes |
|---|----|----------|--------|-------|
| 1 | `operator/SKILL.md §5.2` or `cdd/SKILL.md` contains explicit statement that §5.2 collapses **δ↔γ only** and γ↔α↔β remain structurally separate per §1.4 | yes | met | `operator/SKILL.md` line 301: "**Scope of the collapse.** §5.2 collapses **δ↔γ only**. γ↔α↔β remain structurally separate per `CDD.md §1.4` Triadic rule..." |
| 2 | The clarification names what violation looks like (single subagent doing γ+α+β work) | yes | met | line 303: "A single sub-agent that performs γ-selection plus α-implementation plus β-review is not §5.2 — it is a §1.4 violation. §5.2 requires three execution contexts..." |
| 3 | `operator/SKILL.md §5.2` consistent with the patch (no contradiction with the existing three-consequences list or downstream §5.2 references) | yes | met | new block lands between the existing mechanism paragraph ("α and β are dispatched as sub-agents", line 299) and "Three structural consequences follow:" (line 305); existing consequence 1 (δ=γ collapse) is unchanged and the new block sharpens its scope. Downstream references in `release/SKILL.md §3.8` (γ/δ separation absent), `activation/SKILL.md §8` (dispatch declaration), `operator/SKILL.md §5.3` (escalation criteria) all describe γ/δ-only collapse; none asserts α/β collapse |

### Named Doc Updates

| Doc / File | In diff? | Status | Notes |
|------------|----------|--------|-------|
| `src/packages/cnos.cdd/skills/cdd/operator/SKILL.md` | yes | met | +4 lines (two paragraphs) at §5.2 head (commit `22e9e7eb`, `alpha@cdd.cnos`) |

### CDD Artifact Contract

| Artifact | Required? | Present? | Notes |
|----------|-----------|----------|-------|
| `.cdd/unreleased/359/gamma-scaffold.md` | yes | yes | commit `88a573de`, `gamma@cdd.cnos`; rule 3.11b satisfied |
| `.cdd/unreleased/359/self-coherence.md` | yes | yes | manifest `[gap, skills, acs, self-check, debt, cdd-trace, review-readiness]` all in `completed:`; review-readiness signal at commit `701f8947` |

### Active Skill Consistency

| Skill | Required by | Loaded? | Applied? | Notes |
|-------|-------------|---------|----------|-------|
| `cdd/SKILL.md` + `alpha/SKILL.md` | α intake | yes | yes | self-coherence §Skills declares Tier 1 / role |
| `cnos.core/skills/write/SKILL.md` | Tier 3 (skill prose) | yes | yes | brevity-is-earned applied — two paragraphs / 4 lines; state-what-it-is observable in line 301; front-load-the-point observable in "**Scope of the collapse.**" lead |
| `design/SKILL.md`, `plan/SKILL.md`, `test/SKILL.md` | optional | no | n/a | self-coherence §Skills + §CDD-Trace steps 1, 3, 4 document reason ("single-paragraph skill patch with three ACs needed no design or plan artifact"; "no executable surface") |

## §Findings

None.

| # | Finding | Evidence | Severity | Type |
|---|---------|----------|----------|------|
| — | — | — | — | — |

No D, C, B, or A finding identified in the contract surface, the diff, or the self-coherence artifact.

## §CI status

`gh run list --branch cycle/359 --json status,conclusion,workflowName,headSha` → Build workflow `success` on HEAD `701f8947` (run created `2026-05-14T21:24:44Z`). Rule 3.10 satisfied.

## §Artifact completeness

`.cdd/unreleased/359/gamma-scaffold.md` present on `origin/cycle/359` (commit `88a573de`, authored `gamma@cdd.cnos`). Rule 3.11b satisfied.

## §Honest-claim verification (rule 3.13)

- **(a) Reproducibility.** Every measurement in the self-coherence artifact is reproducible from this commit. AC1/AC2 text presence is reproducible via `git show 22e9e7eb -- src/packages/cnos.cdd/skills/cdd/operator/SKILL.md`. AC3 downstream enumeration is reproducible via `rg "§5\.2|δ-as-γ|δ=γ|δ↔γ" src/packages/cnos.cdd/skills/cdd/`. Branch CI claim reproducible via `gh run list --branch cycle/359`. Verified.
- **(b) Source-of-truth alignment.** Terms used in the new paragraphs (γ, δ, α, β, "Triadic rule", "role-isolation", "sub-agent") trace to canonical definitions in `CDD.md §1.4` and `operator/SKILL.md §5`. No drift introduced.
- **(c) Wiring claims.** The new paragraphs do not introduce new wiring; they describe an existing structural invariant (γ↔α↔β separation) as preserved under §5.2. The wiring described — γ in parent session, α in sub-agent, β in sub-agent — matches the §5.2 mechanism paragraph (line 299) and the `CDD.md §1.4` Triadic rule. Grep-verified: no production code or test imports reference the new prose.
- **(d) Gap claims.** §Gap claim "§5.2 did not state which role-pair the collapse covers" is reproducible against the pre-patch operator/SKILL.md §5.2 (consequence 1 "δ=γ collapse" did not bound the scope of `γ↔α↔β` separation). Cited originating signal (tsc #49 wave-1 misread) recorded in `.cdd/releases/0.10.0/49/cdd-iteration.md` F1 per the issue body — not verified against the upstream tsc repo, but the within-repo misread is plausible and the patch is justified on its internal merits regardless of the upstream anchor. Peer-enumeration via `rg` confirms no pre-existing surface already states the scope.

## §Notes

- **§5.2 configuration recorded.** Cycle dispatch is §5.2 per `.cdd/DISPATCH`. The `release/SKILL.md §3.8` configuration-floor clause caps the γ axis at **A−** regardless of execution quality. β does not score the cycle; recording here for γ's PRA. This cycle is the canonical example of "the patch that clarifies the configuration it runs under."
- **Author email audit.** `git log --format='%h %ae' origin/main..origin/cycle/359` shows all eight α commits authored `alpha@cdd.cnos` and the single γ scaffold commit authored `gamma@cdd.cnos`. Identity-truth invariant intact.
- **Minor narrative observation, not a finding.** α's self-coherence §CDD-Trace step 6 lists `alpha/SKILL.md (review-readiness fix-round protocol)` among downstream §5.2 references. `alpha/SKILL.md`'s only `§5.2` match (line 131) is to `CDD.md §5.2` (canonical artifact order), not to `operator/SKILL.md §5.2` — so it is not a downstream reference to the section being patched. §ACs AC3 enumerates the correct three sites (`release/SKILL.md §3.8`, `activation/SKILL.md §8`, `operator/SKILL.md §5.3`) and the patch's downstream coherence claim stands; the §CDD-Trace narrative loosely conflates the two §5.2's. Below the bar for an A-finding (working-notes inconsistency, no impact on the shipped patch or any AC closure); recorded here for γ's PRA learning surface, not as merge-blocking.
- **Approval closes the search space** (rule 3.7). No D/C/B/A finding in: contract integrity (11/11 rows green or n/a), issue contract (3/3 ACs met, doc update present, CDD artifacts present and consistent, active skills consistent), CI status, artifact completeness, or honest-claim verification (3.13 a–d all verified).

## §Merge instruction

After β close-out is decided, β executes:

```
git switch main
git pull --ff-only origin main
git merge --no-ff origin/cycle/359 -m "merge: cycle/359 — clarify §5.2 collapses δ↔γ only (Closes #359)"
git push origin main
```

The merge is the docs-only disconnect signal per `release/SKILL.md §2.5b` (no tag, no version bump, no CHANGELOG ledger row). After merge and β close-out:
- δ owns the docs-only disconnect mechanics (cycle-directory move to `.cdd/releases/docs/{YYYY-MM-DD}/359/`), per `release/SKILL.md §2.5b`.
- γ owns the post-release assessment at `docs/gamma/cdd/docs/{YYYY-MM-DD}/POST-RELEASE-ASSESSMENT.md`.
- β does not tag, push tags, delete the cycle branch, or move the cycle directory.
