---
cycle: 344-b
role: gamma
type: post-release-assessment
---
# Post-Release Assessment — Cycle #344 Cycle B

**Version:** docs-only (merge commit `8fdc255d`, 2026-05-12)
**Issue:** #344 — reference notifier + GH Actions templates
**Dispatch:** §5.2 (single-session δ-as-γ via Agent tool)

## Coherence delta

C_Σ **A−** (`α B+`, `β A−`, `γ A−`)

The cycle delivered the reference notifier implementation and GitHub Actions workflow templates prescribed by `activation/SKILL.md §10` and §9. A tenant can now wire CDD cycle notifications to Telegram by copying two files and setting two secrets. The `cdd-artifact-validate.yml` template gives tenants the CI artifact gate prescribed in §9 Layer 1 without requiring them to configure it from scratch.

## α assessment

**Grade: B+**

α met all 5 ACs. The implementation was structurally correct: `notify.sh` correctly handles all 4 events with graceful missing-secret handling; YAML files are valid; no hardcoded tokens. The F2 operator-precedence defect in the `if:` condition (B severity) was a genuine mechanical error that β caught correctly — it would have caused unintended notifications on non-cycle branches. F1 was an issue-accuracy gap (AC named a different file than what α naturally built); F3 was a small documentation completeness gap. 2 review rounds for a 5-AC cycle with 3 findings maps to B+.

Pattern: The F1 class (issue AC names a specific file path that α diverges from) is a coordination friction point. It surfaced here and previously in Cycle A (different manifestation: template measurement vs actual count). Not yet at the 3-occurrence monitoring threshold, but worth watching.

## β assessment

**Grade: A−**

β found all 3 legitimate findings in R1 and verified all 3 resolutions cleanly in R2. No phantom blockers. The F2 (operator-precedence in YAML `if:`) required genuine YAML semantics understanding to catch. The narrowed R2 review was efficient and complete.

## γ assessment

**Grade: A− (§5.2 configuration-floor clause)**

γ/δ separation is structurally absent under §5.2. The cycle scaffolding, sub-agent dispatch, artifact verification, and close-out were coherent. No unblock decisions required. Branch-name adaptation (344-b) under §5.2 consequence 3 worked correctly.

## Cycle economics

- **Review rounds:** 2 (target: ≤1 for docs cycles)
- **Total findings:** 3 (F1=C, F2=B, F3=A)
- **Mechanical ratio:** 1/3 = 33% (F2 is mechanical; F1 and F3 are judgment/contract)
- **ACs delivered:** 5/5

The 2-round outcome is acceptable for a new template class. The F2 YAML precedence defect is the only finding that a more careful self-review would have caught before handoff; the others are judgment gaps.

## Cycle iteration

No protocol-gap findings. See `cdd-iteration.md` for the clean-cycle declaration.

## Next

Cycle C (tsc adoption) — apply Cycle B templates to tsc; populate 6 activation marker files; run §24 verification.
