# ε cdd-iteration — cycle/414

**Issue:** [cnos#414](https://github.com/usurobor/cnos/issues/414) — Add design essay `DECREASING-INCOHERENCE.md` to `docs/gamma/essays/` (companion to `CCNF-AND-TYPED-TRUST.md`).
**Mode:** docs-only; γ+α+β-collapsed-on-δ. Per ε hygiene, empty findings are recorded explicitly.

## Findings

**None.**

This was a docs-only cycle producing exactly 2 file changes — one new essay (`docs/gamma/essays/DECREASING-INCOHERENCE.md`) and one README update (`docs/gamma/essays/README.md`). No tooling, no schemas, no build/test surface, no code was touched. The cycle had no review-oracle ambiguity, no β-α dispatch round (β-α-collapsed-on-δ explicitly), no protocol-shape disagreement, no out-of-band coordination friction. The δ-pinned implementation contract was complete and unambiguous; α executed within it; β confirmed conformance.

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

**None surfaced this cycle.** Three non-blocking observations from β's R1 review are recorded as positive notes, not protocol-gap signals:

1. **`related:` schema convention coexistence.** The new essay uses `usurobor/tsc:path` form for cross-repo references in `related:`. The companion essay `CCNF-AND-TYPED-TRUST.md` uses `cnos#NNN` issue-ref form. Both forms coexist as valid cross-repo references in essay frontmatter. A future ε cycle could ratify one canonical form, but this is additive normalization, not a gap surfaced by this cycle's failure. Positive forward-looking observation.

2. **Companion-essay back-link opportunity.** `CCNF-AND-TYPED-TRUST.md` (the precursor essay) does not back-link to `DECREASING-INCOHERENCE.md` (the steering-layer follow-on) because the back-link is forbidden by this cycle's hard rule "no edits to other essays." A future cycle may add a back-link in `CCNF-AND-TYPED-TRUST.md`'s frontmatter or References section. Not a gap; an explicitly deferred tidy.

3. **Issue-proposal YAML illustrative-vs-normative discipline.** The essay's `## Issue proposal surface` section labels its YAML block "Illustrative shape:" — making clear the schema is deferred to #405 Sub 6, not committed by this essay. β confirmed this discipline holds throughout the essay (the YAML is descriptive prose-equivalent, not a schema definition). Positive observation; no gap.

None of these rise to a `cdd-skill-gap`, `cdd-protocol-gap`, `cdd-tooling-gap`, or `cdd-metric-gap` finding for this cycle. They are forward-looking notes for future ε signal aggregation.

## Non-findings (worth recording)

- **Source was pre-cleaned.** The dispatch brief noted "the source above ALREADY HAS the Unicode characters cleaned up." α verified post-Write via `grep -E "Î[±²³´µ]|â¡|matterâ|Î±â"` returning 0 hits. The substitution table from the dispatch brief was internalized as a defensive checklist; no character-by-character substitution was needed. The discipline of *providing* the substitution table even when the source is clean is itself good ε hygiene (operator-prepared safety net).
- **Verbatim discipline held.** α did not editorialize, rephrase, or "improve" any prose. Structural spot-check against the dispatch brief's source confirms byte-equality of all 21 section headers, the CCNF kernel block, the FOUNDATIONS stack, the YAML example, and the operating slogan.
- **Companion-essay dependency correctly surfaced.** Reading Order item 5 (after item 4: `CCNF-AND-TYPED-TRUST.md`) and the essay's `## Current foundations` section both cite typed trust as the prerequisite, consistent with the dispatch brief's design-constraint "the essay sits AFTER `CCNF-AND-TYPED-TRUST.md` because typed trust is the prerequisite."

## Verdict

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

`protocol_gap_count: 0`.

This courtesy stub is filed per `post-release/SKILL.md §5.6b` close-out shape (cdd-iteration.md required when `protocol_gap_count > 0`; courtesy stub for clean cycles is the convention established by cnos#396, #401, #406–#413 close-outs).
