**Verdict:** REQUEST CHANGES

**Round:** 1
**origin/main SHA:** 0ff6d427275b68998c8413ab8f26079928222c78
**cycle/325 HEAD SHA:** 26619247563601ed7c240c44a44801fad9b605c9
**Branch CI state:** no CI workflow for docs/skills-only changes
**Merge instruction:** pending — see findings

---

## §2.0 Issue Contract

### AC Coverage

| # | AC | In diff? | Status | Notes |
|---|----|----------|--------|-------|
| AC1 | CDD lifecycle model is explicit | yes | MET | §1.6 coordination model table; §Tracking "in-session only" clarification |
| AC2 | Role/artifact ownership matrix exists | yes | MET — partial (see F1) | §5.3b added with all required rows and columns; one row has wrong "Written when" timing |
| AC3 | α close-out timing is executable | yes | MET | §1.4 α step 10 rewritten; §1.6a re-dispatch prompts; alpha/SKILL.md §2.8; gamma/SKILL.md §2.7; operator/SKILL.md step 5 |
| AC4 | β close-out and merge boundary are executable | yes | MET | release/SKILL.md Core Principle fixed; post-release/SKILL.md §Who fixed; all three surfaces agree |
| AC5 | γ closure gate is complete | yes | PARTIAL (see F2) | gamma/SKILL.md §2.10 has 12 rows but does not include δ release-boundary preflight; §4.1a S11 explicitly requires "δ preflight passed" as input |
| AC6 | δ release-boundary preflight is placed correctly | yes | MET | §4.1a S10→S11→S12 ordering; operator/SKILL.md lifecycle table updated |
| AC7 | `.cdd/unreleased` movement is owned and timed | yes | MET | §5.3b matrix row; §8.1 F4 checklist; gamma/SKILL.md §2.10 row 12 |
| AC8 | `RELEASE.md` ownership and timing are explicit | yes | MET | §5.3b matrix row; §8.1 F5 checklist; §1.2 small-change table; gamma/SKILL.md §2.6 |
| AC9 | Polling-era text is reconciled | yes | MET | §1.6 declares sequential bounded dispatch as current; §Tracking "in-session only" banner |
| AC10 | Role skill peer audit is complete | yes | MET | All 7 role/lifecycle skills audited or confirmed no change needed |
| AC11 | CDD has a failure-mode regression surface | yes | MET | §8.1 10-row closure checklist with positive/negative tests |
| AC12 | Small-change path remains coherent | yes | MET | §1.2 artifact collapse table with explicit status per artifact |

### Named Doc Updates

| Doc / File | In diff? | Status | Notes |
|------------|----------|--------|-------|
| `CDD.md` | yes | present | §1.2 expanded, §1.6/§1.6a added, §4.1a added, §5.3b added, §8.1 added, §1.4 α step 10 rewritten, §Tracking updated |
| `alpha/SKILL.md` | yes | present | §2.8 close-out timing rewritten with re-dispatch path + provisional fallback |
| `beta/SKILL.md` | no | confirmed no change needed | β merge authority and δ release boundary already correct |
| `gamma/SKILL.md` | yes | present | §2.7 re-dispatch protocol; §2.10 "Then:" gamma-closeout.md labeled as closure artifact |
| `operator/SKILL.md` | yes | present | Algorithm steps 4–6 added; lifecycle table rows updated |
| `release/SKILL.md` | yes | present | Core Principle: β/δ authority split corrected |
| `post-release/SKILL.md` | yes | present | §Who: β/δ authority split corrected |
| `review/SKILL.md` | no | confirmed no change needed | review mechanics unchanged |

### CDD Artifact Contract

| Artifact | Required? | Present? | Notes |
|----------|-----------|----------|-------|
| `self-coherence.md` | yes | yes | complete with review-readiness signal, CDD Trace through 7a, 12 ACs |
| `alpha-design.md` | per issue (Tier 3: design skill) | yes | D1–D7 decisions with rationale |
| `beta-review.md` | yes | yes (in progress) | this document |
| `alpha-closeout.md` | after merge (re-dispatch) | not yet | expected post-merge via re-dispatch |
| `beta-closeout.md` | after merge | not yet | expected post-merge |

### Active Skill Consistency

| Skill | Required by | Loaded? | Applied? | Notes |
|-------|-------------|---------|----------|-------|
| `cnos.core/skills/write` | Tier 3 (issue) | yes | yes | prose structure is clear; one-governing-question discipline visible per section |
| `cnos.core/skills/design` | Tier 3 (issue) | yes | yes | D1–D7 decisions with rationale; authority boundaries explicit |
| `eng/test/SKILL.md` | Tier 3 (issue) | yes | yes | §8.1 checklist with positive/negative test pairs |

---

## §2.0.0 Contract Integrity

| Check | Result | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Status truth preserved | yes | spec/skill only; no runtime claim; debt section names real gaps |
| Canonical sources/paths verified | yes | all §-refs and file paths resolve |
| Scope/non-goals consistent | yes | no runtime implementation introduced |
| Constraint strata consistent | yes | hard gates enforced per issue; provisional fallback explicitly constrained |
| Exceptions field-specific/reasoned | yes | provisional close-out fallback is narrowly scoped with declaration-as-debt requirement |
| Path resolution base explicit | yes | relative repo paths throughout |
| Proof shape adequate | partial | §8.1 has positive/negative tests; AC oracle has positive/negative cases; one §5.3b ownership row has wrong "Written when" timing (see F1) |
| Cross-surface projections updated | yes | all 7 role/lifecycle skills audited; real conflicts found and fixed (release/SKILL.md, post-release/SKILL.md β/δ split) |
| No witness theater / false closure | yes | debt section names 3 known gaps; F1/F2 are real gaps not covered by debt |
| PR body matches branch files | n/a | triadic protocol — no PR |

---

## Findings

| # | Finding | Evidence | Severity | Type |
|---|---------|----------|----------|------|
| F1 | **§5.3b POST-RELEASE-ASSESSMENT.md "Written when" is wrong — says "after δ preflight" but PRA is written before δ preflight.** The ownership matrix row for POST-RELEASE-ASSESSMENT.md states `Written when: After β merge + close-outs + δ preflight`. But CDD.md §4.1a state table makes PRA an output of S9 (γ triaging) and a required input to S10 (δ preflight). The γ algorithm (Phase 3 write PRA → Phase 5a δ preflight) confirms: PRA comes before δ preflight, not after. A γ reading §5.3b as the canonical lookup would defer PRA writing until after preflight, causing S10's "PRA present" check to fail. | §5.3b row 8 (`POST-RELEASE-ASSESSMENT.md`) col `Written when`; §4.1a S9 "Required outputs: PRA at canonical path"; §4.1a S10 "Required inputs: PRA present"; CDD.md §1.4 γ algorithm Phase 3 (write PRA) → Phase 5a (δ preflight) | D | judgment, contract |
| F2 | **gamma/SKILL.md §2.10 closure gate is missing δ release-boundary preflight as a gate row — a γ can close without δ preflight.** The 12 closure gate rows in §2.10 do not include δ release-boundary preflight. CDD.md §4.1a S11 explicitly lists "δ preflight passed" as a required input for γ closing. AC5 oracle requires "δ release-boundary preflight result, if the release boundary is being crossed" in the gate. The omission means γ can write gamma-closeout.md (the closure declaration) without δ preflight having occurred, undermining the S10→S11 ordering the lifecycle state table defines. | gamma/SKILL.md §2.10 rows 1–12 (no δ preflight row); CDD.md §4.1a S11 "Required inputs: δ preflight passed; all closure gate rows pass (§gamma/SKILL.md §2.10)"; issue AC5 oracle: "δ release-boundary preflight result, if the release boundary is being crossed" | D | judgment |
| F3 | **gamma/SKILL.md §2.10 "Then:" block instructs "write RELEASE.md" after writing gamma-closeout.md, contradicting gate row 11 which requires RELEASE.md to be present before the "Then:" block executes.** The "Then:" block sequence: (1) write gamma-closeout.md, (2) "write RELEASE.md and move cycle directories per §2.6 (if not already done in §2.6)". Row 11 says "RELEASE.md is written and committed to main (§2.6)" must be true before γ can declare closure. If RELEASE.md must be present for all gate rows to pass, it cannot be a "Then:" action after gamma-closeout.md. The "(if not already done)" caveat partially addresses this but the instruction sequence remains contradictory: a γ reading sequentially can interpret writing RELEASE.md as a post-closure task, making it unavailable for δ preflight (S10 requires RELEASE.md present). | gamma/SKILL.md §2.10 row 11 "RELEASE.md is written and committed to main"; gamma/SKILL.md §2.10 "Then:" line "write RELEASE.md and move cycle directories per §2.6 (if not already done in §2.6)"; CDD.md §4.1a S10 "Required inputs: RELEASE.md present" | C | judgment |

---

## Regressions Required (D-level only)

### F1 — §5.3b POST-RELEASE-ASSESSMENT.md "Written when" timing

**Positive case:** γ follows §4.1a lifecycle state table. At S9 (γ triaging), γ writes the PRA. At S10 (δ preflight), δ finds "PRA present" in its required inputs — preflight proceeds. γ advances to S11 (γ closing) with PRA already committed.

**Negative case:** γ reads §5.3b "Written when: After β merge + close-outs + δ preflight" as canonical. γ defers PRA writing until after δ preflight. At S10, δ cannot verify "PRA present" — preflight either fails with missing artifact or proceeds with an unchecked row. If γ then reaches S11 without PRA, γ closure gate row 3 ("γ has written the post-release assessment") also blocks, surfacing the missing PRA — but only after δ preflight has already run against an incomplete artifact set.

**Fix:** Change §5.3b POST-RELEASE-ASSESSMENT.md "Written when" from `After β merge + close-outs + δ preflight` to `After β merge + close-outs; before δ preflight (S9: γ triaging)`.

### F2 — gamma/SKILL.md §2.10 missing δ preflight gate row

**Positive case:** gamma/SKILL.md §2.10 includes a row 13 (or equivalent): "δ release-boundary preflight was requested and returned Proceed". γ cannot write gamma-closeout.md until this row is satisfied. γ requests δ preflight → δ returns Proceed → γ satisfies all 13 rows → γ writes gamma-closeout.md. The S10→S11 ordering is enforced on the γ side as well as the δ side.

**Negative case:** gamma/SKILL.md §2.10 has no δ preflight row (current state). γ satisfies all 12 rows (none of which mention δ preflight), writes gamma-closeout.md (closure declaration), and then requests δ preflight. δ, seeing gamma-closeout.md already on main (the closure signal), proceeds to disconnect (S12) without a preflight gate in its own flow explicitly gating on γ's preflight request. The cycle closes without δ preflight ever running — F7 in CDD.md §8.1 was not caught.

**Fix:** Add a row 13 (or renumber as appropriate) to gamma/SKILL.md §2.10 closure gate: "δ release-boundary preflight was requested and returned Proceed (§4.1a S10, operator/SKILL.md §3.4)". Cross-reference operator/SKILL.md §3.4 and CDD.md §4.1a S11 required inputs.

---

## Notes

The three findings are self-referential: this cycle aims to eliminate lifecycle incoherence in CDD, and two of the three findings are incoherence within the cycle's own new surfaces (§5.3b and §4.1a disagree on PRA timing; §2.10 and §4.1a disagree on δ preflight as an S11 input). The cycle's architecture is sound — the design decisions (D1–D7) are correct and the overall structure is right. The fixes are narrow: one "Written when" cell in §5.3b and one missing gate row in §2.10 §2.10.

F3 is pre-existing in gamma/SKILL.md §2.10 "Then:" block (the cycle added "(if not already done)" as mitigation but left the contradictory "write RELEASE.md" instruction). The fix is to remove "write RELEASE.md" from the "Then:" block entirely (it's enforced by row 11 as a gate precondition) or reorder the "Then:" block to put RELEASE.md verification before gamma-closeout.md writing.

After these three fixes, the review will re-verify AC2 (F1 fix), AC5 (F2 fix), and gamma/SKILL.md §2.10 coherence (F3 fix). No other ACs are expected to change.

No phantom blockers: all findings are traced to specific lines and demonstrate a real state that produces a wrong outcome.

---

**Verdict:** REQUEST CHANGES

**Round:** 2
**origin/main SHA:** 0ff6d427275b68998c8413ab8f26079928222c78
**cycle/325 HEAD SHA:** 2073edb0d5e2554b7ac479247c059f000e02701d
**Fixed this round:** `1ae0f8cb`, `2073edb0` close R1 F1/F2/F3
**Branch CI state:** no CI workflow for docs/skills-only changes

---

## §2.0 Issue Contract — R2

### R1 finding resolution

| R1 Finding | Severity | Fix commit | Verified | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| F1: §5.3b POST-RELEASE-ASSESSMENT.md "Written when" wrong (said "+ δ preflight") | D | `1ae0f8cb` | ✅ | CDD.md line 896 now reads "After β merge + close-outs" — δ preflight no longer in "Written when" |
| F2: gamma/SKILL.md §2.10 missing δ preflight gate row | D | `1ae0f8cb` | ✅ | Row 13 added: "δ release-boundary preflight was requested and returned Proceed (§4.1a S10, operator/SKILL.md §3.4)" |
| F3: gamma/SKILL.md §2.10 "Then:" block contradicts gate rows 11/12 (instructed "write RELEASE.md and move cycle directories" after gamma-closeout.md) | C | `1ae0f8cb` | ✅ | "write RELEASE.md and move cycle directories per §2.6" removed from the Then block; block now contains only: write gamma-closeout.md, update hub memory, delete merged branches, state closure |

All R1 D-level and C-level findings resolved.

### AC Coverage — R2 delta

| AC | R1 status | R2 status | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| AC2: Role/artifact ownership matrix exists | MET — partial (F1) | PARTIAL (R2-F1 below) | F1 fixed; new inconsistency in "Verified by" column for PRA row |
| AC5: γ closure gate is complete | PARTIAL (F2) | MET | Row 13 added; gate now enforces δ preflight before closure |
| All other ACs | MET | MET (unchanged) | No other ACs affected by R1 fixes or R2 scope |

---

## §2.0.0 Contract Integrity — R2

| Check | R1 result | R2 result | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Proof shape adequate | partial | partial | §8.1 checklist is correct; §5.3b PRA "Verified by" incomplete (R2-F1) |
| All others | yes / n/a | yes / n/a | No change from R1 |

---

## Findings — R2

| # | Finding | Evidence | Severity | Type |
|---|---------|----------|----------|------|
| R2-F1 | **§5.3b POST-RELEASE-ASSESSMENT.md "Verified by" is incomplete — omits δ at release-boundary preflight.** §4.1a S10 (δ release-boundary preflight) explicitly lists "PRA present" as a required input. The matrix correctly names δ preflight as a verifier for every other §4.1a S10-required artifact: `RELEASE.md` ("Verified by: δ at release-boundary preflight") and `.cdd/releases/{X.Y.Z}/{N}/` ("Verified by: γ closure gate row 12; δ preflight"). The PRA row is the only S10-required artifact whose "Verified by" does not name δ preflight. A γ or δ reading the matrix to determine who verifies PRA would conclude only γ's closure gate checks it — missing that δ preflight also requires it. This could lead to a γ scheduling PRA after requesting δ preflight (reasoning from "Required before: γ closure"), causing δ to return "Request changes" unexpectedly. | CDD.md §5.3b line 896: `POST-RELEASE-ASSESSMENT.md \| γ \| After β merge + close-outs \| γ closure gate \| γ closure \| γ closure gate blocks`; CDD.md §4.1a S10 "Required inputs: PRA present, RELEASE.md present, .cdd/unreleased/{N}/ not yet moved, merge on main"; CDD.md §5.3b RELEASE.md row: "Verified by: δ at release-boundary preflight"; CDD.md §5.3b .cdd/releases/ row: "Verified by: γ closure gate row 12; δ preflight" | C | judgment |

---

## Notes — R2

R1 fixes are narrow and correct. The overall architecture and all 12 ACs remain sound.

R2-F1 is a missed finding from R1 — the F1 fix (removing δ preflight from "Written when") was correct, but the "Verified by" column for PRA was not updated to reflect that δ preflight also verifies it per §4.1a S10. The fix is one cell in §5.3b.

**Fix for R2-F1:** In CDD.md §5.3b, update the POST-RELEASE-ASSESSMENT.md row "Verified by" from `γ closure gate` to `γ closure gate; δ at release-boundary preflight`. Optionally update "Required before" from `γ closure` to `δ preflight` (earlier enforcement point, consistent with §4.1a S10 ordering) — however updating "Required before" to "δ preflight" is also consistent with the pattern on the `.cdd/releases/` row ("Required before: δ tag/release") which shows the latest enforcement. The minimal correct fix is updating "Verified by" only.

After R2-F1 is fixed, no further review rounds are expected. The branch will be approvable.

---

**Verdict:** APPROVED

**Round:** 3
**origin/main SHA:** 0ff6d427275b68998c8413ab8f26079928222c78
**cycle/325 HEAD SHA:** 1ee4dd35308be07d9c5e10dd6f943571fae4c200
**Fixed this round:** `dcda8a0c` closes R2-F1
**Branch CI state:** no CI workflow for docs/skills-only changes
**Merge instruction:** `git merge --no-ff cycle/325` into main with `Closes #325`

---

## §2.0.0 Contract Integrity — R3

| Check | Result | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Status truth preserved | yes | spec/skill only; no runtime claim; R2-F1 fix is one cell |
| Canonical sources/paths verified | yes | all §-refs resolve; §5.3b PRA "Verified by" now consistent with §4.1a S10 |
| Scope/non-goals consistent | yes | no runtime implementation; no scope drift in fix |
| Constraint strata consistent | yes | hard gates enforced; no new exceptions |
| Exceptions field-specific/reasoned | yes | provisional fallback still narrowly scoped |
| Path resolution base explicit | yes | relative repo paths throughout |
| Proof shape adequate | yes | §8.1 checklist correct; §5.3b ownership matrix now fully consistent |
| Cross-surface projections updated | yes | no additional peers affected by one-cell fix |
| No witness theater / false closure | yes | debt section unchanged; no false closure added |
| PR body matches branch files | n/a | triadic protocol — no PR |

---

## §2.0 Issue Contract — R3

### R2 finding resolution

| R2 Finding | Severity | Fix commit | Verified | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| R2-F1: §5.3b POST-RELEASE-ASSESSMENT.md "Verified by" omits δ at release-boundary preflight | C | `dcda8a0c` | ✅ | "Verified by" now reads `γ closure gate; δ at release-boundary preflight` — consistent with §4.1a S10 required inputs and peer rows (RELEASE.md, .cdd/releases/) |

### AC Coverage — R3

| AC | R2 status | R3 status | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| AC2: Role/artifact ownership matrix exists | PARTIAL (R2-F1) | MET | R2-F1 fixed; all 8 required rows fully consistent |
| All other ACs | MET | MET (unchanged) | No other ACs affected |

---

## Pre-merge gate — R3

| # | Row | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Identity: `git config --get user.email` | ✅ `beta@cdd.cnos` |
| 2 | Canonical-skill freshness: origin/main SHA | ✅ `0ff6d427` — matches session-start; skills not reloaded (no advancement) |
| 3 | Non-destructive merge-test | ✅ Zero unmerged paths; merge exit 0. `validate-skill-frontmatter.sh` requires `cue` (not installed — environment constraint); no SKILL.md frontmatter changed in this cycle, so validator is not blocking |

---

## Findings — R3

None. All prior findings resolved. No new findings.

---

## Notes — R3

R2-F1 fix is correct and complete. The single-cell change in §5.3b PRA "Verified by" closes the last inconsistency between the ownership matrix and the §4.1a lifecycle state table. "Required before: γ closure" is retained as the minimal-fix choice (β R2 explicitly accepted this); the "Verified by: δ at release-boundary preflight" provides sufficient signal to both δ and γ about the earlier enforcement point.

The cycle's three-round narrowing pattern demonstrates the regression surface works: the cycle was fixing CDD incoherence, and β found incoherence within the cycle's own new surfaces in rounds 1 and 2. All were narrow and resolvable. Architecture and design decisions D1–D7 (per alpha-design.md) are sound.

No remaining blockers. Branch is coherent and merge-ready.
