# Score Sheet

**Kata ID:** A1-open-op-registry-conflict
**Run ID:** A1-selected-001

| Dimension | Score (0–4) | Why |
|-----------|-------------|-----|
| α Pattern | 4 | The answer enforced the right invariant: reject ambiguity, do not shadow. |
| β Relation | 3 | It mostly kept the fix at the registry layer, though it lightly referenced doctor/traceability without fully scoping them as follow-on effects. |
| γ Exit | 3 | The proposed patch/test set was minimal and coherent, though not yet a full migration strategy. |
| Efficiency | 3 | More expensive, but still one round and clearly better than the cold run. |

## Positive Signals

- [x] Explicit invariant-first reasoning.
- [x] Deterministic rejection instead of weak warning semantics.
- [x] Stronger test family choice (order-independence/property).
- [x] Good positive/negative regression framing.

## Negative Signals

- [x] Slight tendency to mention downstream doctor/traceability consequences before fully closing the local fix.
- [x] Could have been slightly tighter on keeping the scope strictly registry-local.

## Transfer Assessment

- likely moderate to strong, pending Task B

## Cost Assessment

- acceptable

## Final Classification

- skill-effective
