# Score Sheet

**Kata ID:** B1-runtime-contract-v2-parity-review
**Run ID:** B1-cold-001

| Dimension | Score (0–4) | Why |
|-----------|-------------|-----|
| α Pattern | 3 | The review was internally organized and identified one real issue (cn doctor depth), but did not produce the strongest issue map. |
| β Relation | 1 | Missed the key canonical-doc/runtime contradictions, especially stale examples and wake-strata mismatch. |
| γ Exit | 2 | Suggested more validation but did not identify the smallest finishing patch set accurately. |
| Efficiency | 4 | One round, low cost, quick result. |

## Positive Signals

- [x] Correctly saw that Runtime Contract v2 existed in code.
- [x] Correctly noticed cn doctor was weaker than the issue claim.

## Negative Signals

- [x] Missed the canonical architecture/doc drift.
- [x] Under-read unchanged but authoritative sibling docs.
- [x] Treated code progress as stronger evidence than doc/runtime parity.

## Transfer Assessment

- none yet

## Cost Assessment

- cheap

## Final Classification

- selection-limited
