---
id: T-2325
name: "arc-011 grill_me primary_target response artifact — AEF ADR §ACD audit + Spike
  1 falsifiability sharpening + A2-fails AEF-side prep + §9 closure binding analysis"
description: >
  arc-011 grill_me primary_target response artifact — AEF ADR §ACD audit + Spike 1
  falsifiability sharpening + A2-fails AEF-side prep + §9 closure binding analysis

status: work-completed
workflow_type: build
owner: agent
horizon:
tags: [arc-parallel-execution-aef, agent-prep, no-source-change]
components: []
related_tasks: [T-2303, T-2323, T-2324]
arc_id: parallel-execution-aef
# demo_target: true               # T-2286: optional — marks task as reserved for an orchestrated demo
#                                 # worker (e.g. arc-010 HM-A dispatches via mcp__fw__work_on). When set,
#                                 # `fw work-on T-XXX` refuses unless --i-am-demo-orchestrator (CLI) or
#                                 # FW_I_AM_DEMO_ORCHESTRATOR=1 (env) is passed. Prevents the parent
#                                 # session from consuming the captured→started-work transition the demo
#                                 # worker expects to drive. Origin OBS-057.
created: 2026-06-11T06:39:30Z
last_update: '2026-06-11T22:24:15Z'
date_finished: 2026-06-11T06:46:30Z
# revisit_at: YYYY-MM-DD          # T-1451: set on DEFER decisions to enable G-053 daily revisit scan
# revisit_evidence_needed:        # T-1451: one-line description of what evidence makes the revisit actionable
# ── BVP scoring fields (T-1918, arc-006). See docs/reports/T-1915-bvp-inception.md for semantics. ──
# bvp_scores:                     # confirmed per-driver scores 0-5, set by `fw bvp confirm` (T-1924).
#                                 # Sovereignty boundary — only set after human or agent confirmation.
#                                 # Shape: {D1: <int 0-5>, D2: <int 0-5>, D3: <int 0-5>, D4: <int 0-5>, [<free-driver-id>: <int>]...}
# bvp_scores_proposed:            # estimator-proposed scores (T-1922 worker). Persists when ≥2 delta
#                                 # from bvp_scores: on any driver (M3 v2-delta). Shape: list of timestamped entries.
# cost_estimate:                  # F8 composite: 0.6×blast_radius + 0.3×tier + 0.1×effort.
#                                 # Q2 fallback: T-shirt S/M/L/XL mapped to 2/4/6/8 when blast_radius is not yet computable.
cost_estimate_proposed:
  - ts: '2026-06-11T06:45:03Z'
    estimator: bvp-estimator-v1-heuristic
    cost_estimate:
      blast_radius: 0
      tier: 2
      effort: 8
    rationale: blast_radius=0 (no-signal); tier=2 (no-signal); effort=8 
      (no-signal)
    rubric_sha: e4a00f38e801
bvp_scores_proposed:
  - ts: '2026-06-11T06:45:04Z'
    estimator: bvp-estimator-v1-heuristic
    scores:
      D1: 4
      D2: 2
      D3: 2
      D4: 4
      F-RECALL: 2
      F-ORCH: 0
    rationale: D1=4 (body:structural-gate); D2=2 
      (body:telemetry-or-audit-entry); D3=2 (body:default-change); D4=4 
      (body:cross-machine); F-RECALL=2 (body:lightly-promoted); F-ORCH=0 
      (no-signal)
    rubric_sha: e4a00f38e801
  - ts: '2026-06-11T22:24:15Z'
    estimator: bvp-estimator-v1-heuristic
    scores:
      D1: 4
      D2: 2
      D3: 2
      D4: 4
      F-RECALL: 2
      F-ORCH: 0
      F3: 0
      F1: 0
      F2: 0
    rationale: D1=4 (body:structural-gate); D2=2 
      (body:telemetry-or-audit-entry); D3=2 (body:default-change); D4=4 
      (body:cross-machine); F-RECALL=2 (body:lightly-promoted); F-ORCH=0 
      (no-signal); F3=0 (no-signal); F1=0 (no-signal); F2=0 (no-signal)
    rubric_sha: e4a00f38e801
---

# T-2325: arc-011 grill_me primary_target response artifact — AEF ADR §ACD audit + Spike 1 falsifiability sharpening + A2-fails AEF-side prep + §9 closure binding analysis

## Context

arc-011 (parallel-execution-aef) anchored T-2303 (GO 2026-06-10 commit `989fc1e6e`).
Two downstream inceptions filed (T-2323 AEF-IC-1 yield-point granularity; T-2324
AEF-IC-2 disjoint write-set policy) both operator-parked captured/later awaiting
spike dialogue. The arc's `grill_me.primary_targets` block contains four sharpening
questions that gate further downstream inceptions from re-litigating settled forks.

Filing more downstream inceptions (IC-3/IC-4/IC-5) without answering these gating
questions is the inception-cluster-bombing anti-pattern the T-2303 grill page
warned against. This task writes the response artifact agent-side so the operator
can grill against substantive material instead of starting cold in the next session.

Scope: a single docs/reports/ artifact answering the 4 grill_me.primary_targets,
no source change, no downstream inception filings. The artifact references arc-011
yaml + the AEF ADR + the T-2303 research artifact as source-of-truth — answers
are derivations from existing decisions, not new architecture.

## Acceptance Criteria

### Agent
- [x] docs/reports/arc-011-grill-me-responses.md exists with non-empty body
- [x] Artifact contains a section per arc-011.yaml `grill_me.primary_targets` entry (4 sections)
- [x] Section 1 (headline_mechanic §ACD/G-062 audit) explicitly classifies CONSUMER-SIDE vs SUBSTRATE-TERRITORY per audit-clause language
- [x] Section 2 (Wire-evidence-X falsifiability — Spike 1) names ≥2 concrete test scenarios with named task ids and expected dispatches.jsonl row shape (3 scenarios shipped — 1A positive, 1B gate, 1C adversarial)
- [x] Section 3 (A2-fails AEF-side prep) lists ≥3 AEF-side workstreams that can ship without TermLink substrate primitives (6 workstreams shipped)
- [x] Section 4 (§9 closure binding) explicitly answers the binary question (is arc-011 cross-repo-ETA-bound?) and proposes a milestone-split structural counter
- [x] Artifact cross-references docs/architecture/parallel-execution-aef.md sections by number (§N) where claims trace to ADR decisions (18 §N references)
- [x] No new downstream inception tasks filed under this task (anti-cluster-bombing — Recommendation block declares this explicitly)

### Human
<!-- Criteria requiring human verification (UI/UX, subjective quality). Not blocking.
     Remove this section if all criteria are agent-verifiable.
     Each criterion MUST include Steps/Expected/If-not so the human can act without guessing.

     ── Prefix routing (T-1811, T-1878): default to [REVIEWER] if Expected is grep-able ──
     If your Expected clause is grep-able / file-exists / structural (a deterministic
     shell check), prefer [REVIEWER] — that AC should be an Agent AC with the reviewer
     command in `## Verification` instead of a Human AC here. Only keep [REVIEW] if
     verification genuinely needs human taste (tone, feel, layout rhythm).
     See CLAUDE.md §AC Classification Guidance for the conversion rule.

     [REVIEW] example (genuine human judgment):
       - [ ] [REVIEW] Dashboard renders correctly
         **Steps:**
         1. Open https://example.com/dashboard in browser
         2. Verify all panels load within 2 seconds
         3. Check browser console for errors
         **Expected:** All panels visible, no console errors
         **If not:** Screenshot the broken panel and note the console error

     [REVIEWER] example (static-scan-verifiable — convert to Agent AC + Verification):
       - [ ] [REVIEWER] Block message names both bypass mechanisms
         **Steps:**
         1. Run `bin/fw reviewer T-XXX`
         **Expected:** Verdict: PASS; no findings on `block-message-completeness`
         **If not:** Inspect hook block-message string and add missing mechanism
       Conversion: this AC should be moved to ### Agent and
       `bin/fw reviewer T-XXX 2>&1 | grep -q "Overall:.*PASS"` added to ## Verification.
-->

## Verification

# Shell commands that MUST pass before work-completed. One per line.
# Lines starting with # are comments (skipped). Empty lines ignored.
# The completion gate runs each command — if any exits non-zero, completion is blocked.
#
# Toolchain hint (L-291): if you edited *.vbproj/*.csproj/*.xaml add `dotnet build`;
# *.go → `go build ./...`; Cargo.toml → `cargo check`; tsconfig.json → `tsc --noEmit`;
# pom.xml → `mvn -q compile`. P-011 runs only what you write — broken builds slip
# past otherwise (origin: 003-NTB-ATC-Plugin T-077, broken WPF DLL on master 5 days).
#
# Pipefail/SIGPIPE hint (L-387): P-011 runs each command under `set -eo pipefail`.
# `cmd | grep -q PATTERN` exits 141 (SIGPIPE) when grep matches and closes stdin
# while the upstream is still writing — verification then "fails" even though
# the pattern was present. Safe pattern: capture first, grep the capture:
#     out=$(cmd 2>&1); echo "$out" | grep -q "PATTERN"
# Or:
#     cmd > /tmp/.out 2>&1 && grep -q "PATTERN" /tmp/.out
# Origin: L-387, captured 4× (T-1716, T-1838, T-1862, T-1863) before this hint.
#
# Single pipe only — no intermediate tail/awk/sed stages between capture and grep
# (T-2090): `echo "$out" | tail -3 | grep -q PAT` re-introduces the SIGPIPE risk
# the capture step closed off — the middle stage is what `grep -q` slams its
# stdin on. `echo "$out"` is small and immediate; grep scans the whole captured
# string anyway, so the tail-3 was cosmetic. Drop it: `echo "$out" | grep -q PAT`.
#
# Enforcement-baseline hint (L-398, T-1886): if you edited `.claude/settings.json`
# (added/removed/reorganised hooks), add `bin/fw enforcement baseline` to your
# Verification block. Otherwise the canonical hash diverges and `fw doctor`
# reports a FAIL ("Enforcement baseline CHANGED") that accumulates silently.
# Origin: T-1849/T-1730/T-1731 each added a legitimate hook without refreshing
# the baseline — FAIL sat for multiple sessions until T-1886 cleaned up.

test -s docs/reports/arc-011-grill-me-responses.md
out=$(cat docs/reports/arc-011-grill-me-responses.md); echo "$out" | grep -qE "^## 1\.\s+Headline" && echo "$out" | grep -qE "^## 2\.\s+Wire-evidence" && echo "$out" | grep -qE "^## 3\.\s+A2-fails" && echo "$out" | grep -qE "^## 4\.\s+§9"
out=$(cat docs/reports/arc-011-grill-me-responses.md); echo "$out" | grep -qE "CONSUMER-SIDE|consumer-side" && echo "$out" | grep -qE "SUBSTRATE|substrate-territory"
out=$(cat docs/reports/arc-011-grill-me-responses.md); echo "$out" | grep -qE "T-PAR-A|T-COL-A|T-[A-Z]+-[A-Z]+" && echo "$out" | grep -qE "dispatches\.jsonl"
out=$(cat docs/reports/arc-011-grill-me-responses.md); n=$(echo "$out" | grep -cE "^- "); test "$n" -ge 8
out=$(cat docs/reports/arc-011-grill-me-responses.md); echo "$out" | grep -qE "milestone|M1|split"
out=$(cat docs/reports/arc-011-grill-me-responses.md); echo "$out" | grep -qE "§[0-9]"
# L-387: capture-first, no pipe-to-grep — avoid SIGPIPE on the find→grep boundary.
# Predicate: zero new T-23[3-9][0-9] inception files newer than this task = no cluster-bombing.
n=$(find .tasks/active -name "T-23[3-9][0-9]-*" -newer .tasks/active/T-2325-arc-011-grillme-primarytarget-response-a.md 2>/dev/null); test -z "$n"

## RCA

<!-- REQUIRED for bug-class tasks (workflow_type=build with bug-tag, OR title matches
     fix/bug/rca/broken/crash/error/regression/fail/hotfix).
     Non-bug-class tasks may leave this section empty or remove it.

     For bug-class, fill in:
       **Symptom:** what was observed (the user-facing manifestation).
       **Root cause:** the specific structural/logical gap — not "the code was wrong".
       **Why structurally allowed:** what in the framework/code/tooling let this go undetected.
       **Prevention:** what catches the next instance (test/lint/gate/doc/learning) — distinct from the fix itself.

     The completion gate (T-1550, G-019) blocks --status work-completed when
     bug-class AND this section is empty/template-only. Use --skip-rca to bypass (logged).
-->

## Evolution

### 2026-06-11 — Reviewer-caught Verification regex placeholders

- **What changed:** Wrote initial Verification block with placeholder grep patterns (`T-X|task-A`) before knowing what task ids the artifact would actually name. The artifact ended up naming `T-PAR-A/B` (positive parallelism scenario) and `T-COL-A/B` (collision/disjointness gate). The placeholder regex matched zero — predicate p4 returned 0 on real verify run.
- **Plan impact:** Verification predicates written speculatively at task-create time can drift from the artifact's actual content. Better discipline: write Verification predicates *after* the artifact draft is in place, or write them against shape patterns (`T-[A-Z]+-[A-Z]+`) that survive content choices.
- **Triggered:** No new task — this is a one-line lesson for next time, not a new structural fix. Captured here so future arc-prep tasks (T-2326+) don't replay the same placeholder-drift.

### 2026-06-11 — Reviewer FP override class: doc-discusses-cross-repo

- **What changed:** Reviewer Layer-1 flagged `cross-project-blast` (medium) on the substring "cross-repo" in §4. Pure FP — the task is a docs artifact in this repo only; the substring discusses arc-011's binding situation (AEF↔TermLink substrate) without making any cross-project change. Filed OV-b13c3432 (90d TTL).
- **Plan impact:** Discussions *about* cross-repo binding will keep hitting this FP. The override pattern is reusable.
- **Triggered:** No new task; the override is the structural counter. Memory candidate: "reviewer cross-project-blast FP class — doc-discusses-cross-repo binding (not a cross-repo change)" for the L-XXX sibling rail.

<!-- REQUIRED for arc-tagged build tasks (tags include arc:*). Captures how
     understanding evolved during build — what was learned that wasn't known at
     filing, what in the original plan no longer fits, what triggered pivots
     or new sub-tasks. Mandatory at slice boundaries (when applicable) and
     before --status work-completed.

     Origin: T-1717 grill Q4 — "the understanding of what we need and want
     evolves with the process of materialisation." Structural counter to §ACD:
     spec-vs-build divergence is logged as soon as it happens, not lost as
     folklore.

     Format (one entry per slice boundary or significant insight):
       ### YYYY-MM-DD — [topic]
       - **What changed:** [what we learned that we didn't know at filing]
       - **Plan impact:** [what in the plan no longer fits]
       - **Triggered:** [new sub-task / pivot / scope cut, with task ID if filed]

     The completion gate (T-1718) blocks --status work-completed when this
     section exists but is empty/template-only. Use --skip-evolution to bypass
     (logged Tier-2). Non-arc tasks may leave this empty.
-->

## Decisions

<!-- Record decisions ONLY when choosing between alternatives.
     Skip for tasks with no meaningful choices.
     Format:
     ### [date] — [topic]
     - **Chose:** [what was decided]
     - **Why:** [rationale]
     - **Rejected:** [alternatives and why not]
-->

## Decision

<!-- Filled at completion of inception tasks via:
     fw inception decide T-XXX go|no-go|defer --rationale "..."

     For non-inception tasks this section is ignored. Kept in template
     so `fw inception decide` (lib/inception.sh) finds the anchor heading
     without auto-creating; T-1832 added auto-create as fallback for
     legacy tasks lacking this section. -->

## Recommendation

**Recommendation:** GO (full close — pure docs artifact, no source change, no
downstream inception filings; agent ACs verifiable mechanically, no human
[REVIEW] needed)

**Rationale:** Substantive agent-side prep for arc-011's next operator grilling
session. The artifact at `docs/reports/arc-011-grill-me-responses.md` answers
all four `grill_me.primary_targets` entries with derivations from existing
AEF-ADR decisions (§N-traced) and the T-2303 scoping research. The four
answers individually:

- **§1 (headline_mechanic audit):** PASSES §ACD/G-062 — consumer-side outcome
  with one non-territorial substrate reference. Optional simplification offered.
- **§2 (Spike 1 falsifiability):** ships 3 concrete test scenarios (1A positive,
  1B disjointness gate, 1C adversarial collision detection) with named tasks,
  expected `dispatches.jsonl` row shapes, and grep-able predicates.
- **§3 (A2-fails AEF-side prep):** lists 6 workstreams that ship AEF-only
  without TermLink substrate primitives. Single-host parallel demo named.
- **§4 (§9 closure binding):** binary answer YES (as currently scoped) with
  recommended milestone-split structural counter (M1 single-host AEF-only;
  M2 multi-host substrate-bound).

**Evidence:**
- `docs/reports/arc-011-grill-me-responses.md` exists with 4 numbered
  sections matching grill_me.primary_targets order
- 18 explicit `§N` cross-references to the AEF ADR
- 3 named test scenarios (1A/1B/1C) with worked dispatches.jsonl excerpts
- 6 enumerated AEF-only workstreams
- "deliberately does NOT" closing block declares no inception filings — this
  artifact is response material, not new architecture
- Verification block contains 7 grep-able predicates against the artifact (all
  pass — see Updates below)
- T-2325 frontmatter: `arc_id: parallel-execution-aef`, `related_tasks:
  [T-2303, T-2323, T-2324]`, `tags: [arc-parallel-execution-aef, agent-prep,
  no-source-change]` — arc-membership traceable

**What this changes for arc-011:** the next operator grilling session opens
on a substantive corpus instead of a blank arc-011.yaml grill_me block. The
operator can either accept any of the four answers' recommendations, push
back on specific claims, or commission a sharper artifact — all in
arc-grill mode rather than arc-bootstrap mode.

**Out of scope (deliberately):**
- No edit to `.context/arcs/parallel-execution-aef.yaml.grill_me.primary_targets`
  — those questions remain as filed; this artifact responds to them
- No edit to `docs/architecture/parallel-execution-aef.md` — the ADR is
  unchanged; the §1 "strike substrate phrase" suggestion is operator's call
- No new inception tasks (IC-3/IC-4/IC-5) — would be cluster-bombing per
  T-2303 grill page warning
- No code (orchestrator/harness/sidecar). The §3 workstreams are scope
  proposals, not implementations

## Updates

### 2026-06-11T06:39:30Z — task-created [task-create-agent]
- **Action:** Created task via task-create agent
- **Output:** /opt/999-Agentic-Engineering-Framework/.tasks/active/T-2325-arc-011-grillme-primarytarget-response-a.md
- **Context:** Initial task creation

### 2026-06-11T06:55:00Z — artifact-shipped [agent]
- **Action:** Wrote docs/reports/arc-011-grill-me-responses.md (4 sections, 18 §N refs, 3 named test scenarios, 6 AEF-only workstreams, binary answer to §4 + milestone-split structural counter)
- **Verification predicates (all PASS):**
  - Section headers 1/2/3/4 present (1 each)
  - "CONSUMER-SIDE"/"consumer-side" appears 8× ; "SUBSTRATE"/"substrate-territory" 3×
  - Named tasks (T-PAR-A/T-COL-A/T-X) appear 8× ; `dispatches.jsonl` appears 14×
  - 30 bullet lines (threshold: ≥8)
  - "milestone"/"M1"/"split" appears 14×
  - 18 explicit `§N` ADR cross-references
- **AC ticks:** all 8 Agent ACs ticked progressively per T-1831 C-4 (artifact-in-place precondition met)

## Reviewer Verdict (v1.5)

- **Scan ID:** R-90e27a05
- **Timestamp:** 2026-06-11T06:46:31Z
- **Catalogue:** v1.3-seed
- **Overall:** PASS
- **Needs Human:** yes
- **Findings:** none

- **Layer-1 escalations:** 1
  1. **cross-project-blast** (medium) — Cross-project or cross-repo change
     - matched: `cross-repo`

### 2026-06-11T06:46:30Z — status-update [task-update-agent]
- **Change:** status: started-work → work-completed
