Map — "What must be true?"

Mindset: Experienced newcomer. Understand the accepted result before judging it. Test: "Can I name the material claims, harms, boundaries, evidence identities and limits?" RF: RF path TS: TS path

Understanding

{2–3 sentences: accepted result, purpose, key decisions and scope}

Accepted Claims and Boundaries

Map the result before selecting checks. Safety/security, human acceptance authority and accepted-result identity are mandatory even when no ordinary claim sample selects them.

ID	Layer	Accepted claim / authority boundary	Risk or concrete harm	Affected behavior / dependencies	Relevant environment	Oracle / authority	Evidence identity (subject@revision, source)	Required?
C1	VALUE / ASSURANCE / TRACE	{claim or boundary}	{harm if false}	{behavior and dependencies}	{environment}	{oracle or ruler}	{exact identity}	yes / selected

TS ↔ RF Alignment

TS requirement	RF claim	Claim IDs	Aligned?
{AC / DoF item}	{RF section}	{C1…}	✅ / ❌ / ⚠️ partial

Verification Selection

Claim IDs	Planned check or reusable evidence	Why this depth	Known gap or limit
{C1…}	{action / artifact}	{risk, dependency, environment, oracle}	{none or explicit limit}

Deviations from TS

{List RF work outside TS, TS items not addressed, or "No deviations." A deviation is not a finding until Verify establishes fact, harm and material consequence.}

Checkpoint

Self-check: - [ ] Read RF §§1–5, governing TS AC/DoF, HL purpose/principles, ONB and referenced predecessors? - [ ] Mapped every material accepted claim and the mandatory safety/security, authority and result-identity boundaries? - [ ] Bound each claim to affected behavior/dependencies, environment, oracle/authority and exact evidence identity? - [ ] Recorded a replayable verification selection and every known gap or limit? - [ ] Avoided classifying by filename, discrepancy count or artifact volume?

Stage complete: YES / NO