title: "Map — "What was done?" (revision 2)" source: "workspace/2026/TFW_20260830-114238_ASSISTED15/review/rev2/map.md"
Map — "What was done?" (revision 2)¶
Mindset: Experienced newcomer. Understand the corrected result before judging it. Test: "Can I explain the complete current result to someone who has not read either review pass?" RF: RF — TFW_20260830-114238_ASSISTED15 TS: TS — TFW_20260830-114238_ASSISTED15 Historical verdict: first pass — REVISE
Understanding¶
The complete current result remains a standalone Russian-authoritative Assisted 1.5 inside the original 35-product-path boundary: 25 additions, seven modifications and three exact stock-hook deletions. It combines five role skills, a fail-closed local identity service, neutral offline templates, public-only release history, and an asymmetric maintenance bridge in which verified public stock may update a clean downstream core while downstream learning returns only as a confined privacy-safe candidate; the real mixed Innoforce tree remains read-only P6 evidence.
After the first independent review returned eight findings, the same Executor changed six existing product files without adding a product path. The declared corrections make release verification regenerate the exact payload, carry the self-excluded manifest through forward updates, pin operation/staging and identity namespace chains, require Windows private owner/ACL proof, validate closed reverse provenance and an outside candidate root, replace role token scanning with a seven-scenario deterministic table, align the identity command, and replace defective render evidence. The product model still separates manifest, policy, private operation records and public candidates, preserves the manual lifecycle baseline, and leaves human acceptance to this independent repeat review.
TS ↔ RF Alignment¶
| TS requirement | Corrected RF claim | Aligned? |
|---|---|---|
| AC-1 — release boundary, standalone package, truthful version and 35-path/4,800-line ceiling | RF §§1, 3, 4 claims one uninitialized 1.5, exactly 35 product paths, 3,649 changed lines and task-attributed zero-forbidden audit despite concurrent external work |
✅ claimed |
| AC-2 — portable acyclic manifest/policy and exact hook retirement | RF §§2–4 claims exact regenerated payload equality, hostile omitted/extra/self/nonregular rejection and separate manifest authority | ✅ claimed |
| AC-3 — forward preflight, race stop and honest partial/recovery history | RF §§2–4 claims pinned source/target/operation/stage chains, zero-write link rejection, immutable partial and linked recovery | ✅ claimed |
| AC-4 — complete five-skill lifecycle and reusable independent roles | RF §§1–5 claims complete contracts, manual baseline, seven deterministic role scenarios, same Executor and the same independent Reviewer for this full pass | ✅ claimed |
| AC-5 — installed-state and customization preservation | RF §§2–4 claims protected project/work/people/knowledge/template/overlay/unknown/.codex/Full bytes and next-source readiness |
✅ claimed |
| AC-6 — reverse privacy, asymmetric authority and P6 field treatment | RF §§2–4 claims closed terminal+journal provenance, outside-root confinement, byte-identical secret-different candidates, no public mutation and field read-only treatment | ✅ claimed |
| AC-7 — identity semantics and zero-write fallback | RF §§2–4 claims clean documented command execution, cardinality/surname/collision coverage, Assisted-only state and zero-write unsafe fallback | ✅ claimed |
| AC-8 — operation-time locality and race defense | RF §§2–4 claims full created-chain pinning, Windows owner/ACL proof, live lock, permissive-ACL/substitution/reparse rejection and re-probing | ✅ claimed |
| AC-9 — useful neutral offline templates | RF §§1–4 claims complete worked templates, restricted TI1, header-free blocked-network output and 20 replacement visual inspections | ✅ claimed |
| AC-10 — public neutrality and product-wide agreement | RF §§2–4 claims cross-file path/version/lifecycle/identity/template agreement and zero organization/person/path/brand/private-history residue | ✅ claimed |
| AC-11 — complete deterministic V1–V12 matrix | RF §§3–5 claims two clean V1–V12, identity and template runs, deterministic evidence summaries, task schema checks and hostile correction cases | ✅ claimed |
| AC-12 — both maintenance directions, source immutability and no publication | RF §§2–5 claims maintainable P2 forward, confined candidate-only reverse, equal field pre/post rows under both aggregate orders and no push/tag; independent acceptance remains deferred to this pass | ✅ claimed |
“Aligned” here records that RF addresses the TS requirement; Verify must independently establish whether each claim is true.
Deviations from TS¶
No new product path or frozen-contract change is declared. Correction commit b37f7a3 modifies six existing approved product paths; evidence commit 964abd2 replaces or extends 26 task-local evidence/RF artifacts, and 85d4e76 updates five of those task-local attestations to include the terminal evidence commit. The current claimed product total is 35 paths and 3,649 changed lines, below both TS ceilings.
The original ONB topology corrections remain the only approved affected-file refinement: maintainer tooling is under editions/maintenance/, and the neutral asset is шаблоны/assets/tfw-mark.svg. They add no frozen claim or product path.
EV E4 and E12 intentionally remain DEFERRED only for this same Reviewer's full second pass. E4 requires the actual one-Coordinator → same-Executor → one-Reviewer lineage plus independent examination of all seven role scenarios. E12 requires independent acceptance of both corrected maintenance directions, the field-source pre/post proof and the no-publication boundary. RF/EV are not permitted to close those conclusions themselves.
Concurrent TFW-60 commits modified .tfw/ and its own task artifacts between the first review and terminal evidence. The corrected RF separates them from the Assisted commit set instead of claiming the whole repository stayed static. Verify must therefore perform both audits: the literal repository-wide baseline difference and a task-attributed commit/path audit proving that no Assisted commit touched forbidden product paths.
The first-pass review/map.md, review/verify.md, review/judge.md and formal REVISE remain immutable history. This pass writes only under review/rev2/ and later a distinct REVIEW__...__rev2.md.
Checkpoint¶
Self-check:
- [x] Read corrected RF §1–§5 completely?
- [x] Read all TS acceptance criteria and matched each to corrected RF §3?
- [x] Read the master HL §7 principles at Contract Baseline ee09a8a and can state the design philosophy?
- [x] Read ONB and confirmed all blocking questions were answered before implementation?
- [x] Read the historical REVISE and mapped D1–D8 to the claimed correction surface without treating closure as proven?
Stage complete: YES