---

title: "Map — "What was done?"" source: "tasks/TFW-42__research_cycle_restructure/phase-c/review/map.md"

---

Map — "What was done?"

Mindset: Experienced newcomer. You arrived after someone else's work. Understand before you judge. No opinions yet — only comprehension. Test: "Can I explain what was done to someone who hasn't read the RF?" RF: RF Phase C TS: TS Phase C Mode: docs

Understanding

The executor updated 3 glossary entries ("Iteration (Research)", "iterations.yaml", "min_iterations") to replace old path conventions (researchN/, RES__iterN__*.md, "at task root") with the new structure (research/iterN/, research/iterN/RES.md, "research/ subfolder"). Added agent and sources optional fields to the iterations.yaml glossary entry. Then synced 4 adapter workflow copies (2 Antigravity + 2 Claude Code) to match Phase B source files. Bumped VERSION to 0.8.6, recorded all 3 phases (A/B/C) in CHANGELOG, and updated project_config.yaml version. Key decision: synced 4 adapter files (not 2 as TS §4 listed) because AC-2 explicitly required checking all adapter directories.

TS ↔ RF Alignment

TS requirement	RF claim	Aligned?
AC-1: Glossary entries updated (3 entries, no old paths)	RF §3 AC-1: all 4 sub-items checked, grep gates pass	✅
AC-2: Adapter workflow sync (byte-identical copies)	RF §3 AC-2: 4 adapter pairs synced + Cursor checked (template only)	✅
AC-3: Version & changelog (0.8.6 in VERSION, CHANGELOG, config)	RF §3 AC-3: all 3 values match	✅

Deviations from TS

1. TS §4 listed 5 modifications; executor modified 8. TS §4 omitted .claude/commands/ copies and project_config.yaml. However, AC-2 and AC-3 explicitly required these — the TS §4 table was conservative, ACs are authoritative. The executor followed ACs correctly. This was flagged in ONB §5 Risk #1.

Checkpoint

Self-check: - [x] Read RF §1-§5 completely? - [x] Read TS DoD and matched each item to RF §3? - [x] Read HL §7 Principles — can I state the design philosophy? - [x] Read ONB — were blocking questions resolved?

Stage complete: YES