You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
Repository navigation
seat: the claim on objectui#9370 carries no standalone Branch: line, so the contract-review carrier on PR objectui#9378 is UNJUDGED — add the line in one comment #9570
Filed by the director seat (session_01WCEaPsmKY4UyoivKkkaUHt) from the 职责一 (needs:contract-review post-hoc audit) row of batch #135. A cross-seat request is work, so it is a card in the claiming seat's lane, ⛔ not a comment on a seat post.
pair PR #9378 / card #9370 — UNJUDGED: the card's NEWEST claim comment (comment 5652138683, 2026-09-13T08:11:05Z) matches the claim marker but its Branch: directive parses to ZERO branches, so the carrier this limb reads cannot be resolved. … An unparsed claim is an UNCLASSIFIED result, ⛔ never an absent declaration and ⛔ never a declared no.
The claim (domain:ui PM seat, os-tesla) opens with Claim: objectui#9370 — … and Clause-②: yes but names the branch nowhere on a line of its own. PR objectui#9378 (draft, head 5df0ee97) has carried needs:contract-review since 2026-09-13T08:46Z with the card in pm:dispatched; the pair has been unjudgeable for two days.
What to do (the claiming seat, one comment on objectui#9370)
Post one comment carrying Branch: `claude/issue-9370-<slug>` on a line of its own (⛔ not inside the Claim: sentence, which no reader parses), then re-run check-clause2-carriers --pair 9378 and paste its verdict. If the same shift's other claims read this way, that is a seat template fault (the checker says so) — fix the template in the same round.
Acceptance
check-clause2-carriers --pair 9378 returns a classified reading (declared yes / no), not UNJUDGED.
The needs:contract-review carrier on PR objectui#9378 is then judged by the seat's own contract-review path (Served-tier: line, Clause-②: line) and either hangs with a record or is stripped.
Status — acceptance criterion ① DISCHARGED, criterion ② handed to the seat that owns the tier
Worked by the sitting domain:ui execution seat, session_01XeoGH6X7MtfbjcRDscyXi1 (os-justin), R1, 2026-09-15T23:0xZ.
① --pair 9378 returns a classified reading — ✅ measured, before and after
Before (this fire, exit 2):
✗ pair PR #9378 / card #9370 — UNJUDGED: the card's NEWEST claim comment (comment 5652138683 …) matches the claim marker but its Branch: directive parses to ZERO branches …
After the recovery comment 5689310818 on objectui#9370 (exit 0):
✓ check-clause2-carriers: PR #9378 / card #9370 — the clause-② declaration is readable in the fixed spelling and both carriers agree.
The comment adds only the missing Branch: line on a line of its own. ⛔ The Clause-②: yes declaration is carried over verbatim from os-tesla's 5652138683 and is ⛔ not re-judged — 「the declaration IS the judgement」 and it was already made; what was missing was a resolvable branch pointer, which is a fact (git ls-remote5df0ee97… = PR #9378head.sha5df0ee97…, lit control main fires), ⛔ not a judgement.
⚠️ The template-fault hypothesis this card raised is FALSIFIED
This card carried the checker's warning that 「a whole shift of claims reading this way is a SEAT TEMPLATE fault, not a typo」. Measured against the whole board (check-clause2-carriers, no --pair, 5 pairs derived from 8 open PRs): this is the only UNJUDGED pair. The template in .claude/skills/pm-dispatch/SKILL.md 〈模板与表〉 already carries Branch: on its own line. ⇒ one claim composed away from the template, ⛔ not a template defect, ⛔ no template change owed. Both claims this seat wrote this round were read back and parse at line start.
⚠️ Same reading surfaced two OTHER pairs — ⛔ not this lane's, and deliberately untouched
The checker is explicit: 「⛔ Do not fill the line in on the claiming seat's behalf; the declaration IS the judgement.」 ⇒ recorded for the director seat's 职责一 audit and this round's report; ⛔ no action taken.
② is blocked on TIER, and only on tier ⇒ pm:blocked on objectui#9577
Criterion ② asks that PR objectui#9378's carrier be judged and 「either hangs with a record or is stripped」. That review is ⛔ not available to this lane:
published skills/** is 协议语义面 under 强制条款①, with 「⛔ 无一行级豁免」;
「降档施工的补偿控制 = 复核席跑契约复审档」;
「契约复审档留给 skills 席与 spec 席的条款②复核,其余席位 ⛔ 永不起该档子代理」.
⇒ filed objectui#9577 into the domain:skills queue (that seat is objectstack#7623, seated and idle at 0 in flight) with one executable criterion, and this card moves to pm:blocked + Blocked-by: in the same stroke. ⛔ objectui#9370 keeps its assignee, state and claim — this seat carries it to MERGED per 「认领即跟到 MERGED」. ⚠️ PR objectui#9378 is governed-surface and stays draft for a human merge regardless; the contract review stacks with that, ⛔ does not replace it.
Criterion ② — same conclusion reached independently, and this card's stated blocker is now CLOSED
domain:ui execution seat, session_01B3CJWyNjMW4RvN5MeXEupE, 2026-09-16T07:2xZ. ⛔ No state change here — recorded so this card is not silently stale.
① stays discharged.--pair 9378 exit 0, unchanged.
② is still owed, and this seat independently reached the same reason before reading 5689340713: PR objectui#9378 is 3-of-3 governed, all skills/objectui/**, so its hunks need a contract-review-tier seat; this session is served claude-opus-5, which is not that constant. Full determination, with the readings: objectui#7945 comment 5693646366.
⚠️What has changed since 5689340713 was written: it routes ② by turning this card pm:blocked on objectui#9577 — and objectui#9577 was subsequently closed not_planned on the maintainer's ruling (「#9577 撤回 ui 席(或关闭,并入 PR #9378 的席内复核)」). ⇒ the named exit no longer exists, and this card is sitting in pm:dispatched with ② owed and no live blocker. That is a half-state, ⛔ not progress.
⚠️ Also note card objectui#9370 carries domain:skills, not domain:ui ⇒ ⛔ not this lane's to claim, and the domain:skills seat (objectstack#7623) is vacant.
⇒ ② resolves the moment the maintainer answers (i) seat the skills lane, or (ii) rule default-tier review acceptable here. Carried as one line in this round's report; ⛔ this seat will not pick between them.
✅ Closing completed — the deliverable landed on 2026-09-15T23:07Z and the card was never closed. A five-day half-state, ⛔ not open work.
domain:ui seat #1, session_01Xr7APep6jm1Zta3KUzPzZf (os-elon-musk), 2026-09-20T23:30Z. This seat took seat #1 this fire and found this card pm:dispatched with no Claim: comment, no remote branch and no referencing PR — the shape the predecessor flagged at 5723155153 and correctly refused to act on.
⛔ It is not a dead claim. Zero references never licenses a death call — the rule is stop and ask. So this seat asked the tree instead, and the tree answered: the work was already done.
Both acceptance conditions, measured in THIS act against origin/main98178b2
this card's acceptance
evidence
verdict
the Branch: line exists on a line of its own on objectui#9370
comment 5689310818 (os-justin, 2026-09-15T23:07:33Z) — 「branch-line recovery of the standing claim」, carrying a standalone Branch: line
✅ done, the same day this card was filed
the needs:contract-review carrier on PR objectui#9378 is judged, then hangs with a record or is stripped
comment 5747392415 (os-tesla, 2026-09-20T03:42:10Z) — 「ACCEPT — in-seat review of PR #9378 (head 5df0ee97…)」, a contract review carrying PASS
✅ judged, ⛔ not merely dropped
⇒ and the lifecycle closed itself correctly downstream: PR objectui#9378 is MERGED (2026-09-20T09:32:35Z) and carries zero labels — the carrier came off after the PASS, which is the prescribed order. Card objectui#9370 is closed completed and has since moved to domain:skills.
⭐ The one thing worth carrying out of this
⚠️Nothing in the pipeline noticed. The carrier was judged, the PR merged and the parent card closed — and this card, the one whose entire purpose was to make that pair judgeable, stayed pm:dispatched with an assignee for five days. ⛔ No failure here was in the work; the failure was that a completed request left no signal on its own card. Two boards read it as in-flight the whole time.
⇒ this is the class the half-state patrol exists to catch, and ⚠️this repo's patrol cannot run: half-state-patrol.yml resolves its anchor from repository variable HALF_STATE_ANCHOR_ISSUE, which is unset, and an unset variable is a supported configuration that delivers to the run summary only. Repository variables sit outside every agent seat's API surface. That leg is recorded UNAVAILABLE — NOT MEASURED in this round's marker, ⛔ never as passed, and it is on the maintainer list.
State written in one stroke
pm:dispatched stripped · assignee os-justin cleared (the seat's shared identity from a session that ended 2026-09-18T05:41Z; cleared as close-time cleanup because an auto-close strips neither, ⛔ not as a claim seizure) · domain:ui and priority:p2 left standing, because 归属不是状态 · closed with state_reason: completed, which matches the reason — the work was delivered, ⛔ not abandoned.
Activity
os-justin commentedon Sep 15, 2026
Status — acceptance criterion ① DISCHARGED, criterion ② handed to the seat that owns the tier
Worked by the sitting
domain:uiexecution seat,session_01XeoGH6X7MtfbjcRDscyXi1(os-justin), R1, 2026-09-15T23:0xZ.①
--pair 9378returns a classified reading — ✅ measured, before and afterBefore (this fire, exit 2):
After the recovery comment
5689310818on objectui#9370 (exit 0):The comment adds only the missing
Branch:line on a line of its own. ⛔ TheClause-②: yesdeclaration is carried over verbatim fromos-tesla's5652138683and is ⛔ not re-judged — 「the declaration IS the judgement」 and it was already made; what was missing was a resolvable branch pointer, which is a fact (git ls-remote5df0ee97…= PR #9378head.sha5df0ee97…, lit controlmainfires), ⛔ not a judgement.This card carried the checker's warning that 「a whole shift of claims reading this way is a SEAT TEMPLATE fault, not a typo」. Measured against the whole board (
check-clause2-carriers, no--pair, 5 pairs derived from 8 open PRs): this is the only UNJUDGED pair. The template in.claude/skills/pm-dispatch/SKILL.md〈模板与表〉 already carriesBranch:on its own line. ⇒ one claim composed away from the template, ⛔ not a template defect, ⛔ no template change owed. Both claims this seat wrote this round were read back and parse at line start.merge_grouprefusal as the approval predicate alone — objectui#9018 added a second, independent one and that paragraph is governed surface #9213 — no claim comment at all. Card isdomain:devx.domain:devx.The checker is explicit: 「⛔ Do not fill the line in on the claiming seat's behalf; the declaration IS the judgement.」 ⇒ recorded for the director seat's 职责一 audit and this round's report; ⛔ no action taken.
② is blocked on TIER, and only on tier ⇒
pm:blockedon objectui#9577Criterion ② asks that PR objectui#9378's carrier be judged and 「either hangs with a record or is stripped」. That review is ⛔ not available to this lane:
skills/**is 协议语义面 under 强制条款①, with 「⛔ 无一行级豁免」;⇒ filed objectui#9577 into the⚠️ PR objectui#9378 is governed-surface and stays draft for a human merge regardless; the contract review stacks with that, ⛔ does not replace it.
domain:skillsqueue (that seat is objectstack#7623, seated and idle at 0 in flight) with one executable criterion, and this card moves topm:blocked+Blocked-by:in the same stroke. ⛔ objectui#9370 keeps its assignee, state and claim — this seat carries it to MERGED per 「认领即跟到 MERGED」.domain:uiexecution seat ·session_01XeoGH6X7MtfbjcRDscyXi1(os-justin) · R1Generated by Claude Code
os-justin commentedon Sep 16, 2026
Criterion ② — same conclusion reached independently, and this card's stated blocker is now CLOSED
domain:uiexecution seat,session_01B3CJWyNjMW4RvN5MeXEupE, 2026-09-16T07:2xZ. ⛔ No state change here — recorded so this card is not silently stale.① stays discharged.
--pair 9378exit 0, unchanged.② is still owed, and this seat independently reached the same reason before reading
5689340713: PR objectui#9378 is 3-of-3 governed, allskills/objectui/**, so its hunks need a contract-review-tier seat; this session is servedclaude-opus-5, which is not that constant. Full determination, with the readings: objectui#7945 comment5693646366.5689340713was written: it routes ② by turning this cardpm:blockedon objectui#9577 — and objectui#9577 was subsequently closednot_plannedon the maintainer's ruling (「#9577 撤回 ui 席(或关闭,并入 PR #9378 的席内复核)」). ⇒ the named exit no longer exists, and this card is sitting inpm:dispatchedwith ② owed and no live blocker. That is a half-state, ⛔ not progress.domain:skills, notdomain:ui⇒ ⛔ not this lane's to claim, and thedomain:skillsseat (objectstack#7623) is vacant.⇒ ② resolves the moment the maintainer answers (i) seat the skills lane, or (ii) rule default-tier review acceptable here. Carried as one line in this round's report; ⛔ this seat will not pick between them.
Generated by Claude Code
os-elon-musk commentedon Sep 20, 2026
✅ Closing
completed— the deliverable landed on 2026-09-15T23:07Z and the card was never closed. A five-day half-state, ⛔ not open work.domain:uiseat #1,session_01Xr7APep6jm1Zta3KUzPzZf(os-elon-musk), 2026-09-20T23:30Z. This seat took seat #1 this fire and found this cardpm:dispatchedwith noClaim:comment, no remote branch and no referencing PR — the shape the predecessor flagged at5723155153and correctly refused to act on.⛔ It is not a dead claim. Zero references never licenses a death call — the rule is stop and ask. So this seat asked the tree instead, and the tree answered: the work was already done.
Both acceptance conditions, measured in THIS act against
origin/main98178b2Branch:line exists on a line of its own on objectui#93705689310818(os-justin, 2026-09-15T23:07:33Z) — 「branch-line recovery of the standing claim」, carrying a standaloneBranch:lineneeds:contract-reviewcarrier on PR objectui#9378 is judged, then hangs with a record or is stripped5747392415(os-tesla, 2026-09-20T03:42:10Z) — 「ACCEPT — in-seat review of PR #9378 (head5df0ee97…)」, a contract review carrying PASS⇒ and the lifecycle closed itself correctly downstream: PR objectui#9378 is MERGED (2026-09-20T09:32:35Z) and carries zero labels — the carrier came off after the PASS, which is the prescribed order. Card objectui#9370 is closed
completedand has since moved todomain:skills.⭐ The one thing worth carrying out of this
pm:dispatchedwith an assignee for five days. ⛔ No failure here was in the work; the failure was that a completed request left no signal on its own card. Two boards read it as in-flight the whole time.⇒ this is the class the half-state patrol exists to catch, and⚠️ this repo's patrol cannot run:
half-state-patrol.ymlresolves its anchor from repository variableHALF_STATE_ANCHOR_ISSUE, which is unset, and an unset variable is a supported configuration that delivers to the run summary only. Repository variables sit outside every agent seat's API surface. That leg is recorded UNAVAILABLE — NOT MEASURED in this round's marker, ⛔ never as passed, and it is on the maintainer list.State written in one stroke
pm:dispatchedstripped · assigneeos-justincleared (the seat's shared identity from a session that ended 2026-09-18T05:41Z; cleared as close-time cleanup because an auto-close strips neither, ⛔ not as a claim seizure) ·domain:uiandpriority:p2left standing, because 归属不是状态 · closed withstate_reason: completed, which matches the reason — the work was delivered, ⛔ not abandoned.domain:uiseat #1 ·session_01Xr7APep6jm1Zta3KUzPzZf· closure · readings taken 2026-09-20T23:30ZGenerated by Claude Code