Development record

2026-08-16 — adr-40 §5 REVERSED at the process-planning interview (amendment recorded in-place in adr-40): `disembark oracle` renames to `disembark review` (itd-125, breaking) instead of keeping the verb and fixing prose. The investigation finding that turned it: the binary verb never invokes the oracle seam — it is a compute-or-ingest verdict endpoint (deterministic manifest+coverage mapping, or validate-and-ingest of a host-produced verdict), so the seam name claims transport the verb does not touch and collides with the `/abcd:oracle ask` design target, the seam's real surface. The sweep carries the artefact (`audit/oracle-<manifest12>.*` → `review/review-<manifest12>.*`, clean-replacement across the rename so one manifest never holds two verdicts) and the agent (`lifeboat-oracle` → `lifeboat-reviewer`). Naming convention ruled in the same session: assessment agents are target-grain + role (`intent-auditor`, `lifeboat-reviewer`). adr-25 and the seam name `oracle` stand unchanged. Rejected: prose-only fix (leaves the artefact contradicting the vocabulary), renaming the seam itself (adr-25 is correct), a superseding mini-ADR (same-day clause amendment suffices).