An INCONCLUSIVE fidelity verdict is terminal, so an audit that could not decide anything is indistinguishable from one that passed. The ingest does not branch on the verdict value: it rolls the per-criterion verdicts into counts and replaces the parked OWED marker with INGESTED whatever they say, so a verdict of all-INCONCLUSIVE closes the receipt exactly as a verdict of all-MET does. The re-emit verb then refuses to reopen it, reporting already_ingested and leaving the Audit Notes untouched, which is correct for a decided audit and wrong for an undecided one. The consequence is that there is no way to ensure the re-run that an INCONCLUSIVE calls for. The only lever that produces a fresh receipt is editing the acceptance-criteria section, because the receipt digest is taken over that section alone, which conflates two unrelated acts: clarifying a promise, and retrying an audit that was merely under-fed. This is a loud-staging violation in the precise sense the principle names, since a stage that degraded presents as a completed one. The narrow fix is for the ingest to branch: an INCONCLUSIVE leaves the receipt OWED, or moves it to a distinct re-run state, so the outstanding work stays visible without minting a ledger issue for what is an input fault rather than a product defect.

Frontmatter

.abcd/work/issues/resolved/iss-2608290820473197-an-inconclusive-fidelity-verdict-is.md
open on GitHub ↗ · commit history ↗

mentions5

• adr-55The construal stands in the record; its history does not
• dcn-26093000000000092026-09-30 — The person answered eighteen rulings of autonomous run A on 2026-09-30 (CF1, CF2, CG1, CI1, CI2, CJ1, CK1, CL1, CM1, DR1, DR2, DR4, DR5, DR6, DQ1a, DQ1b, DQ2, DQ3), relayed by the run's interviewer abcd-23 [b1e81b] and recorded by lane recRulingsDR for orchestrator abcd-8d [5bfdfb]. The answers are kept in the local-tier file `.abcd/.work.local/scratch/reports/rulings-answered-2609-29-b.md`, lines 13 to 30, and are restated here because that file is not committed. SETTLED BLOCKERS: a blocker replaced by an accepted ADR counts as settled, so the waiting intent may start (CF1); a blocker reclassified as a discipline counts as settled too (CF2). Neither is built at this entry's base: the blocked pre-start check still refuses both shapes, and iss-2609300751191426 carries the change. AS BUILT: the App token for the dependency re-authoring workflow is minted in the shell, an openssl-signed JWT exchanged with curl and revoked on exit, with no new action (CG1); when the prompt router cannot evaluate a prompt, its envelope carries the error and leaves the active-domain list out, so the client keeps what it had (CI1); a domain that returns to the active set is re-injected on every host, one that appends to a transcript included, not only on a client that snapshots (CI2); `abcd update` shows progress only when stderr is a terminal, and saved output stays clean (DR4). BUILD: the installer (`hooks/bootstrap.sh`) writes the previous release tag into binary-meta when it swaps a binary, the session hook stays read-only, and that tag replaces the setup_version comparison of the itd-111 update notice (CJ1); the SHELL domain also teaches a repository's own guard entries, generated the same way as the bundled registry's (CK1); `step` in `abcd implement check` is renamed `stage` too, in the same breaking v0.12.0 (CM1); the fix rounds a run spends before it hands a lane back are a per-run setting beside `--pace`, for example `--fix-rounds`, default 3 (DR1); the dependency-bump intent itd-2609221842494980 ships now, with the first live bump recorded as owed until the person has created the App and its secrets (DR2); only a self-contained agent is sent to a paid provider by default, so the cold-reading positions may go while a file-reading agent such as the intent auditor is refused with the reason, and a central override, a machine-level settings list the person keeps that no agent or repository can change, may name providers that take bundled-context requests for file-reading agents (DR5); a run works in parallel, building several pieces and running reviewers at once up to its agent limit, which is new build-loop work that makes the pacing intent's criterion 6 testable (DR6); an undecided fidelity audit reopens the work, sending the feature back to a lane, and never closes like a pass (DQ1a, iss-2608290820473197); the audit moves before the merge, as part of the build loop's last lane (per ruling AI), and until that loop is ready it stays after the merge and reopens on an undecided or failed verdict (DQ1b, iss-2608290822140563); the filing-time duplicate check covers every route, the promoted inbox report, the consistency pass and the reading ingest, in a lane after remedyRequired (DQ2, iss-2609281911024185); `abcd ahoy` offers to install gh on an explicit yes (DQ3, iss-2609281911024838). KEEP: a promoted inbox report's own remedy is kept but not usable: the sender's suggestion stays in the issue's text for reference, the remedy field is `none (filed automatically)`, and a drain skips the record until a person writes the fix, so the conservative default recorded above on 2026-09-30 stands and is not widened (CL1). The person added to CL1 that when a person comes to write the real fix for such an issue, the agent offers a state-of-the-art research pass first (principle `prefer-sota`), which `commands/capture.md` says under the `capture remedy` verb. The three rulings of 2026-09-29 owed to this ledger by earlier sessions of the run, the ceilings of five and of eight sub-agents and the remedies ruling, already have their entries above, so this entry adds none.
• dcn-26101614282444612026-10-16 — An after-merge audit's owed-check issue reaches a lane through a person's own build, and a drain still hands it back as promoted (facilitator-on-delegation, drain-many-accounts step 4; a new record refining dcn-2610161401449155, since records are append-only): ruling DQ1a, that an undecided fidelity audit reopens the work and sends the feature back to a lane, is subsumed by ruling DQ1c, which says what reopening means for a shipped intent (it stays shipped and flagged, and one issue carries the owed check, dcn-2609300000000027), so DQ1a is met when that issue reaches a lane, and a person's abcd build <iss-N> remains the lane route for it: the eligibility check lets a promoted issue through with a note naming its intent, as dcn-2610161040365515 lets a person's own build through a hand-back, while every other hand-back is still refused. This overrides the resolution of iss-2608290820473197 where it says the captured issue is one "which a drain can take": a drain hands it back, and a person's build or abcd intent audit takes it (grounds: rulings DQ1a and DQ1c, dcn-2610161040365515, dcn-2610161401449155; iss-2610161015370582).
• itd-50The Audit Loop Drives An Intent To Acceptance — Or Calls For A Replan
• itd-165A failed fidelity verdict becomes work somebody can see