Record consistency findings from the Phase 1 adversarial review: itd-142 and itd-143 attribute the 2026-08-28 rulings to a third role name; itd-143 still describes the not-yet-real marker as pending in a form the same filing ratifies differently; 06-framing.md places a dated preface between the Construal heading and the token, so the section is not statement-first as its own rule and itd-143's projection criterion require; invariant 15 carries an adoption-date marker no sibling carries; 04-scope.md line 24 still counts seven phase docs; Phase 7 and the log say 'Phase 2 planning' where roadmap Phase 2 is a shipped phase; the phases README says phases 1-6 are organised by capability moment; the lifeboat mapping comment counts 23 rows.

Frontmatter

.abcd/work/issues/resolved/iss-2608300114359543-phase-1-filing-consistency-findings.md
open on GitHub ↗ · commit history ↗

mentions3

• dcn-26083000000000112026-08-30 — Phase 1 adversarial review (ruthless-reviewer, fresh context) findings captured as iss-2608300114352100 (a first name disclosed through a homonym in the session-1 lapse record; the wording is replaced, and the pushed branch's history still carries it until the PR is squash-merged), iss-2608300114357633 (this log contradicting the branch, remedied by the two lines above), and iss-2608300114359543 (record consistency: one role name for the 2026-08-28 rulings, the ratified marker form in itd-143, the framing section statement-first, no adoption-date marker on invariant 15, the phase count, and "Phase 2 planning" reworded so it cannot read as roadmap Phase 2). All three resolved in the same change.
• itd-142The brief-creation interview: abcd elicits a repository's brief in a staged conversation — narrative first, then frontier rounds that ask only what the record cannot yet settle, options at conjectural questions (at most three candidate construals, a ceiling not a target, with a null answer always available), and a per-item confirmation — distilling committed products into the brief and a ledger while the transcript is discarded. Entry is one door for both modes: a brownfield repository arrives pre-populated from embark probe coverage, provenance-stamped and still requiring confirmation; a greenfield repository is the same interview run from the all-blank coverage state. Command-shaped, because it mutates state — abcd ships zero skills
• itd-143The brief gains a framing chapter under 01-product/ — the macro-why home: one section holds the project's framing, the why behind the why, and receives the brief-creation interview's committed framing products; the brief-lifeboat mapping gains the matching row so a lifeboat carries framing like any other section