the absent-required-property message names a validating reader for two stores that have none, and this branch certified that claim as store-wide

the absent-required-property message names a validating reader for two stores that have none, and this branch certified that claim as store-wide

Found by the round-3 adversarial ruthless review of build/itd-189. The MESSAGE is pre-existing; a57e7bb6 newly certified it, in a comment and in a test assertion, as holding "for every store and every field".

checkRecordRequiredFields' absent branch says the store's reader "validates before it reads, so a record without it is skipped — invisible to every <noun> surface while it still sits in the store". That holds for the two stores whose readers fail closed: the issue ledger (capture's validateStrict) and the ADR store (the record dispatcher confirms the frontmatter id). It does not hold for the two stores this cycle added.

The only reader of admission records anywhere in the tree is admittedProposals in internal/core/lint/readingoutstanding.go, and it validates nothing but a non-empty proposal and the run agreement: an admission carrying only run and proposal — no schema_version, no id, no grounds — is read and honoured, and silences its proposal in the outstanding report. The record is not skipped and not invisible; it is actively counted. For surprises there is no reader at all, so the message names one that does not exist.

This is the class iss-2608301308369559 closed for the BLANK branch, left open in the ABSENT branch one line above it: what a reader does with a record is a property of the reader, and a store with no validating reader supports no claim about one.

Remedy: declare on recordStore whether the store's reader validates before it reads, true for the issue and ADR stores and false for the admission and surprise stores, and drop the reader clause where it is false. The absent half of TestAbsentAndEmptyRequiredPropertiesGiveDifferentReasons is pinned on an admission fixture and belongs on an issue one, where the claim it asserts is true.