spc-63's payload item shape disagrees with the shipped cold-reading definitions: the spec states items[] = {pattern_named, body} with body fields claim, candidate, characterization, why, while every definition under agents/ instructs a FLAT item carrying pattern plus the record schema's own body fields (claim_surfaced, candidate_id, characterisation, why_a_tension), which is also what issueschema.ReadingBodyFields declares and what capture.IngestReading writes. Building the verb to the spec's table would refuse every output the shipped instrument can produce.

spc-63's payload item shape disagrees with the shipped cold-reading definitions: the spec states items[] = {pattern_named, body} with body fields claim, candidate, characterization, why, while every definition under agents/ instructs a FLAT item carrying pattern plus the record schema's own body fields (claim_surfaced, candidate_id, characterisation, why_a_tension), which is also what issueschema.ReadingBodyFields declares and what capture.IngestReading writes. Building the verb to the spec's table would refuse every output the shipped instrument can produce.

Grounds

• pursued: one vocabulary reaches from the definition through the payload to the record, so no rename sits between producer and consumer; a definition instructing a key the ingest refuses would show this wrong