`abcd intent interview` never hands the interview to a host session, and its refusal names only a runner, so a person sent to the verb is not told that the session they are in may conduct the interview.

abcd intent interview never hands the interview to a host session, and its refusal names only a runner, so a person sent to the verb is not told that the session they are in may conduct the interview.

The refusal (internal/core/interview/written.go:169-175, check at :180-190) passes only when roles.planning-interviewer.runner names a runner this machine enabled, or runner.fallback_host is set; repository routes are skipped (internal/core/runner/config.go:247-252). The verb dispatches with HostSession unset (written.go:342-345), and the host route never hands off to a host session in this verb (internal/core/runner/dispatch.go:83-103), while implement step does hand a host-routed role to the session that drives it (internal/core/implement/loop/drive.go:111-113).

The host-run interview exists as written procedure (commands/intent.md:319-499; :553-554: "in a host session the interview is yours"), but nothing reaches it from the verb, and the refusal does not mention it. On 2026-10-24 the session itself sent the person to the terminal verb instead of conducting the interview, which this refusal did nothing to correct. A person on a subscription (no API key, iss-2610240932215918) is therefore told to configure a route they cannot run, and is not told the route they can.

Surfaced 2026-10-24 (the person ran the command from the session's own advice and got the refusal; "jesus. too complicated. Not working").