04-scope defines operator-internal verbs, rules and spec among them, as wiring with no commands/ file; itd-146 says operator_internal only means 'needs no surface chapter' and treats rules as user-facing.

04-scope defines operator-internal verbs, rules and spec among them, as wiring with no commands/ file; itd-146 says operator_internal only means 'needs no surface chapter' and treats rules as user-facing.

A terminology drift (severity minor) found by the cross-document consistency pass.

• End A: .abcd/development/intents/shipped/itd-146-abcd-s-help-renders-in-labelled-command.md:75 — "record-lint.json means needs no surface chapter, which is a lint"
• End B: .abcd/development/brief/01-product/04-scope.md:19 — "the class is defined by the absence of a commands/ file rather than by the presence of one"

04-scope lists rules and spec among the operator-internal verbs, as wiring rather than user-facing surface, and says 'the class is defined by the absence of a commands/ file rather than by the presence of one'. itd-146 says the operator_internal key in 'record-lint.json means needs no surface chapter, which is a lint' exemption rather than a verdict on user visibility, and keeps rules listed because the marker block tells every managed repository to run it. The term operator-internal has two definitions, and they disagree on whether rules is user-facing.

Evidence: .abcd/work/reviews/2026-10-26-consistency/00-summary.md, finding 203.

Grounds

• declined: Closed in the 2026-10-27 triage (dcn-2610271112330536): a later record already settles which end holds. internal/surface/cli/helpgroups.go files rules and spec under the agents block, and the lint config comment defines operator_internal as exempt from a surface file; the two definitions coincide today.