itd-4's shipped scope migrates scratch issues through dev-sync; the capture surface page says that migration is not built and rides a dev-sync surface that is only a design target.

itd-4's shipped scope migrates scratch issues through dev-sync; the capture surface page says that migration is not built and rides a dev-sync surface that is only a design target.

A sequencing impossibility (severity minor) found by the cross-document consistency pass.

• End A: .abcd/development/intents/shipped/itd-4-issue-capture.md:46 — "dev-sync promotes existing .abcd/.work.local/issues.md entries to the structured ledger on first run after install"
• End B: .abcd/development/brief/04-surfaces/06-capture.md:521 — "Not built yet. The migration rides the dev-sync work surface"

itd-4 places in scope a migration path in which dev-sync promotes the entries of .abcd/.work.local/issues.md into the ledger on the first run after install. 06-capture.md says the legacy scratch migration is not built, that it rides the dev-sync work surface, and that this surface is itself a design target. A shipped intent's scope rests on a verb that, as the surface page states it, does not exist, so that part of the intent cannot have been delivered.

Evidence: .abcd/work/reviews/2026-10-26-consistency/00-summary.md, finding 535.

Grounds

• declined: Closed in the 2026-10-27 triage (dcn-2610271112330536): a later record already settles which end holds. The itd-4 audit marks the migration criterion not met and cites the decision record that closed it without code; the capture chapter says the same thing.