This is the record of an abcd-managed repository

abcdBetav0.16.2 · 2026-11-06

Development record

itd-53 calls the shipped-but-unreviewed listing a consistency gate; the intent chapter uses Consistency for the Role 2 cross-document pass

issuewontfixminoriss-2610262035102052

itd-53 calls the shipped-but-unreviewed listing a consistency gate; the intent chapter uses Consistency for the Role 2 cross-document pass

A naming conflict (severity minor) found by the cross-document consistency pass.

  • End A: .abcd/development/intents/shipped/itd-53-review-queue-auto-drain-fidelity-gate.md:36 — "A consistency gate / report that lists shipped intents whose latest fidelity review is missing or not-met"
  • End B: .abcd/development/brief/04-surfaces/05-intent.md:332 — "Consistency (the whole corpus, or one intent id)"

itd-53 names its list of shipped intents whose fidelity review is missing or not met a consistency gate. In the intent chapter, Consistency is the Role 2 cross-document pass over the whole corpus or one intent, and the shipped-but-unreviewed listing is the owed-reviews form of the audit sub-verb. One name covers two concepts, so a reader cannot tell which surface consistency means.

Evidence: .abcd/work/reviews/2026-10-26-consistency/00-summary.md, finding 553.

Grounds

  • declined: Closed in the 2026-10-27 triage (dcn-2610271112330536): a later record already settles which end holds. The re-scope says the gate reports and never blocks and hands the standing list to another record, so the consistency gate wording is read through the banner.

Frontmatter

idiss-2610262035102052
typeissue
lifecyclewontfix
severityminor

References1

mentions1