The build-next intent says --max and --until-empty are flags that next and drain share; the drain chapter's run ends at its cap and its shipped surface has no --until-empty.

The build-next intent says --max and --until-empty are flags that next and drain share; the drain chapter's run ends at its cap and its shipped surface has no --until-empty.

A premise contradiction (severity minor) found by the cross-document consistency pass.

• End A: .abcd/development/brief/04-surfaces/35-drain.md:254 — "When the drain has opened as many lanes as its cap, it ends and says so."
• End B: .abcd/development/intents/shipped/itd-2609211116005482-abcd-build-next-picks-the-readiest.md:68 — "--max <n> and --until-empty are the two flags both share"

itd-2609211116005482 decision 4 rules that --max < n> and --until-empty are the two flags that build next and drain share, with drain reading all by default. 35-drain.md bounds a drain by a cap on the lanes it opens and ends the drain when that cap is reached. Its generated surface appendix lists --dry-run, --fix-rounds, --judgement, --max, --pace, --sub-agents and --take-over, with no --until-empty. One document promises drain a flag that the other's surface does not carry.

Evidence: .abcd/work/reviews/2026-10-26-consistency/00-summary.md, finding 762.

Grounds

• declined: Closed in the 2026-10-27 triage (dcn-2610271112330536): the two ends do not conflict when read in full. Read with itd-82, drain reads all by default, so a separate --until-empty flag would be a no-op; the build-next intent's 'both share' is loose shorthand for the shared vocabulary.