The loop glossary entry says abcd never owns the run loop; the shipped pacing intent describes the loop abcd's own build, drain and implement verbs run.

The loop glossary entry says abcd never owns the run loop; the shipped pacing intent describes the loop abcd's own build, drain and implement verbs run.

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

• End A: .abcd/development/brief/glossary/core/loop.md:38 — "abcd never owns the run loop."
• End B: .abcd/development/intents/shipped/itd-2609201925079472-an-autonomous-implementation-run-paces.md:20 — "A run started with abcd build (or abcd drain, or the abcd implement loop they hand over to)"

The loop entry says abcd only defines the run-loop contract (iterate, gate on a receipt, guard) and that a pluggable adapter supplies the loop itself. The shipped pacing intent describes a run started with abcd build or abcd drain and handed to the abcd implement loop. That run opens lanes, writes next_eligible_at into its own state file, checkpoints and refuses an early restart. This is a loop the abcd binary owns and runs, with no adapter. Someone building from the glossary would treat a native loop as forbidden, which contradicts what shipped.

Evidence: .abcd/work/reviews/2026-10-26-consistency/00-summary.md, finding 1021.

Grounds

• declined: Closed in the 2026-10-27 triage (dcn-2610271112330536) as a duplicate of iss-2610262037018200. Same End A. The pacing intent's run state file, lanes and next_eligible_at are abcd's own implement loop, so the edit belongs in loop.md.