The drive draft treats a plain-terminal drain that runs on its own as new, but the shipped drain bundle says drains already run unattended in a plain terminal

The drive draft treats a plain-terminal drain that runs on its own as new, but the shipped drain bundle says drains already run unattended in a plain terminal

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

• End A: .abcd/development/intents/planned/itd-2610222215485265-abcd-drain-run-from-a-plain-terminal.md:21 — "Type abcd drain --drive in a plain terminal and it works through the ledger on its own."
• End B: .abcd/development/intents/shipped/itd-2610161016401115-a-drain-runs-unattended-on-a-hosted.md:21 — "A drain runs unattended on a hosted session or a plain terminal for a day."

itd-2610222215485265 introduces --drive as the only way for abcd drain to work through the ledger on its own from a plain terminal, and carries a proposed reversal of the host-delegated boundary to allow it. itd-2610161016401115, which the draft refines, already claims a drain runs unattended on a hosted session or a plain terminal for a day. Either the shipped claim overstates what exists, or the draft's premise is wrong.

Evidence: .abcd/work/reviews/2026-10-26-consistency/00-summary.md, finding 1208.

Grounds

• declined: Closed in the 2026-10-27 triage (dcn-2610271112330536): the two ends do not conflict when read in full. Both ends are the draft and the intent it explicitly refines; the draft names the over-promise itself, and the shipped record stays as history.