[kikashy]

Closes #213.

What it adds

• Qualifies RFC 0020 §2 so the later-sibling limit-exceeded rule applies only to instances admitted for acquisition, while §§3 and 7 admission failures retain their own codes.
• Adds a closed, hand-written workflow vector with the four ordered instances from the decision and a negative twin whose incorrect projection-failure code produces inventory-mismatch.
• Updates the companion, RFC fixture plan, workflow fixture schema and documentation, tests, and changelog without adding a workflow instance member or state value.

Checks

== check summary (dev.json) ==
handover: boundary 2 paths, shared 3 paths; see AGENTS.md "Before you hand over"
PASS     local-paths              0s
PASS     agent-docs               0s
    sync-agent-docs: CLAUDE.md matches AGENTS.md
PASS     diff-check               0s
PASS     repository-tests         105s
    Ran 245 tests in 104.851s
    OK
PASS     policy-prototype         1s
    Ran 38 tests in 1.529s
    OK
PASS     policy-contract          3s
    Ran 13 tests in 3.091s
    OK
PASS     policy-official-draft    3s
    Ran 16 tests in 3.671s
    OK
== 7 passed, 0 failed, 0 skipped, 0 not run ==

Not in this PR

• Byte-bound admission proofs from RFC 0020: specify independently verifiable byte-bound admission refusals #209.
• The separately decided work from A portable workflow contract for staged research: dependencies, selection, per-record execution, output relationships #160.
• A workflow implementation, recorded executor run, or conformance claim.

A Codex session wrote this change.

[kikashy]

Review round 1 (OpenAI gpt-5.6-sol, effort medium, 2026-10-23), reviewed SHA 33f11dd

Clean-room clone at the head, probes under .review/; CI green before the round. The report verbatim:

MEDIUM — spec/workflow.md:565, rfcs/0020-workflow.md:743: §9 orders admission checking before deterministic bound accounting, but never explicitly says admission status must be established before applying the later-sibling rule. A reader could incorrectly include a projection-failed instance. Fix: state in check 4 that §2’s later-sibling rule applies only after admission is checked and only to admitted instances.

Verified

• §2 contains the admission qualification and §§3/7 cross-reference; §§3 and 7 are substantively unchanged.
• Positive vector has the required four instances in order and expected states.
• Independent probe confirms the positive vector and finds exactly the intended mismatch in the negative twin.
• Negative twin differs only by projection-invalid → limit-exceeded; expected report is inventory-mismatch.
• Changelog accurately records issue RFC 0020: a later sibling of a limit-exceeded instance whose projection failed (§2 against §§3, 7) #213.
• tests.test_workflow: 18 passed.

merge: after fixes — 33f11dd

Disposition (the coordinator's)

#	Finding	Severity	Disposition
1	§9's verifier checks never say that admission status is established before the later-sibling rule is applied	MEDIUM	Fixed in this pull request: one sentence in check 4 of §9, in the companion and in the RFC record; no further round

The merge follows CI on the fix. Same vendor as the builder, not a cross-vendor claim.

[kikashy]

The round-1 MEDIUM is fixed at 7cdba75 (check 4 of §9 states that the later-sibling rule is applied after admission is established and only to admitted instances, in the companion and the RFC record); CI green; no further round. Merged on the standing rule.

[github-actions]

🎉 Thank you for your contribution to Judgment Pack!

If you’d like another task, choose a path that interests you:

• Go runtime
• Judgment desk
• Gateway and provenance
• Python and evaluator experiments
• Specification and documentation