Require verified impact coverage for shared changes

[laimis91]

Summary

A fix to shared behavior could satisfy the reported case while omitting other consumers or state transitions. This change records bounded impact across workflow, standalone debugging, and review, then validates the captured evidence before mutation and at completion.

• Capture base/candidate consumers, distinct contract and state obligations, planned verification, current results, and original review bindings. Local and cosmetic changes retain compact applicability and proportionate verification.
• Reject expanded behavior assessments with empty discovery/consumer evidence, including explicitly expanded local work; each consumer retains a required contract/state obligation. Compact local work and cosmetic controls remain proportionate.
• Require one jointly justified equivalence group per verification plan; separately justified groups cannot share one execution record.
• Selective installs include transitive bundled requires, so debugging and workflow receive the canonical review producer. Both installers deduplicate cycles, refresh bundled dependencies, preserve missing-external notes, and resolve selection before writes. Bash now preflights every resolved skill path before metadata reads or writes, rejecting traversal, links, and wrong-type nodes.
• Bind each actual verification to the executed base/candidate/universe snapshot and the verification source identity. Refreshed headers cannot make an old run current; missing execution snapshots require verification to be rerun.
• Allow blocked, invalid, or gap-reporting outputs to cite their blocker without a fabricated checker result; valid evidence and mutation handoffs stay strict.
• Require current valid pre_build evidence and an assessment before source/test mutations and mutation dispatches, including entry-time Spec Review repairs. Read-only discovery remains available.
• Add a Node 22+ standard-library checker for incomplete or stale evidence. Waivers separate their explanation from existing authority and cannot pass completion. Both installers deploy the common checker.
• Route light expanded-impact completion through canonical assistant-review outputs without changing the light Build policy or automatically adding architecture/QA work. All completion tiers conditionally retain impact evidence; preparation-only work retains discovery evidence.
• Align the four-value applicability domain across all three skills and the v7.2 migration notice with persisted 6.0/7.0/7.1 invalidation, preserving complete historical finding identities.
• Reject behavior pre-build and completion when every obligation is unaffected and no verification is bound; retain discovery and cosmetic controls.
• Bind successful checker results to versioned, phase-specific semantic JSON digests. Reusing evidence requires current validation plus an exact prior-result match through --receipt; legacy or stale evidence requires a fresh run. Workflow, debugging, and review retain their existing result-reference carriers.
• Keep preparation-only discovery free of implementation completion/review requirements across the gate and generated phase guidance.
• Return compact applicability from debugging, workflow, and review, including local causal evidence and cosmetic decisions. All workflow completion tiers and both progressive output routes retain it without requiring expansion. Keep both harness artifact ledgers aligned with the canonical enum.

Validation

• CI-equivalent aggregate: 624 passed, 0 failed, repeated after the first review corrections. The original fixture-whitelist failure is covered.
• Final descriptor-snapshot correction: Node API/CLI tests 31/0, impact contracts 16/0, context contracts 23/0, and Bash installer checks 24/0, including the installed checker for all three consumer skills. Unchanged aggregate checks are reused after a recorded three-file delta audit.
• All 14 skills validate; existing instruction budgets are unchanged. Independent probes cover phase-specific digests, changed-input rejection, sparse arrays, and inert current/prior input snapshots.
• Fresh canonical review, source hash audit, eight finding closures, and the framework's completion validator passed. Matching completion receipt reuse also passed.

Local validation runs on macOS with Node 25; the checker supports Node 22+. Fresh hosted Node 22/Linux and Windows checks are tracked on the published head.

Limits

The deterministic guarantee covers captured-evidence consistency and closure. It does not prove exhaustive dependency discovery, semantic truth, or unavoidable invocation by a model. Contract tests validate instruction routing and evidence shapes; checker tests execute the validator.

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Codex Review Summary

This comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.

Review	Status	Commit	Review trigger
📝 Code Review	✅ Completed 2026-09-21T09:46:59.117397Z	f9a8ada	New commits

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review" or "@codex security review".

Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings.

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 1333d94885

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

[laimis91]

@codex review

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 467d1008ec

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

[laimis91]

@codex review

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: f3c4057990

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

[laimis91]

@codex review

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: ef21f675d0

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

[laimis91]

@codex review

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: b0b3f6de87

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: e4064391ee

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: a9eb51d79e

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: cc5bedcb64

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 609be9027f

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: ca90df6ed6

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 1866d8ba1b

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: fe1c79ee62

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".