feat(discussion): load-bearing tree claims are measured when written - #959
Open
leeovery wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
feat(discussion): load-bearing tree claims are measured when written#959leeovery wants to merge 1 commit into
leeovery wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
Six of the seven false claims that reached a real spec were one-command checks at the moment the discussion wrote them. The template now records a load-bearing empirical claim with the command that measured it, and both document reviews (discussion and research) gain an unverified-claims dimension: re-run recorded commands, construct the obvious measurement where none exists, correct values with the command recorded, and raise — never silently patch — a mismatch that undermines a decision or insight. Closes idea 40; the row and file leave the index with the work. Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
leeovery
force-pushed
the
discussion-measured-claims
branch
from
August 19, 2026 14:20
7ec11ef to
c3cf5e4
Compare
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Why
Idea 40's root defect: six of the seven false claims that poisoned a real spec were one-shell-command checks at the moment the discussion wrote them — including the discussion's own Key Insight, in a document whose other Key Insight was "when a claim is load-bearing, measure it." Nothing in the discussion (or research) flow ever measured anything.
What
template.md: a load-bearing empirical claim is measured when written and carries its command with the result (cmd → result); unmeasurable load-bearing claims are written as observation, not fact. Anti-pattern added. This is what makes every downstream re-check (the spec claims agent in feat(spec): a claims-verification pass measures the spec against the tree #958, the dimensions below) mechanical — authority attaches to the reproducible command, not the assertion.document-review.md: seventh dimension — re-run every load-bearing claim's command before concluding; the documents' own figures and asserted-as-verified statements are claims, not measurements. Value corrections land with their command; a mismatch that undermines a decision or insight is raised in-session, never patched silently.document-review.md: same dimension (sixth), research files feed specs identically.Stacks on #958. Part 5 of 5 — completes the idea-40 stack.
🤖 Generated with Claude Code