Metadata Testing Back-fill

Counts

Measure	Count
Capability test specifications	19
Capability scenarios retained from the starting planning sets	164
Capability scenarios added in the first back-fill	24
Capability scenarios now present	188
Feature acceptance suites	6
Feature acceptance scenarios	30
Executable suites registered	140
Capability scenario-to-suite bindings	236
Feature scenario-to-suite bindings	16
Coverage-gap findings from the first back-fill	21
Category cells recorded as gaps	66
Executable suites without scenario mappings	52
Capability scenarios without executable bindings	28
Feature scenarios without executable bindings	14
New continuation findings	1

The first back-fill adds nineteen interaction cases, four failure cases and one transition case. This continuation adds no scenarios or suites: every missing proof obligation already has a finding, and the previous report names no unfinished prose rewrite.

Continuation (pass 2)

The continuation examines the nineteen capability test specifications, six feature suites, executable register, feature acceptance references, module inventory, findings and identifier allocations. Each capability specification has all ten coverage categories and a category on every scenario. Each feature has its acceptance reference, covers its child capabilities and includes behaviour, interaction, lifecycle, permission and regression cases. The declared service integration and end-to-end scan contains eighty-three files, all represented in the register.

Static source inspection checks all 140 registered files at the pinned commits and every direct file-and-case binding retained in the capability scenarios. All 252 scenario-to-suite links agree in both directions. Existing source-backed bindings remain intact; proposed scenarios keep their proposed provenance and no suite gains a passing result or verified conformance from this audit.

The earlier checker blockers are resolved by an upstream change already present at the starting commit. The tracked checker now accepts feature scenario references in executable suite implementation maps and recognizes the required report filenames. Dependency installation, corpus conformance and all seven checker tests pass. Conformance reports zero errors and 8,176 warnings across the repository; a passing corpus check does not establish executable product coverage.

This report receives final OpenAI text, and the design examination report receives a continuation section and a three-sentence verdict. The registry summary now includes every allocated testing finding and advances the next-free value beyond the new continuation finding. Conflicting descriptions for four permanent finding identifiers remain recorded for an explicit identity decision; their existing identities and evidence are preserved.

Outstanding Proof Recorded as Findings

The nineteen capability coverage findings retain the sixty-six category gaps, incomplete transition and permission matrices, unproved invariants, workflow seams and twenty-eight unbound capability cases. Separate findings retain the fifty-two unmapped executable suites and fourteen unbound feature cases. The earlier evidence correction limits the deployed owner-deletion claim to its tested cascade; a restricting deletion through CRM remains unproved. The new continuation finding records the registry identity conflict. These are explicit proof and record obligations, with no unfinished back-fill artifact or unrecorded examination item.

Verdict for Andrew

The testing back-fill is complete as a source-pinned specification and register, and the tracked conformance gate passes with zero errors. The weakest evidence remains the recorded category gaps, incomplete lifecycle and permission matrices, unmapped suites and unbound acceptance outcomes; no product-suite execution is claimed. Before qualification, resolve the conflicting finding descriptions and product disagreements, implement the missing proof and run the applicable suites against the intended environment.