Verify the pinned records

Type: types/instruction.md

Judge whether the reconciled records support a source-grounded bounded account, distinguishing material blockers from local limits.

Judge coverage and materiality

Independently trace the behavior supporting consequential claims, then compare it with the submitted wording. Check conditions, scope, ordering and evidence strength; do not treat the analyst's checks as verification. For consequential claims such as “never,” “excluded by default” or “only when enabled,” inspect branches that can reach the same result without the cited control, not just the guarded branch. Separately assess branch behavior and supported-input reachability. If either is unresolved, require wording bounded by the evidence; do not infer safety from types alone or a demonstrated bypass from an unchecked branch alone.

Check every record, source anchor, evidence status, Part of: relation, supersession and unresolved conflict. State the checks and dispositions in Verification. Apply the verification type's materiality threshold. Select omission questions by the central runtime and lens conclusions they could change, using the frozen repository tree, alternate shipped paths and producer/consumer dependencies, not only listed anchors. A shipped caller is not external merely because it calls an API. These questions guide additional omission searches; they do not replace the required checks above or demand an exhaustive inventory.

Continue an omission search while further inspection is reasonably likely to change a consequential conclusion and retaining that conclusion's breadth justifies the investigation effort. Otherwise stop the search: retain a limit only if the existing wording remains supported, or request that the analyst narrow, withhold or qualify the unsupported claim. Do not write the correction yourself. A search stopping decision does not settle acceptance: unsupported emitted claims and known contradictions still require disposition under the verification type. Preserve supported findings; do not weaken them merely to save work, produce uniform coverage or avoid a content warning.

Stop optional omission expansion when selected questions have a supported disposition or a correction request, and no identified material challenge is left without a disposition. Additional artifacts alone do not require more inspection. If reduced scope cannot preserve a faithful bounded account, request correction or return problem under the conditions below.

Every structural failure in report-check requires an explicit blocker addressed to its report; if the finding cannot be routed within this job's authority, write problem instead of silently dismissing it. A conflict missing record citations, both findings, evidence or prevented conclusion is addressed to reconciliation.

Write problem instead of a verdict when the records together cannot support any bounded conclusion or evidence contradicts the frozen target or boundary kind. Name paths, responsibilities and prevented conclusions. A local defect within a supported boundary is not that case. Do not move an incorrect classification into Limitations to accept it.