Counting the readers that had broken on their own format turned up one nothing had
caught. docs/scenarios holds scenarios, eight playtest records and two art prompt
sheets, and every guard treated all three as scenarios -- harmless for citations
and skill spellings, false for reachability. Six quotations across passes 4, 6 and
7 were checked as live rolls, so a record of a session already played could fail
the build over a skill nobody can reach. Planting Science (Physics) in pass 4 fails
before the split and passes after; the same skill in CLEAN_GROUND still fails.
Classified by the document's own H1, not its filename, because tools/scenario-*
naming is what swept a tools file into this corpus in R-268. An unclassified
document is fatal: an allowlist that silently drops what it does not recognise
would take a new scenario out of reachability checking on the day it was written.
89 rolls across 18 files becomes 83 across 8.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Both earlier cast defects were shown by editing CLEAN_GROUND.md in the shared tree,
which is how this session came within a git checkout of c0's uncommitted work and
is also the weaker test. Seven cases now live in check-behaviour as strings.
Writing them found a live one: "<!-- cast : ... -->", one space before the colon,
matched nothing -- not an empty declaration R-288 would refuse but no declaration
at all, so check-rollable widened to the whole duty roster and printed its usual OK
line. check-cited's three spellings again. The reader now takes cast\s*:.
castLikeIn adds the asymmetric half: anything comment-shaped containing cast\w* the
reader did not consume is named by check-rollable, so a spelling nobody anticipated
fails the build instead of silently declaring nobody. Looser than the reader on
purpose -- a false alarm costs a reword, the opposite error costs a guard that
checks the wrong six people and says OK.
Tests then mutation-checked for being load-bearing, each mutation asserted to have
applied after a first pass where three silently did not.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
c0's point on R-286: the reader is unambiguous now, but the roster fallback that
made the failure look like success is still reachable. Narrowly closed -- sixteen
of the seventeen scenarios declare no cast and are rightly checked against the
whole roster, so only a marker that is PRESENT and names nobody is refused, with
its line named. Replacing the declaration with <!-- cast: --> passes before this
change and fails after it.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
CLEAN_GROUND.md contains two things matching <!-- cast: ... -->: the real
declaration, and the warning ten lines below it that quotes the marker inside
backticks and matches with an empty capture. check-rollable and declared-cast both
took .match(), first hit wins, so the arrangement has been correct only because the
declaration comes first.
Move that warning above the list and check-rollable reads a cast of nobody, falls
back to ROSTER_BEST, and prints the same OK line having held every skill in the
document to the full duty roster instead of the declared six. Instrumented and read
off: "the duty roster" against "its declared cast of 6".
castMarkersIn blanks code spans and fenced blocks before scanning (padded, so line
numbers still point at the source) and refuses more than one surviving marker,
naming every line. check-rollable imports it instead of carrying a second regex, so
the guard that checks the cast and the guards that measure the fight cannot
disagree about who is in it.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
check-scenarios resolves every skill a scenario NAMES against the catalogue, which
is a different question from whether anybody present can roll it. CLEAN GROUND
shipped four commits with three clues gated on Track (base 10), Navigate (base 10)
and Science (Botany) — base 1, so the 1% floor was the whole of it — and every
guard passed, because all three are perfectly real skills. A desk playtest found
it by auditing the acts against the sheets the scenario casts. That audit is
mechanical, so it belongs in the build.
Two tiers. Corpus-wide, some roster agent must reach VIABLE for every skill any
scenario names. Per scenario, a document that DECLARES its cast is held to that
cast instead, and that is the tier that catches this defect class.
The cast is declared rather than inferred, and that is the interesting part. The
first version scraped pc_ keys out of the prose and swept up the substitutes named
in CLEAN GROUND's player-count scaling — a cast of nine instead of six, which put
Sandoval and his Track 35 in scope and made the guard pass the very bug it was
written for. A guard that guesses the cast is worse than none, because it reports
success. CLEAN GROUND now carries a cast comment and the guard reads it off the raw
text, since scenarioText strips HTML comments.
Verified load-bearing rather than assumed: re-injecting the original Track tag into
the real CLEAN_GROUND.md fails the guard, naming the skill, the base chance and the
declared cast. Worth recording that the corpus-wide tier would never have caught
it — Lindqvist trains Botany at 40, so it is rollable by the roster and simply not
by the six who were cast. The first fixture test passed for that reason and misled
me; only the declared-cast tier finds this.
VIABLE is 25 and is justified, not picked: it is the commonest base chance in the
catalogue, what an untrained agent brings to Spot, Listen or Brawl, so it is the
level the game itself treats as worth attempting. Below it a clue is not gated, it
is buried.
check-scenarios exports its tag parser rather than growing a second copy, behind
the invokedDirectly pattern simulate.mjs already uses; a duplicated parser is
exactly what this repository's one standing law forbids. update-readme then caught
me fairly — it cross-checks the advertised guard list against npm run check — so
the guard is registered there too and the README advertises eleven in all three
places.
No REVIEW_LOG entry: the log is clean at R-260 and is being appended to every few
minutes by concurrent work, so the end of that file is the likeliest place to
collide. Left for whoever next touches it.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
