@azure-id/orc 1.9.1 → 1.9.2

package/mock-run/context-combiner.md

@@ -1,100 +1,100 @@
-# Mock run — the context combiner
-
-> Two analyses of two related documents, merged into one spec — and it proves
-> that nothing was lost.
-
-There is no slash command for this. It is offered by `/orc-analyze` when two or
-more related analyses already exist.
-
----
-
-## 1. What it does
-
-You analysed the refund policy PDF last week. Today you analysed the support
-escalation doc. Both talk about refunds. Building from either one alone means
-building half the thing.
-
-The combiner pools **every** requirement from **every** source and gives each
-one exactly one outcome. Then it counts. If the count is not 100%, it does not
-hand off.
-
----
-
-## 2. The run
-
-```
-/orc-analyze  …  Phase F:
-
-  Two related analyses found. Merge them into one spec?
-  · refund-policy       11 requirements   2026-08-04
-  · support-escalation   7 requirements   2026-08-12
-
-> yes
-```
-
-```
-Dispatching orc-context-combiner-opus-5-high …
-returned as: claude-opus-5 / high        ✓
-
-Phase B — are these really related?
-  shared files       api/refunds/ (both), web/refunds/ (both)
-  shared subject     refund state and who is told about it
-  Verdict: related. Continuing.
-
-Phase C — pooled 18 requirements, reconciled one at a time
-
-  exact duplicate    R-04 = S-02  "refund state must be visible to support"
-                     → ONE row, both sources cited
-  partial overlap    R-07 "notify the customer" vs S-05 "notify support"
-                     → SPLIT into two rows, never collapsed into "notify"
-  conflict           R-09 says refunds are final; S-06 describes a re-open
-                     → CONFLICT, raised to you (below)
-  ordering           S-01 must happen before R-02 (it creates the state)
-
-Phase D — one question at a time
-
-  ❓ R-09 vs S-06 — can a closed refund be re-opened?
-     R-09 (policy PDF, p.4): "a completed refund is final"
-     S-06 (escalation doc, §2): "support may re-open within 14 days"
-     ➡️  The escalation doc is newer. I recommend S-06 wins, with R-09 kept
-        as a note. Your call.
-
-  > S-06 wins, and add the 14 days as a hard rule
-
-Phase E — conservation gate
-  source requirements   18
-  rows in the merged spec 19   (one split into two)
-  every source id has exactly one outcome:
-     kept 15 · merged 2 · split 1→2 · resolved-by-you 1 · dropped 0
-  coverage_pct: 100        → handoff allowed
-
-Phase F — written
-  combined-report.md
-  combined-requirement-spec.md          (a normal spec, plus the source map)
-
-Evidence freshness: 2 anchors from last week no longer match HEAD.
-  api/refunds/create.ts:31 → now :44     (flagged, not silently fixed)
-```
-
----
-
-## 3. What to notice
-
-- **Nothing may vanish quietly.** Below 100% coverage there is no handoff.
-  Dropping a requirement is allowed — but only as your explicit decision, and
-  it is recorded as one.
-- **A partial overlap is split, never collapsed.** Collapsing two similar
-  requirements into one shorter sentence is how scope disappears.
-- **Old evidence is re-checked against HEAD**, because an anchor that was true
-  last week is not a fact today.
-- **The merged spec is a normal spec.** The planner and the build pipeline do
-  not know or care that it came from two documents.
-- **Full lane only.** There is no mini version of this, and it never builds
-  anything or spawns anything itself.
-
----
-
-## 4. Related
-
-- Where it starts: [`/orc-analyze`](../templates/skills/orc-analyze/examples/analyze-mock.md)
-- What happens next: [`/orc-plan`](orc-plan.md)
+# Mock run — the context combiner
+
+> Two analyses of two related documents, merged into one spec — and it proves
+> that nothing was lost.
+
+There is no slash command for this. It is offered by `/orc-analyze` when two or
+more related analyses already exist.
+
+---
+
+## 1. What it does
+
+You analysed the refund policy PDF last week. Today you analysed the support
+escalation doc. Both talk about refunds. Building from either one alone means
+building half the thing.
+
+The combiner pools **every** requirement from **every** source and gives each
+one exactly one outcome. Then it counts. If the count is not 100%, it does not
+hand off.
+
+---
+
+## 2. The run
+
+```
+/orc-analyze  …  Phase F:
+
+  Two related analyses found. Merge them into one spec?
+  · refund-policy       11 requirements   2026-08-04
+  · support-escalation   7 requirements   2026-08-12
+
+> yes
+```
+
+```
+Dispatching orc-context-combiner-opus-5-high …
+returned as: claude-opus-5-5 / high        ✓
+
+Phase B — are these really related?
+  shared files       api/refunds/ (both), web/refunds/ (both)
+  shared subject     refund state and who is told about it
+  Verdict: related. Continuing.
+
+Phase C — pooled 18 requirements, reconciled one at a time
+
+  exact duplicate    R-04 = S-02  "refund state must be visible to support"
+                     → ONE row, both sources cited
+  partial overlap    R-07 "notify the customer" vs S-05 "notify support"
+                     → SPLIT into two rows, never collapsed into "notify"
+  conflict           R-09 says refunds are final; S-06 describes a re-open
+                     → CONFLICT, raised to you (below)
+  ordering           S-01 must happen before R-02 (it creates the state)
+
+Phase D — one question at a time
+
+  ❓ R-09 vs S-06 — can a closed refund be re-opened?
+     R-09 (policy PDF, p.4): "a completed refund is final"
+     S-06 (escalation doc, §2): "support may re-open within 14 days"
+     ➡️  The escalation doc is newer. I recommend S-06 wins, with R-09 kept
+        as a note. Your call.
+
+  > S-06 wins, and add the 14 days as a hard rule
+
+Phase E — conservation gate
+  source requirements   18
+  rows in the merged spec 19   (one split into two)
+  every source id has exactly one outcome:
+     kept 15 · merged 2 · split 1→2 · resolved-by-you 1 · dropped 0
+  coverage_pct: 100        → handoff allowed
+
+Phase F — written
+  combined-report.md
+  combined-requirement-spec.md          (a normal spec, plus the source map)
+
+Evidence freshness: 2 anchors from last week no longer match HEAD.
+  api/refunds/create.ts:31 → now :44     (flagged, not silently fixed)
+```
+
+---
+
+## 3. What to notice
+
+- **Nothing may vanish quietly.** Below 100% coverage there is no handoff.
+  Dropping a requirement is allowed — but only as your explicit decision, and
+  it is recorded as one.
+- **A partial overlap is split, never collapsed.** Collapsing two similar
+  requirements into one shorter sentence is how scope disappears.
+- **Old evidence is re-checked against HEAD**, because an anchor that was true
+  last week is not a fact today.
+- **The merged spec is a normal spec.** The planner and the build pipeline do
+  not know or care that it came from two documents.
+- **Full lane only.** There is no mini version of this, and it never builds
+  anything or spawns anything itself.
+
+---
+
+## 4. Related
+
+- Where it starts: [`/orc-analyze`](../templates/skills/orc-analyze/examples/analyze-mock.md)
+- What happens next: [`/orc-plan`](orc-plan.md)