okstra 0.163.2 → 0.165.0

package/runtime/templates/reports/html/i18n/ko.json

@@ -67,6 +67,21 @@
       "timeout": "시간 초과",
       "not-run": "미실행",
       "synthesis-only": "종합만 수행"
+    },
+    "replanMode": {
+      "full": "전부 다시 계획함",
+      "incremental": "일부만 다시 계획함"
+    },
+    "ledgerKind": {
+      "code-evidence": "코드 근거",
+      "hypothesis": "가설",
+      "confirmed-fact": "확인된 사실",
+      "inference": "추론",
+      "unknown": "미확인",
+      "cross-check-consensus": "작업자 간 합의",
+      "cross-check-dissent": "작업자 간 이견",
+      "missing-information": "빠진 정보",
+      "follow-up": "후속 작업"
     }
   },
   "enumHint": {
@@ -85,7 +100,8 @@
     "written": "작성",
     "elapsed": "소요 시간",
     "evidence-ledger": "근거 대장",
-    "source-confidence": "출처 · 확신도",
+    "source": "출처",
+    "confidence": "확신도",
     "export-my-answers": "내 답변 내보내기",
     "copy": "복사",
     "dismiss": "닫기",
@@ -95,7 +111,7 @@
   },
   "runUsage": {
     "heading": "이번 실행에 든 비용",
-    "intro": "이번 실행이 투입한 에이전트별로 얼마를 썼고 얼마나 오래 일했는지입니다. 에이전트는 서로 겹쳐서 돌기 때문에 각 작업 시간을 더해도 머리말의 소요 시간과 같지 않습니다. 원시 토큰은 처리한 분량이고, 과금 환산 토큰은 같은 작업을 입력 단가 기준으로 환산한 값으로 금액은 이 값에서 나옵니다.",
+    "intro": "이번 실행이 투입한 에이전트별로 얼마를 썼고 얼마나 오래 일했는지입니다. 에이전트는 서로 겹쳐서 돌기 때문에 각 작업 시간을 더해도 머리말의 소요 시간과 같지 않습니다. 원시 토큰은 이번 실행이 모델에 한 번씩 통과시킨 분량입니다. 캐시 재읽기는 매 턴 다시 읽어 들이는 앞선 대화 전체로, 입력 단가의 10분의 1로 매겨지기 때문에 원시 토큰 밖에 있으면서 금액 안에는 들어옵니다. 과금 환산 토큰은 이 둘을 모두 입력 단가 기준으로 환산한 값이고, 금액은 거기서 나옵니다.",
     "agent": "에이전트",
     "role": "역할",
     "model": "모델",
@@ -109,7 +125,9 @@
     "row-lead": "리드",
     "row-workers": "워커 합계",
     "row-total": "합계",
-    "row-cli": "CLI 호출 (별도 청구)"
+    "row-cli": "CLI 호출 (별도 청구)",
+    "cache-read-tokens": "캐시 재읽기",
+    "row-task-cumulative": "이 태스크 누적 (run {runs}회)"
   },
   "macros": {
     "forms": {
@@ -122,7 +140,6 @@
       "why": "이유",
       "further-evidence": "추가 근거",
       "scope-change-requested": "범위 변경 요청",
-      "approve-this-plan": "이 계획 승인하기",
       "implementation-option": "구현 방식 선택",
       "i-approve-this-plan": "이 계획을 승인합니다.",
       "approval-is-held": "승인이 보류 중입니다:",
@@ -136,7 +153,12 @@
       "recommended": "권장",
       "scope-impact": "범위",
       "added-work": "추가 작업",
-      "direction-change": "방향 전환"
+      "direction-change": "방향 전환",
+      "decide-on-this-plan": "이 계획에 대한 결정",
+      "request-changes-to-this-plan": "고쳐서 다시 가져오게 합니다",
+      "reject-this-plan": "이 계획을 반려합니다",
+      "why-required-for-changes-or-rejection": "사유 — 반려하거나 다시 고치게 할 때는 반드시 적어야 합니다",
+      "answer-the-blockers-then-regenerate": "{ids}에 답한 뒤 답변을 내보내고, clarification resume 명령으로 리포트를 다시 만드세요."
     },
     "visualizations": {
       "component": "구성 요소",
@@ -285,7 +307,8 @@
       "statement-overturned": "뒤집힌 진술",
       "replaced-with": "대체된 내용",
       "no-answer-overturned-anything": "답변으로 뒤집힌 것이 없습니다.",
-      "scope-restated": "다시 정리한 범위",
+      "scope-restated": "계획을 어디까지 다시 썼는지",
+      "scope-restated-lede": "이번 계획은 앞선 계획을 이어받아 시작했습니다. 답변을 반영한 뒤 그중 얼마가 살아남았는지입니다.",
       "stages-verified-again": "다시 검증한 stage",
       "stages-carried-over-as-they-were": "그대로 이어받은 stage",
       "decision-record-draft": "결정 기록 초안",
@@ -297,7 +320,9 @@
       "topic": "주제",
       "why": "이유",
       "open-decisions-before-approval": "승인 전에 남은 결정",
-      "no-open-decision-is-holding-approval": "승인을 막는 미결 결정이 없습니다."
+      "no-open-decision-is-holding-approval": "승인을 막는 미결 결정이 없습니다.",
+      "uniform-verifier-label": "단일 판정 검증자",
+      "uniform-verifier-legend": "이 검증자는 자기가 투표한 모든 항목에 같은 판정을 냈습니다. 그래서 이번 라운드의 반증 신호는 나머지 검증자에게서만 나왔고, 위의 게이트 값은 실제보다 넓은 교차 검증처럼 읽힙니다. 만장일치도 정당한 결과이므로, 그 워커의 audit 사이드카에서 인용한 근거를 실제로 열어봤는지 확인하십시오."
     },
     "implementation": {
       "what-was-delivered": "무엇을 만들었나",

package/runtime/templates/reports/html/macros/forms.html

@@ -18,15 +18,21 @@
 
 {% macro plan_approval(state) -%}
 <section id="plan-approval" data-report-section="plan-approval">
-  <h2>{{ t('macros.forms.approve-this-plan') }}</h2>
+  <h2>{{ t('macros.forms.decide-on-this-plan') }}</h2>
+  <fieldset id="plan-decision"><legend>{{ t('macros.forms.verdict') }}</legend>
+    <input id="plan-decision-approved" type="radio" name="plan-decision-status" value="approved"{% if state.disabled_reason %} disabled{% endif %}><label for="plan-decision-approved">{{ t('macros.forms.i-approve-this-plan') }}</label>
+    <input id="plan-decision-revision-requested" type="radio" name="plan-decision-status" value="revision-requested"><label for="plan-decision-revision-requested">{{ t('macros.forms.request-changes-to-this-plan') }}</label>
+    <input id="plan-decision-rejected" type="radio" name="plan-decision-status" value="rejected"><label for="plan-decision-rejected">{{ t('macros.forms.reject-this-plan') }}</label>
+  </fieldset>
   <label for="approval-option">{{ t('macros.forms.implementation-option') }}</label>
   <select id="approval-option"{% if state.disabled_reason %} disabled{% endif %}>
       {% for name in state.option_names %}
       {% if name == state.recommended_option %}<option data-recommended="true" selected value="{{ name }}">{{ name | inline_code }} (recommended)</option>{% else %}<option value="{{ name }}">{{ name | inline_code }}</option>{% endif %}
       {% endfor %}
   </select>
-  <input type="checkbox" id="approval-checkbox"{% if state.disabled_reason %} disabled{% endif %}><label for="approval-checkbox">{{ t('macros.forms.i-approve-this-plan') }}</label>
-  {% if state.disabled_reason %}<div class="approval-disabled-reason"><p>{{ t('macros.forms.approval-is-held') }} <strong>{{ state.disabled_reason }}</strong>.</p><p>Answer {{ state.blocker_ids | join(', ') }}, export your answers, then regenerate the report with the clarification resume command.</p></div>{% endif %}
+  <label for="plan-decision-reason">{{ t('macros.forms.why-required-for-changes-or-rejection') }}</label>
+  <textarea id="plan-decision-reason" rows="4"></textarea>
+  {% if state.disabled_reason %}<div class="approval-disabled-reason"><p>{{ t('macros.forms.approval-is-held') }} <strong>{{ state.disabled_reason }}</strong>.</p><p>{{ t('macros.forms.answer-the-blockers-then-regenerate') | replace('{ids}', state.blocker_ids | join(', ')) }}</p></div>{% endif %}
 </section>
 {%- endmacro %}
 

package/runtime/templates/reports/html/tasks/implementation-planning.template.html

@@ -55,24 +55,16 @@
 </section>
 {% endif %}
 
-<section data-report-section="validation-and-rollback">
-  <h2>{{ t('tasks.implementation-planning.verification-and-rollback') }}</h2>
-  {{ render_narrative(narrative.validationAndRollback, "implementationPlanning.userNarrative.validationAndRollback") }}
-  <h3>{{ t('tasks.implementation-planning.validation-checklist') }}</h3><table data-report-field="implementationPlanning.validationChecklist"><thead><tr><th>{{ t('tasks.implementation-planning.check') }}</th><th>{{ t('tasks.implementation-planning.check') }}</th><th>{{ t('tasks.implementation-planning.command') }}</th><th>{{ t('tasks.implementation-planning.expected') }}</th></tr></thead><tbody>{% for row in planning.validationChecklist %}<tr id="id-{{ row.id }}">{{ row_key(pairs=[("ID", row.id), ("Phase", row.phase)]) }}<td>{{ row.check | inline_code }}</td><td><code>{{ row.commandOrObservation }}</code></td><td>{{ row.expectedOutcome | inline_code }}</td></tr>{% endfor %}</tbody></table>
-  <h3>{{ t('tasks.implementation-planning.how-each-requirement-gets-met') }}</h3><table data-report-field="implementationPlanning.requirementCoverage"><thead><tr><th>{{ t('tasks.implementation-planning.requirement') }}</th><th>{{ t('tasks.implementation-planning.body') }}</th><th>{{ t('tasks.implementation-planning.covered-by') }}</th></tr></thead><tbody>{% for row in planning.requirementCoverage %}<tr id="id-{{ row.id }}">{{ row_key(pairs=[("ID", row.id), ("Source", row.source)], status_name="Status", status_raw=row.status, status_text=row.status) }}<td>{{ row.requirement | inline_code }}</td><td>{{ row.coveredBy | inline_code }}</td></tr>{% endfor %}</tbody></table>
-  <h3>{{ t('tasks.implementation-planning.cross-project-dependencies') }}</h3><table data-report-field="implementationPlanning.crossProjectDependencies"><thead><tr><th>{{ t('tasks.implementation-planning.dependency') }}</th><th>{{ t('tasks.implementation-planning.work-needed') }}</th><th>{{ t('tasks.implementation-planning.signal-to-check') }}</th><th>{{ t('tasks.implementation-planning.how-to-start') }}</th></tr></thead><tbody>{% for row in planning.crossProjectDependencies %}<tr id="id-{{ row.id }}">{{ row_key(pairs=[("ID", row.id), ("Project", row.project), ("Direction", row.direction)]) }}<td>{{ row.requiredWork | inline_code }}</td><td>{{ row.verificationSignal | inline_code }}</td><td>{{ row.howToStart | inline_code }}</td></tr>{% endfor %}</tbody></table>
-  <h3>{{ t('tasks.implementation-planning.dependency-and-migration-risk') }}</h3><table data-report-field="implementationPlanning.dependencyMigrationRisk"><thead><tr><th>{{ t('tasks.implementation-planning.item') }}</th><th>{{ t('tasks.implementation-planning.impact') }}</th><th>{{ t('tasks.implementation-planning.mitigation') }}</th></tr></thead><tbody>{% for row in planning.dependencyMigrationRisk %}<tr id="id-{{ row.id }}">{{ row_key(pairs=[("ID", row.id), ("Item", row.item), ("Kind", row.kind)]) }}<td>{{ row.impact | inline_code }}</td><td>{{ row.mitigation | inline_code }}</td></tr>{% endfor %}</tbody></table>
-  <h3>{{ t('tasks.implementation-planning.rollback-strategy') }}</h3><div class="summary-grid" data-report-field="implementationPlanning.rollbackStrategy">{% for row in planning.rollbackStrategy %}{{ summary_card(row.id ~ " · " ~ (row.triggerSignal | inline_code), row.action, "important", anchor=row.id) }}{% endfor %}</div>
-</section>
-
-<section data-report-section="plan-verification" data-report-field="implementationPlanning.planBodyVerification">
-  <h2>{{ t('tasks.implementation-planning.plan-body-verification') }}</h2>
-  <p><strong>{{ t('tasks.implementation-planning.verdict') }}</strong> — {{ planning.planBodyVerification.gateResult | inline_code }} ({{ planning.planBodyVerification.roundCount }} rounds{% if planning.planBodyVerification.get("selfFixRoundsApplied") is not none %}, {{ planning.planBodyVerification.selfFixRoundsApplied }} self-fix rounds{% if planning.planBodyVerification.get("selfFixStopReason") %} · {{ planning.planBodyVerification.selfFixStopReason | inline_code }}{% endif %}{% endif %})</p>
-  {% if planning.planBodyVerification.get("gateBlockedBy") %}<p><strong>{{ t('tasks.implementation-planning.what-it-blocked') }}</strong> — {{ planning.planBodyVerification.gateBlockedBy | join(", ") | inline_code }}</p>{% endif %}
-  {% if planning.planBodyVerification.get("uniformVerifiers") %}<p><strong>{{ t('implementationPlanning.planBodyUniformVerifierLabel') }}</strong> — {% for u in planning.planBodyVerification.uniformVerifiers %}{{ u.worker | inline_code }} → {{ u.verdict | inline_code }} ({{ u.itemCount }}){% if not loop.last %}, {% endif %}{% endfor %}<br><small>{{ t('implementationPlanning.planBodyUniformVerifierLegend') }}</small></p>{% endif %}
-  <table><thead><tr><th>{{ t('tasks.implementation-planning.plan-item') }}</th><th>{{ t('tasks.implementation-planning.subject') }}</th></tr></thead><tbody>{% for row in planning.planBodyVerification.planItems %}<tr id="id-{{ row.id }}">{{ row_key(pairs=[("ID", row.id), ("Source section", row.sourceSection)]) }}<td>{{ row.subject | inline_code }}</td></tr>{% endfor %}</tbody></table>
-  {% if planning.planBodyVerification.get("dissentLog") %}<h3>{{ t('tasks.implementation-planning.dissent-left-standing') }}</h3>
-  <table><thead><tr><th>{{ t('tasks.implementation-planning.subject') }}</th><th>{{ t('tasks.implementation-planning.body') }}</th></tr></thead><tbody>{% for row in planning.planBodyVerification.dissentLog %}<tr>{{ row_key(pairs=[("Subject", row.planItem), ("Worker", row.workerRole)]) }}<td>{{ row.body | inline_code }}</td></tr>{% endfor %}</tbody></table>{% endif %}
+{# The verification checklist, cross-project dependencies, migration risk,
+   rollback strategy and plan-body verification rounds are the implementer's
+   and the auditor's working material, not the approver's: this reader is
+   deciding whether to greenlight the plan, and none of those tables move that
+   decision. They stay in the markdown report, which is what the next phase and
+   the audit trail read. Requirement coverage is the exception — "does this plan
+   actually do what the brief asked" is the approval question itself. #}
+<section data-report-section="requirement-coverage" data-report-field="implementationPlanning.requirementCoverage">
+  <h2>{{ t('tasks.implementation-planning.how-each-requirement-gets-met') }}</h2>
+  <table><thead><tr><th>{{ t('tasks.implementation-planning.requirement') }}</th><th>{{ t('tasks.implementation-planning.body') }}</th><th>{{ t('tasks.implementation-planning.covered-by') }}</th></tr></thead><tbody>{% for row in planning.requirementCoverage %}<tr id="id-{{ row.id }}">{{ row_key(pairs=[("ID", row.id), ("Source", row.source)], status_name="Status", status_raw=row.status, status_text=row.status) }}<td>{{ row.requirement | inline_code }}</td><td>{{ row.coveredBy | inline_code }}</td></tr>{% endfor %}</tbody></table>
 </section>
 
 {% if planning.get("supersessionLedger") is not none %}
@@ -84,8 +76,11 @@
 
 {% if planning.get("incrementalDecision") %}<section data-report-section="replan-scope" data-report-field="implementationPlanning.incrementalDecision">
   <h2>{{ t('tasks.implementation-planning.scope-restated') }}</h2>
-  <p><strong>{{ planning.incrementalDecision.mode | inline_code }}</strong> — {{ planning.incrementalDecision.reason | inline_code }}</p>
+  <p class="replan-lede">{{ t('tasks.implementation-planning.scope-restated-lede') }}</p>
+  <p><strong>{{ planning.incrementalDecision.mode | enum_label('replanMode') }}</strong> — {{ planning.incrementalDecision.reason | inline_code }}</p>
+  {% if planning.incrementalDecision.reverifyStages or planning.incrementalDecision.carryStages %}
   <p><strong>{{ t('tasks.implementation-planning.stages-verified-again') }}</strong> — {{ planning.incrementalDecision.reverifyStages | default([]) | join(", ") | inline_code }} · <strong>{{ t('tasks.implementation-planning.stages-carried-over-as-they-were') }}</strong> — {{ planning.incrementalDecision.carryStages | default([]) | join(", ") | inline_code }}</p>
+  {% endif %}
 </section>{% endif %}
 
 <section data-report-section="decision-drafts" data-report-field="implementationPlanning.decisionDrafts">

package/runtime/templates/reports/report.js

@@ -8,7 +8,8 @@
  *      data-response-id> (everything else / fallback).
  *   2. Serialise the entries into markdown whose bytes are IDENTICAL
  *      to scripts/okstra_ctl/report_views.py serialize_user_response.
- *   3. Collect the analysis-only Accept / Request revision / Reject control.
+ *   3. Collect the plan Approve / Request changes / Reject decision and the
+ *      analysis-only Accept / Request revision / Reject control.
  *   4. Write the result to <pre id="user-response-output">, offer a
  *      [Copy] button, and download it as
  *      user-response-<task-type>-<seq>.md — the user drops that file in
@@ -95,21 +96,43 @@
     return entries;
   }
 
-  // Plan Approval 위젯 (implementation-planning 보고서에만 존재). 체크박스가
-  // disabled(§1 차단 미해소)이거나 미체크면 null. 옵션이 추천(data-recommended)
-  // 그대로면 implementationOption 을 비워 보낸다 → 소비 측 Recommended 폴백.
-  function collectApproval() {
-    var box = document.getElementById("approval-checkbox");
-    if (!box || box.disabled || !box.checked) return null;
-    var sel = document.getElementById("approval-option");
+  function validatePlanDecision(decision) {
+    if (!decision) return null;
+    var allowed = ["approved", "revision-requested", "rejected"];
+    if (allowed.indexOf(decision.status) < 0) {
+      throw new Error("PLAN DECISION Status is invalid");
+    }
+    if (decision.status !== "approved" && !trimMultiline(decision.reason)) {
+      throw new Error("PLAN DECISION " + decision.status + " requires a Reason");
+    }
+    return decision;
+  }
+
+  // 계획 결정 위젯 (implementation-planning 보고서에만 존재). 아무 판정도
+  // 고르지 않았으면 null. 승인 라디오는 §1 차단이 남아 있으면 disabled 다.
+  // 구현 옵션은 승인일 때만 의미가 있고, 추천(data-recommended) 그대로면
+  // implementationOption 을 비워 보낸다 → 소비 측 Recommended 폴백.
+  function collectPlanDecision() {
+    var selected = document.querySelector(
+      'input[name="plan-decision-status"]:checked'
+    );
+    if (!selected || selected.disabled) return null;
     var option = "";
-    if (sel && sel.selectedIndex >= 0) {
-      var opt = sel.options[sel.selectedIndex];
-      if (opt && opt.getAttribute("data-recommended") !== "true") {
-        option = opt.value;
+    if (selected.value === "approved") {
+      var sel = document.getElementById("approval-option");
+      if (sel && sel.selectedIndex >= 0) {
+        var opt = sel.options[sel.selectedIndex];
+        if (opt && opt.getAttribute("data-recommended") !== "true") {
+          option = opt.value;
+        }
       }
     }
-    return { approved: true, implementationOption: option };
+    var reason = document.getElementById("plan-decision-reason");
+    return validatePlanDecision({
+      status: selected.value,
+      implementationOption: option,
+      reason: reason ? trimMultiline(reason.value) : "",
+    });
   }
 
   function validateAnalysisReview(review) {
@@ -192,7 +215,20 @@
     );
   }
 
-  function buildUserResponseMarkdown(runMeta, entries, createdAt, approval, analysisReview) {
+  function serialisePlanDecision(decision) {
+    decision = validatePlanDecision(decision);
+    var chunk = "\n## PLAN DECISION\n- Status: " + decision.status + "\n";
+    if (decision.implementationOption) {
+      chunk +=
+        "- Implementation-Option: " + trimMultiline(decision.implementationOption) + "\n";
+    }
+    if (trimMultiline(decision.reason)) {
+      chunk += quotedReviewField("Reason", decision.reason);
+    }
+    return chunk;
+  }
+
+  function buildUserResponseMarkdown(runMeta, entries, createdAt, planDecision, analysisReview) {
     var head =
       "---\n" +
       "task-key: " + (runMeta["task-key"] || "") + "\n" +
@@ -206,7 +242,7 @@
       "# User Response\n";
 
     entries = entries || [];
-    var hasApproval = !!(approval && approval.approved);
+    var hasPlanDecision = !!planDecision;
     var hasAnalysisReview = !!analysisReview;
     var chunks = "";
     for (var i = 0; i < entries.length; i++) {
@@ -224,15 +260,11 @@
       }
       chunks += chunk;
     }
-    if (entries.length === 0 && !hasApproval && !hasAnalysisReview) {
+    if (entries.length === 0 && !hasPlanDecision && !hasAnalysisReview) {
       chunks += "\n_(No user responses recorded.)_\n";
     }
-    if (hasApproval) {
-      chunks += "\n## APPROVAL\n- Approved: true\n";
-      if (approval.implementationOption) {
-        chunks +=
-          "- Implementation-Option: " + trimMultiline(approval.implementationOption) + "\n";
-      }
+    if (hasPlanDecision) {
+      chunks += serialisePlanDecision(planDecision);
     }
     if (hasAnalysisReview) {
       chunks += serialiseAnalysisReview(analysisReview);
@@ -268,10 +300,11 @@
   function exportUserResponse() {
     var runMeta = readRunMeta();
     var entries = collectEntries();
-    var approval = collectApproval();
     var out = document.getElementById("user-response-output");
+    var planDecision;
     var analysisReview;
     try {
+      planDecision = collectPlanDecision();
       analysisReview = collectAnalysisReview();
     } catch (e) {
       showOutput(out, e.message || String(e));
@@ -279,13 +312,13 @@
       return "";
     }
     var md = buildUserResponseMarkdown(
-      runMeta, entries, isoNowUtc(), approval, analysisReview
+      runMeta, entries, isoNowUtc(), planDecision, analysisReview
     );
     showOutput(out, md);
     showDismiss(true);
     // Nothing answered yet — show the empty serialisation as feedback but
     // don't download a useless file.
-    if (entries.length > 0 || approval || analysisReview) {
+    if (entries.length > 0 || planDecision || analysisReview) {
       downloadUserResponse(md, runMeta);
     }
     return md;
@@ -415,7 +448,7 @@
     window.okstraReportView = {
       buildUserResponseMarkdown: buildUserResponseMarkdown,
       collectEntries: collectEntries,
-      collectApproval: collectApproval,
+      collectPlanDecision: collectPlanDecision,
       collectAnalysisReview: collectAnalysisReview,
       exportUserResponse: exportUserResponse,
       setReaderMode: setReaderMode,

package/runtime/templates/reports/user-response.template.md

@@ -63,20 +63,24 @@ created-at: 2026-05-17T10:00:00Z
   > (prediction=0: 1,204) (prediction=1: 38)
 ```
 
-## APPROVAL block (implementation-planning only)
+## PLAN DECISION block (implementation-planning only)
 
-When you check approval in the Plan Approval widget and Export, the following block is appended to the end of the body:
+When you pick a verdict in the Plan Decision widget and Export, the following block is appended to the end of the body:
 
 ```markdown
-## APPROVAL
-- Approved: true
+## PLAN DECISION
+- Status: <approved | revision-requested | rejected>
 - Implementation-Option: <the name exactly as in Option Candidates>
+- Reason:
+  > <one quoted line per input line>
 ```
 
-- If you leave the option at the recommended default, the `Implementation-Option:` line is omitted — implementation falls back to the plan's Recommended Option.
-- The consumer of this block is the approve-confirm step of the implementation start wizard (`scripts/okstra_ctl/wizard.py`). After user confirmation the wizard applies it through the existing `--approve` / `--implementation-option` path; the sidecar itself does not bypass approval-gate validation.
-- The parser is `parse_user_response_approval` in `scripts/okstra_ctl/user_response.py`, and it accepts only the lowercase `Approved: true` that is byte-identical to the producer output (hand-edited values such as `TRUE` are rejected fail-closed).
-- `--resume-clarification` attaches the sidecar verbatim, so the APPROVAL block is carried along as-is — it is harmless residual information in a planning re-run input.
+- `revision-requested` and `rejected` require a reason: a plan sent back without one leaves the next run guessing at what to change, so Export refuses to serialise it.
+- `Implementation-Option:` is emitted only for `approved`, and only when you moved off the recommended default — otherwise implementation falls back to the plan's Recommended Option.
+- `Reason:` is optional for `approved`, and the line is omitted when empty.
+- The consumer of an `approved` block is the approve-confirm step of the implementation start wizard (`scripts/okstra_ctl/wizard.py`). After user confirmation the wizard applies it through the existing `--approve` / `--implementation-option` path; the sidecar itself does not bypass approval-gate validation. A non-approved status is ignored there — that step only ever looks for an approval.
+- The parser is `parse_plan_decision` in `scripts/okstra_ctl/user_response.py`, and it accepts only the lowercase statuses that are byte-identical to the producer output (hand-edited values such as `Approved` are rejected fail-closed).
+- `--resume-clarification` attaches the sidecar verbatim, so the PLAN DECISION block reaches the next planning run — which is how a rejection and its reason get acted on.
 
 ## ANALYSIS REVIEW block (analysis reports only)
 

package/runtime/templates/worker-prompt-preamble.md

@@ -29,7 +29,7 @@ When `**Evidence ledger:** required-v1` is present, append one canonical row to
 
 - Evidence read: `<project-relative path without a line suffix>`
 
-Every file citation in the result MUST use backticks and a line suffix, for example `src/config/env.ts:1-22`. A cited path without a matching ledger row fails Phase 7 in `validators/validate-run.py` `validate_worker_results_audit()`. Do not add a row for a file you did not open.
+Every file citation in the result MUST use backticks, a line suffix, and the same project-relative path its ledger row carries — for example `src/config/env.ts:1-22`. A bare filename (`env.ts:1-22`) does not match its row and fails exactly like a file you never opened, however many times you cited the full path earlier. A cited path without a matching ledger row fails Phase 7 in `validators/validate-run.py` `validate_worker_results_audit()`. Do not add a row for a file you did not open.
 
 ## Anchor headers (lead-injected, BLOCKING)
 

package/runtime/validators/validate-implementation-plan-stages.py

@@ -235,8 +235,14 @@ def _check_slice_tdd(text: str, stages: List[StageMapStage]) -> List[ValidationE
 
 
 def _check_red_green_steps(section: str, stage_number: int) -> List[ValidationError]:
-    """S10c: RED-first + later GREEN, with each step's `expected` cell matching
-    its prefix (RED → FAIL, GREEN → PASS). Only certain violations fire."""
+    """S10c: RED-first + later GREEN, with each step's `outcome` cell matching
+    its prefix (RED → FAIL, GREEN → PASS).
+
+    `outcome` is its own column, holding one of two words; the sentence about
+    what that looks like lives in `expected` beside it. Written as one cell the
+    author had to bury a literal token inside prose, and the rule fired on
+    fourteen rows of one measured plan whose prose was correct throughout.
+    """
     rows = _effective_step_rows(section)
     steps = [(r[1], r[4]) for r in rows if len(r) > 4]
     actions = [a for a, _ in steps]
@@ -248,16 +254,14 @@ def _check_red_green_steps(section: str, stage_number: int) -> List[ValidationEr
             "S10c: first step action must start with 'RED:' and some "
             "step action with 'GREEN:', or add a 'TDD exemption:' line"))
         return errs
-    for action, expected in steps:
-        exp = expected.upper()
-        if action.startswith("RED:") and "FAIL" not in exp:
+    for action, outcome in steps:
+        cell = outcome.strip().upper()
+        if action.startswith("RED:") and cell != "FAIL":
             errs.append(ValidationError("S10", stage_number,
-                "S10c: 'RED:' step's expected cell must read FAIL, got "
-                f"'{expected}'"))
-        elif action.startswith("GREEN:") and "PASS" not in exp:
+                f"S10c: 'RED:' step's outcome cell must be FAIL, got '{outcome}'"))
+        elif action.startswith("GREEN:") and cell != "PASS":
             errs.append(ValidationError("S10", stage_number,
-                "S10c: 'GREEN:' step's expected cell must read PASS, got "
-                f"'{expected}'"))
+                f"S10c: 'GREEN:' step's outcome cell must be PASS, got '{outcome}'"))
     return errs
 
 
@@ -432,18 +436,9 @@ def _check_data_slice_tdd(stage: dict) -> List[ValidationError]:
         return [ValidationError("S10", number,
             "S10c: first stepwiseExecution action must start with 'RED:' and "
             "some action with 'GREEN:', or declare a 'tddExemption'")]
-
-    errs: List[ValidationError] = []
-    for step in steps:
-        action = str(step.get("action") or "")
-        expected = str(step.get("expected") or "")
-        if action.startswith("RED:") and "FAIL" not in expected.upper():
-            errs.append(ValidationError("S10", number,
-                f"S10c: 'RED:' step's expected must read FAIL, got '{expected}'"))
-        elif action.startswith("GREEN:") and "PASS" not in expected.upper():
-            errs.append(ValidationError("S10", number,
-                f"S10c: 'GREEN:' step's expected must read PASS, got '{expected}'"))
-    return errs
+    # Whether each row's own `outcome` agrees with its RED/GREEN prefix is a
+    # schema conditional now (`StageStepRow.allOf`), not a string search here.
+    return []
 
 
 def _check_data_step_counts(

package/runtime/validators/validate-report-views.py

@@ -23,7 +23,6 @@ per line to stderr.
 from __future__ import annotations
 
 import argparse
-import hashlib
 import json
 import re
 import sys
@@ -40,9 +39,7 @@ from okstra_ctl.clarification_items import (  # noqa: E402
 )
 from okstra_ctl.report_views import (  # noqa: E402
     analysis_review_context,
-    extract_html_digest,
     plan_approval_context,
-    source_digest,
 )
 from okstra_ctl.report_view_artifacts import html_view_path  # noqa: E402
 from okstra_ctl.final_report_paths import final_report_data_path  # noqa: E402
@@ -76,15 +73,6 @@ def _main_body(html_text: str) -> str:
     return match.group("body")
 
 
-def _sha256(path: Path) -> str:
-    return hashlib.sha256(path.read_bytes()).hexdigest()
-
-
-def _digest_from_run_meta(html_text: str, key: str) -> str:
-    match = re.search(rf'"{re.escape(key)}"\s*:\s*"([0-9a-f]{{64}})"', html_text)
-    return match.group(1) if match else ""
-
-
 def _load_v2_data(report_path: Path) -> tuple[Path, dict] | None:
     data_path = final_report_data_path(report_path)
     if not data_path.is_file():
@@ -106,17 +94,6 @@ def _validate_v2(report_path: Path, data_path: Path, data: dict) -> list[str]:
     main_body = _main_body(html_text)
     failures: list[str] = []
 
-    for key, path in (
-        ("source-data-sha256", data_path),
-        ("source-md-sha256", report_path),
-    ):
-        recorded = _digest_from_run_meta(html_text, key)
-        expected = _sha256(path)
-        if not recorded:
-            failures.append(f"html missing {key} in run-meta")
-        elif recorded != expected:
-            failures.append(f"stale html: {key} does not match current source")
-
     task_type = data.get("header", {}).get("taskType", "")
     if f'data-task-template="{task_type}"' not in html_text:
         failures.append(f"v2 html task template mismatch for {task_type}")
@@ -236,22 +213,6 @@ def validate(report_path: Path) -> list[str]:
     html_text = html_path.read_text(encoding="utf-8")
     html_body = _main_body(html_text)
 
-    # (2) source-digest staleness — html's run-meta source-sha256 must
-    # match the current MD's digest. Mismatch means the html was
-    # rendered against an older MD body and Phase 7 step 1.5 was not
-    # re-run.
-    expected_md_digest = source_digest(md)
-    html_digest = extract_html_digest(html_text)
-    if html_digest is None:
-        failures.append(
-            "html missing source-sha256 in run-meta — re-render with okstra render-views"
-        )
-    elif html_digest != expected_md_digest:
-        failures.append(
-            f"stale html: source-sha256 {html_digest[:12]}… does not match "
-            f"current MD {expected_md_digest[:12]}…"
-        )
-
     # (3) deliverable sections contain no form controls
     for chunk in _no_form_sections(html_body):
         if "<textarea" in chunk or "<input" in chunk or "<select" in chunk: