paperlint 3.2.0 → 4.0.0

package/skills/paper-adversarial-review/SKILL.md

@@ -2,10 +2,10 @@
 name: paper-adversarial-review
 description: Use when asking "red-team this paper" / "what would Reviewer 2 attack?" / "find the weaknesses before I submit" — ONE fast hostile-but-fair review of a paper draft. Surfaces overclaims, methodology holes, missing baselines/citations, novelty concerns, threats to validity, and desk-reject risks, with concrete fixes, led by a multi-axis 1–5 scorecard whose card composes into a pc-panel-review panel. NOT the multi-reviewer accept/reject decision (pc-panel-review), a writing grade (grade-paper-writing — this skill consumes its stall inventory rather than re-grading prose), or the full pre-submit gate (harden-paper). Especially for security and agentic-coding measurement papers.
 context: fork
-allowed-tools: [Read, Write, Grep, Glob, Agent, Skill, Bash(node .claude/skills/paper-pipeline/scripts/announce.mjs:*), Bash(node .claude/skills/paper-pipeline/scripts/ledger.mjs:*)]
+allowed-tools: [Read, Write, Grep, Glob, Agent, Skill]
 ---
 
-<!-- vigiles:sha256:2da081a03ae7fee3 compiled from skills/paper-adversarial-review/SKILL.md.spec.ts -->
+<!-- vigiles:sha256:68dcbcc1b7ab5348 compiled from skills/paper-adversarial-review/SKILL.md.spec.ts -->
 
 # paper-adversarial-review — be the reviewer who wants to reject it
 
@@ -15,17 +15,6 @@ allowed-tools: [Read, Write, Grep, Glob, Agent, Skill, Bash(node .claude/skills/
 > CFP-fit score (formerly `venue-review-sim`). Reach for an atom (this, or venue-fit mode) for a quick
 > spot-check; run the panel for the decision.
 
-## Run me
-
-🔴 FIRST, before any other step:
-
-```
-node .claude/skills/paper-pipeline/scripts/announce.mjs paper-adversarial-review <paper-dir>
-```
-
-An advisory pass cannot be observed failing — silence is both its error state and its normal
-state — so starting is an event, and events get written down.
-
 Purpose: catch what a real peer reviewer will hit, while it's still fixable. Peer review is
 **read, not run** — reviewers judge the *text, figures, and reported numbers*, rarely execute code.
 So the paper must be self-contained and airtight on its face. This skill simulates the skeptical
@@ -91,28 +80,6 @@ venue + paper type (short/full/position/benchmark). Ask for the structured outpu
 - **Strongest reframing** if the contribution is undersold or misframed.
 - **What to cut** (for length / TMI) and **what to add** (for soundness).
 
-## Record the verdict
-
-🔴 LAST step, once the deliverable exists:
-
-```
-node .claude/skills/paper-pipeline/scripts/ledger.mjs record paper-adversarial-review <paper-dir> FINDING <count> <report-path>
-node .claude/skills/paper-pipeline/scripts/ledger.mjs record paper-adversarial-review <paper-dir> ABSTAINED <reason> "<one line>"
-```
-
-**FINDING** — `<count>` is the number of ranked weaknesses, `<report-path>` the review with its
-scorecard. Add `--blocking` when the leaning is reject, or there is a live desk-reject risk.
-**ABSTAINED** — `no-witness`: the hostile read found nothing. `blocked`: there was no rendered
-draft to attack.
-
-🔴 **There is no PASS, and this skill is the reason the word was dangerous.** A hostile read that
-found nothing either met a very good paper or was not hostile, and the old vocabulary wrote the
-same word for both. `no-witness` says the true thing — this reader has no witness for the paper
-being sound — and leaves the second possibility standing where it belongs, in view.
-
-Record the weakness count, not the Overall 1–5. The average is exactly what this skill tells its own
-reviewer to distrust — the lowest one or two axes are the story.
-
 ## Rules
 - Be adversarial but *fair* and *specific* — "weak" is useless; "the 65% claim in the abstract isn't
   supported because the pooled bill is −1%, reword to X" is useful.

package/skills/paper-adversarial-review/SKILL.md.spec.ts

@@ -11,16 +11,7 @@ export default experimental_skill({
   description:
     'Use when asking "red-team this paper" / "what would Reviewer 2 attack?" / "find the weaknesses before I submit" — ONE fast hostile-but-fair review of a paper draft. Surfaces overclaims, methodology holes, missing baselines/citations, novelty concerns, threats to validity, and desk-reject risks, with concrete fixes, led by a multi-axis 1–5 scorecard whose card composes into a pc-panel-review panel. NOT the multi-reviewer accept/reject decision (pc-panel-review), a writing grade (grade-paper-writing — this skill consumes its stall inventory rather than re-grading prose), or the full pre-submit gate (harden-paper). Especially for security and agentic-coding measurement papers.',
   context: "fork",
-  tools: [
-    "Read",
-    "Write",
-    "Grep",
-    "Glob",
-    "Agent",
-    "Skill",
-    "Bash(node .claude/skills/paper-pipeline/scripts/announce.mjs:*)",
-    "Bash(node .claude/skills/paper-pipeline/scripts/ledger.mjs:*)",
-  ],
+  tools: ["Read", "Write", "Grep", "Glob", "Agent", "Skill"],
   body: `
 # paper-adversarial-review — be the reviewer who wants to reject it
 
@@ -30,17 +21,6 @@ export default experimental_skill({
 > CFP-fit score (formerly \`venue-review-sim\`). Reach for an atom (this, or venue-fit mode) for a quick
 > spot-check; run the panel for the decision.
 
-## Run me
-
-🔴 FIRST, before any other step:
-
-\`\`\`
-node .claude/skills/paper-pipeline/scripts/announce.mjs paper-adversarial-review <paper-dir>
-\`\`\`
-
-An advisory pass cannot be observed failing — silence is both its error state and its normal
-state — so starting is an event, and events get written down.
-
 Purpose: catch what a real peer reviewer will hit, while it's still fixable. Peer review is
 **read, not run** — reviewers judge the *text, figures, and reported numbers*, rarely execute code.
 So the paper must be self-contained and airtight on its face. This skill simulates the skeptical
@@ -106,28 +86,6 @@ venue + paper type (short/full/position/benchmark). Ask for the structured outpu
 - **Strongest reframing** if the contribution is undersold or misframed.
 - **What to cut** (for length / TMI) and **what to add** (for soundness).
 
-## Record the verdict
-
-🔴 LAST step, once the deliverable exists:
-
-\`\`\`
-node .claude/skills/paper-pipeline/scripts/ledger.mjs record paper-adversarial-review <paper-dir> FINDING <count> <report-path>
-node .claude/skills/paper-pipeline/scripts/ledger.mjs record paper-adversarial-review <paper-dir> ABSTAINED <reason> "<one line>"
-\`\`\`
-
-**FINDING** — \`<count>\` is the number of ranked weaknesses, \`<report-path>\` the review with its
-scorecard. Add \`--blocking\` when the leaning is reject, or there is a live desk-reject risk.
-**ABSTAINED** — \`no-witness\`: the hostile read found nothing. \`blocked\`: there was no rendered
-draft to attack.
-
-🔴 **There is no PASS, and this skill is the reason the word was dangerous.** A hostile read that
-found nothing either met a very good paper or was not hostile, and the old vocabulary wrote the
-same word for both. \`no-witness\` says the true thing — this reader has no witness for the paper
-being sound — and leaves the second possibility standing where it belongs, in view.
-
-Record the weakness count, not the Overall 1–5. The average is exactly what this skill tells its own
-reviewer to distrust — the lowest one or two axes are the story.
-
 ## Rules
 - Be adversarial but *fair* and *specific* — "weak" is useless; "the 65% claim in the abstract isn't
   supported because the pooled bill is −1%, reword to X" is useful.

package/skills/paper-pipeline/SKILL.md

@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ description: The orchestrator for writing a research paper end-to-end, from idea
 allowed-tools: [Read, Write, Edit, Grep, Glob, Bash, WebSearch, WebFetch, Agent, Skill]
 ---
 
-<!-- vigiles:sha256:291d2266e29874be compiled from skills/paper-pipeline/SKILL.md.spec.ts -->
+<!-- vigiles:sha256:a15a3fcf5fdfedf7 compiled from skills/paper-pipeline/SKILL.md.spec.ts -->
 
 # paper-pipeline — the conductor for the whole organism
 
@@ -44,30 +44,6 @@ their grade/result, what's open,* and a one-line **submit-ready verdict**. Rules
 - **"Is paper X ready / what's checked?"** = read this file (verdict + any `☐`/`◐`/`⚠` rows), don't
   reconstruct from chat.
 - Distinct from `SUBMIT-CHECKLIST.md` (venue-format compliance); both must be green before upload.
-- 🔴 **Enforcement leg (prose-isn't-policy), and it is a script, not a paragraph.**
-  `scripts/pipeline-check.mjs` reads this file on every paper edit and reports the failures that
-  actually happened on real papers: a CONTINUOUS check whose last run predates the current text, a GATE
-  that ran without its required input, **a `Requires` cell that omits an edge the pipeline declares**
-  (the canonical set is `scripts/pipeline-edges.mjs`, with the admitting sentence per edge), a study
-  that ran with no stated claim, the `access` row not green inside the moderation window, and a verdict
-  line that is just an accept probability. Run it directly
-  with `node .claude/skills/paper-pipeline/scripts/pipeline-check.mjs <paper-dir>`; it is wired into
-  `.claude/hooks/paper-status-gates.sh` and asserted in `.claude/hooks/hooks.harness.mjs`.
-  **The grading itself stays judgment** (that is the skills' job) — only the mechanically checkable
-  parts are compiled. *Added 2026-08-03, the day three hooks in this repo were found to have been dead
-  for weeks: an advisory that is never exercised is indistinguishable from one that works.*
-
-  🔴 **As of 2026-08-26, this file is read by TWO things.** Sixteen checks over it live as
-  `@eslint/markdown` rules in `eslint-rules/pipeline-status.mjs` (run:
-  `npx eslint <paper-dir>/PIPELINE-STATUS.md`; five of them are `error`), while
-  `scripts/pipeline-check.mjs` holds six whose input lies OUTSIDE the file — git, the clock, the
-  `reviews/` directory, `process.env`. The classification of all 22 lives in the
-  author's private notes (`<papers-root>/research/2026-08-26-klassifikatsiya-pipeline-check.md`).
-
-  ⚠️ The paragraph above lived for a day NOT HERE but directly in `SKILL.md` — i.e. in the
-  generated file. The very first `vigiles compile` (27.08) ate it, and it was not a human who
-  noticed but an agent whose compile had just erased someone else's edit. **An edit to `SKILL.md`
-  without `.spec.ts` is an edit with an expiration date: the next compile.**
 
 ## 🗺️ Where every check actually runs — and where it can be walked around
 
@@ -133,9 +109,7 @@ Prior art is named in the file header (`adewale/skill-eval-harness` does this to
 
 🔴 **Still manual, and no mechanism has been found for it:** the **cold read** — a reader with no
 context restating each sentence — is the only check that catches a sentence that is short, true,
-threshold-passing and meaningless. It needs a fresh subagent, so no hook can run it. What IS
-mechanised is noticing that it is *overdue*: `pipeline-check.mjs` reports `stale-cold-read` when the
-prose changed after the last one.
+threshold-passing and meaningless. It needs a fresh subagent, so no hook can run it.
 
 Install the git hook once per clone: `git config core.hooksPath .githooks`.
 

package/skills/paper-pipeline/SKILL.md.spec.ts

@@ -61,30 +61,6 @@ their grade/result, what's open,* and a one-line **submit-ready verdict**. Rules
 - **"Is paper X ready / what's checked?"** = read this file (verdict + any \`☐\`/\`◐\`/\`⚠\` rows), don't
   reconstruct from chat.
 - Distinct from \`SUBMIT-CHECKLIST.md\` (venue-format compliance); both must be green before upload.
-- 🔴 **Enforcement leg (prose-isn't-policy), and it is a script, not a paragraph.**
-  \`scripts/pipeline-check.mjs\` reads this file on every paper edit and reports the failures that
-  actually happened on real papers: a CONTINUOUS check whose last run predates the current text, a GATE
-  that ran without its required input, **a \`Requires\` cell that omits an edge the pipeline declares**
-  (the canonical set is \`scripts/pipeline-edges.mjs\`, with the admitting sentence per edge), a study
-  that ran with no stated claim, the \`access\` row not green inside the moderation window, and a verdict
-  line that is just an accept probability. Run it directly
-  with \`node .claude/skills/paper-pipeline/scripts/pipeline-check.mjs <paper-dir>\`; it is wired into
-  \`.claude/hooks/paper-status-gates.sh\` and asserted in \`.claude/hooks/hooks.harness.mjs\`.
-  **The grading itself stays judgment** (that is the skills' job) — only the mechanically checkable
-  parts are compiled. *Added 2026-08-03, the day three hooks in this repo were found to have been dead
-  for weeks: an advisory that is never exercised is indistinguishable from one that works.*
-
-  🔴 **As of 2026-08-26, this file is read by TWO things.** Sixteen checks over it live as
-  \`@eslint/markdown\` rules in \`eslint-rules/pipeline-status.mjs\` (run:
-  \`npx eslint <paper-dir>/PIPELINE-STATUS.md\`; five of them are \`error\`), while
-  \`scripts/pipeline-check.mjs\` holds six whose input lies OUTSIDE the file — git, the clock, the
-  \`reviews/\` directory, \`process.env\`. The classification of all 22 lives in the
-  author's private notes (\`<papers-root>/research/2026-08-26-klassifikatsiya-pipeline-check.md\`).
-
-  ⚠️ The paragraph above lived for a day NOT HERE but directly in \`SKILL.md\` — i.e. in the
-  generated file. The very first \`vigiles compile\` (27.08) ate it, and it was not a human who
-  noticed but an agent whose compile had just erased someone else's edit. **An edit to \`SKILL.md\`
-  without \`.spec.ts\` is an edit with an expiration date: the next compile.**
 
 ## 🗺️ Where every check actually runs — and where it can be walked around
 
@@ -150,9 +126,7 @@ Prior art is named in the file header (\`adewale/skill-eval-harness\` does this
 
 🔴 **Still manual, and no mechanism has been found for it:** the **cold read** — a reader with no
 context restating each sentence — is the only check that catches a sentence that is short, true,
-threshold-passing and meaningless. It needs a fresh subagent, so no hook can run it. What IS
-mechanised is noticing that it is *overdue*: \`pipeline-check.mjs\` reports \`stale-cold-read\` when the
-prose changed after the last one.
+threshold-passing and meaningless. It needs a fresh subagent, so no hook can run it.
 
 Install the git hook once per clone: \`git config core.hooksPath .githooks\`.
 

package/skills/paper-pipeline/grade-paper-writing-ablation.eval.mjs

@@ -226,7 +226,7 @@
  *
  *      ⚠️ 2026-08-09: A0 IS TWO TOKENS OFF THE TEXT MEASURED BELOW. The scorecard row ids were
  *      renamed from two-letter codes to words (`Hn` → `claims`) because the two-letter space had
- *      collided — see `scripts/pipeline-edges.mjs`. The target's description carried one such
+ *      collided. The target's description carried one such
  *      reference, so "…mandates the Hn claim-preservation diff." became "…mandates the
  *      claims-preservation diff (row `claims`)." A0 is still read from disk and every guard still
  *      passes; the numbers below were measured on the pre-rename bytes and are left as recorded.

package/skills/paper-pipeline/paper-pipeline.harness.mjs

@@ -10,16 +10,14 @@
  *             -> catches a skill renamed or removed while the conductor still
  *                points at the old name. The agent reads a route to nowhere.
  *
- *   backward  every pipeline-wired skill is named by the conductor
+ *   backward  every skill this package ships is named by the conductor
  *             -> catches the far more common one: a stage skill added and never
  *                wired into the map, so the orchestrated run silently skips it.
  *
- * 🔴 THE BACKWARD DIRECTION IS RED TODAY, WHICH IS WHY IT IS WORTH WRITING.
- * Three wired skills are absent from the conductor (see MISSING below). Two are
- * genuine stages. They are held in an explicit list rather than asserted away,
- * and the list is checked for rot in both directions: an entry naming a skill
- * that stopped being wired, or one that HAS since been routed, fails — so the
- * debt cannot quietly become permanent.
+ * The skills the map does not name are held in an explicit list (NOT_IN_MAP), each
+ * with its reason, and the list is checked for rot in both directions: an entry
+ * naming a skill that no longer ships, or one the map HAS since named, fails — so
+ * an exception cannot quietly outlive its reason.
  *
  * ⚠️ COVERAGE NOTE. Before this file, `paper-pipeline` counted as covered because
  * five older eval files sit in its directory — and every one of them measures
@@ -37,13 +35,8 @@ const HERE = dirname(fileURLToPath(import.meta.url));
 const SKILLS_DIR = join(HERE, "..");
 const SELF = "paper-pipeline";
 
-/** Same contract `skill-checks.mjs` derives membership from: a skill announces ITSELF. */
-const PIPELINE_MARKER =
-  /^\s*node\s+\.claude\/skills\/paper-pipeline\/scripts\/announce\.mjs\s+([a-z0-9-]+)/m;
-
 const dirs = installedSkills(SKILLS_DIR);
 const read = (d) => readFileSync(join(SKILLS_DIR, d, "SKILL.md"), "utf-8");
-const wired = dirs.filter((d) => PIPELINE_MARKER.test(read(d)));
 
 const src = read(SELF);
 
@@ -82,62 +75,54 @@ for (const name of new Set(asserted)) {
   recordCheck();
 }
 
-// ── backward: every wired stage skill is named somewhere in the map ──
-/**
- * Wired skills the conductor does NOT name, each with why it is tolerated TODAY.
- * Dated, because an undated allowance is indistinguishable from an oversight —
- * the same argument `skill-checks.mjs` makes about its own EXCLUDED map.
- */
-const MISSING = new Map([
+// ── backward: every shipped skill is named somewhere in the map ──
+/** Shipped skills the conductor does NOT name, each with why. */
+const NOT_IN_MAP = new Map([
   [
     "cold-read-diff",
-    "2026-08-11 — absent from the MAP but NOT unreachable: it is in EXPECTED_GATES and `grade-paper-writing` routes to it, so a run gets there. Belongs in the map for discoverability; not added here because the pipeline is being reworked in parallel",
+    "reached through `grade-paper-writing`, which routes to it; missing only from the map",
   ],
   [
     "sweep-design-space",
-    "2026-08-11 — same shape: in EXPECTED_GATES, reached via `argument-arc`, missing only from the map. Deferred to the rework",
+    "reached through `argument-arc`; missing only from the map",
   ],
   [
     "paper-status",
     "reports ON the pipeline rather than being a stage in it — the conductor has nothing to route to it",
   ],
+  [
+    "osf-artifact-upload",
+    "a helper that uploads an artifact file, not a stage of writing a paper",
+  ],
 ]);
 
-for (const name of wired) {
+for (const name of dirs) {
   if (name === SELF) continue;
-  if (MISSING.has(name)) continue;
+  if (NOT_IN_MAP.has(name)) continue;
   assert.ok(
     routed.has(name),
-    `${name} is a wired pipeline skill and paper-pipeline never names it. Whether that STRANDS ` +
-      `it depends on whether a sibling routes to it — check before calling it unreachable ` +
-      `(measured 2026-08-11: both known-absent skills WERE reachable via a sibling, and the ` +
-      `first version of this message claimed otherwise). What it always costs is discoverability: ` +
-      `a reader of the map does not learn the stage exists.`,
+    `${name} ships with this package and paper-pipeline never names it. A reader of the map ` +
+      `does not learn the stage exists; name it in the map, or add it to NOT_IN_MAP with a reason.`,
   );
   recordCheck();
 }
 
-// ── the allowance list must not rot, in BOTH directions ──
-for (const [name, reason] of MISSING) {
+// ── the exception list must not rot, in BOTH directions ──
+for (const [name, reason] of NOT_IN_MAP) {
   assert.ok(
     dirs.includes(name),
-    `MISSING names "${name}" and no such skill exists — delete the entry. Recorded reason: "${reason}"`,
-  );
-  assert.ok(
-    wired.includes(name),
-    `MISSING names "${name}", which is no longer a wired pipeline skill, so the allowance covers ` +
-      `nothing. Recorded reason: "${reason}"`,
+    `NOT_IN_MAP names "${name}" and no such skill ships — delete the entry. Recorded reason: "${reason}"`,
   );
   assert.ok(
     !routed.has(name),
-    `MISSING still names "${name}", but paper-pipeline DOES name it now — the debt was paid and the ` +
-      `entry is stale. Delete it, so the assertion above starts protecting this skill.`,
+    `NOT_IN_MAP still names "${name}", but paper-pipeline DOES name it now — delete the entry, ` +
+      `so the assertion above starts protecting this skill.`,
   );
   recordCheck();
 }
 
 console.log(
   `✓ paper-pipeline routing: ${String(new Set(asserted).size)} routes resolve · ` +
-    `${String(wired.length - MISSING.size - 1)} wired skills reachable · ` +
-    `${String(MISSING.size)} known-absent (${[...MISSING.keys()].join(", ")})`,
+    `${String(dirs.length - NOT_IN_MAP.size - 1)} skills named · ` +
+    `${String(NOT_IN_MAP.size)} not in the map (${[...NOT_IN_MAP.keys()].join(", ")})`,
 );

package/skills/paper-pipeline/references/acceptance-gate.md

@@ -250,15 +250,13 @@ program is what you can write only when the question is Type A.
 
 | unit                                                 | question                                                                                 | rung                                                                                                                  |
 | ---------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
-| `ledger.mjs` / `status.mjs`                          | did the gate run, against which bytes, and has it ever said no                           | A (3)                                                                                                                 |
-| `run-mechanical.mjs`                                 | run every script gate; exit on the worst FACT gate                                       | A (3), wrapping A                                                                                                     |
 | `repro/report-submission.py`                         | body pages, overfull boxes, unresolved refs, dropped characters                          | A (3)                                                                                                                 |
 | `repro/check-anon.sh`, `check-figure.sh`             | deanonymising strings; does the figure fit the column                                    | A (3)                                                                                                                 |
 | `structure.mjs`, `prose-lint.mjs`                    | section weights, unjustified blocks, thresholds with published baselines                 | A (3) — _measuring_ a B question, which is legitimate and is not the same as answering it                             |
 | `check-provenance.mjs`                               | untraced number; arm word in the path vs condition word in the sentence                  | A (3)                                                                                                                 |
 | `population-map.mjs`, `artifact-coverage.mjs`        | which set does this number count; does the bundle hold data for what the paper points at | A (3)                                                                                                                 |
 | rules `refs/*` (facts by `extract-ref-facts.mjs`)    | does the registry have this record                                                       | A (3), **external adjudicator**                                                                                       |
-| `pipeline-check.mjs`, `paper-lint.mjs`               | scorecard consistency, gate staleness, appendix ratio, shaved passages                   | A (3)                                                                                                                 |
+| `paper-lint.mjs`                                     | appendix ratio, shaved passages                                                          | A (3)                                                                                                                 |
 | `repro/arm_permutation.py`, `repro/delivered_pdf.py` | is the quantity bound to its arm; did it survive typesetting                             | A (3), metamorphic                                                                                                    |
 | **`repro/paper_numbers.py` + `numbers.tsv`**         | —                                                                                        | **rung 1: no PDF exists in which the number is wrong**                                                                |
 | `paper-edit-guard.hook.ts`                           | writing to a paper from Bash                                                             | rung 2 — **leaky**, an interpreter reading its program from stdin still gets through (`papers/CLAUDE.md`, 2026-08-06) |
@@ -320,9 +318,6 @@ questions into programs.
 ## See also
 
 - `review-ratchet.md` — what a caught overclaim costs, and the pass that pays it back.
-- `eslint-rules/pipeline-status.mjs` (rule `pipeline/judge-recorded`; until 2026-08-26 in
-  `../scripts/pipeline-check.mjs`) — `single-family-jury` and `unattributed-verdict`, the mechanical
-  leg of this document.
 - `../scripts/round-diff.mjs` — the per-round edit gate: a driving pass may only change what it
   declared, and the whole document's growth is measured every round.
 - the papers tree's own `CLAUDE.md` — the four-rung ladder, and the rule that a rule written in prose is

package/skills/paper-pipeline/references/pipeline-status-template.md

@@ -5,11 +5,9 @@
 "did everything run?" is a checked fact, not a memory. Chat evaporates; this file rides with the paper
 to camera-ready.
 
-🔴 **It is also machine-read.** `../scripts/pipeline-check.mjs` parses this file, so the four section
-headings, the row shape, and the ISO dates are a **format contract**, not decoration. Break them and
-the checks go quiet — which, as of 2026-08-03, is a failure mode this repo has lived through three
-times in one day. Run `node .claude/skills/paper-pipeline/scripts/pipeline-check.mjs <paper-dir>`
-after editing to confirm it still parses.
+🔴 **It is also machine-read.** The status hook prints the `**Readiness verdict:**` line and every
+`☐` gate row each time a paper source is edited, and the rules read the front matter below. Keep
+the verdict line's wording and the `☐`/`☑` marks as they are, or the hook goes quiet.
 
 ## The front matter
 
@@ -41,7 +39,7 @@ match, and the finding will quote exactly what it looked for.
 ## The row ids, and what each one runs
 
 The `id` cell is the **join key** — the same string appears in this template, in every paper's
-scorecard, in `Requires` cells, in `../scripts/pipeline-edges.mjs` and in the skills' own prose. So
+scorecard, in `Requires` cells and in the skills' own prose. So
 the scorecard explains itself where it lives:
 
 | id            | section    | what it is                                                                | run by                          |
@@ -79,27 +77,6 @@ two rows, merged by every consumer — and `Id` (research-ideate) was the header
 parser's header-row filter silently ate that row on **every** scorecard for as long as the template
 existed. Neither is expressible now. Keep new ids lowercase, one word, and say what the row is.
 
-### How `pipeline-check.mjs` reads this file (rewritten 2026-08-09 to parse markdown, not match it)
-
-Both defects above, plus a third — two rows sharing an id merging in silence — had one cause: a
-regular expression guessing at document structure. The parser is now an AST walk (`markdown-it`),
-and two rules decide what it reads. They are stated here because the checker's findings point at
-them:
-
-- **A heading names a section iff its FIRST Latin-script word is `SETUP` / `LOOP` / `CONTINUOUS` /
-  `GATES` / `AFTER`.** Anything after that word is free: `### GATES (re-run 06.08)` is GATES. A
-  heading with a different first word — or none, like `### Гейты, прогнанные 06.08` — names no
-  section and CLOSES the previous one. Headings are **not** translated or fuzzy-matched: guessing
-  what a heading means is the defect, not the fix. Rows in such a region are reported
-  (`unattributed-row`), never dropped.
-- **A table is part of the scorecard iff its header row's first cell is `id`** (also `код`, `code`).
-  The header comes from the table's real `thead`, so there is nothing to guess and a data row
-  reading `| Id |` is a row. Prose tables in a scorecard — the panel must-fix table, a ceiling
-  classification — have no id column and are correctly ignored. The pre-2026-08 single-table format
-  keys its first column `#`, a row number; it does not parse, and the checker says so by name.
-
-**A row is never dropped in silence.** Unattributable, unreadable and duplicate ids are findings.
-
 ## Rules
 
 - **One row per unit of work; update the row in the SAME commit as the work.** Status + ISO date +
@@ -108,14 +85,10 @@ them:
   stage 7"). SETUP is done-or-not. LOOP iterates. **CONTINUOUS is never done** — its date is compared
   against the paper's own mtime, and a `☑` older than the text is a _stale pass_, which reads as
   green and is not. GATES are blocked on named inputs.
-- 🔴 **The `Requires` cells above are not free-form — do not thin them.** The canonical edge set lives
-  in `../scripts/pipeline-edges.mjs`, with the sentence from each skill's own SKILL.md that admitted
-  the edge, and the ESLint rule `pipeline/undeclared-input` (`eslint-rules/pipeline-status.mjs`;
-  until 2026-08-26 `pipeline-check.mjs`) reports any cell that drops one. The cell
-  was retyped by hand for every paper until 2026-08-08, and `compile-rules-2026` had lost four of
-  them — including `arc`, which argument-arc's SKILL.md says must precede `tighten-paper`. A dropped
-  edge is invisible: `gate-missing-input` can only enforce what the cell says. Adding an input the
-  table does not know about is fine and reports nothing.
+- 🔴 **The `Requires` cells above are not free-form — do not thin them.** The cell was retyped by
+  hand for every paper until 2026-08-08, and `compile-rules-2026` had lost four of them — including
+  `arc`, which argument-arc's SKILL.md says must precede `tighten-paper`. A dropped edge is
+  invisible. Adding an input the table does not know about is fine.
 - 🔴 **Row `access` is the one that is not about the paper, and it is the one that bites.** _Can you
   physically upload?_ — account exists, profile is **ACTIVE** rather than "pending moderation", the
   portal is reachable, you know the form's fields and its artifact-hosting requirement. On