Macro-4 No-Production-Touch Master Proof Plan — R2-B2 (2026-06-19)
Macro-4 No-Production-Touch Master Proof Plan — R2-B2 (2026-06-19)
Date: 2026-06-19 · Workstream: R2-B2-MACRO-4-STAGING-WORKBENCH-IO-CONTRACT-TD-ENTRY-GATE-2026-06-19 (Deliverable 43 of 90) · Editorial revision: rev1
Class: no-production-touch master proof plan · READ-ONLY · NON-ENACTING · NON-AUTHORIZING · NO write performed.
Metadata convention. Editorial revision (rev1) only. Storage revision/
content_lengthauthoritative at read time.
0. Status and non-authorization
STATUS: PASS — engineering / design-only. The master plan for proving (later) that the workbench never touched production. Engineering PASS ≠ authority PASS. Default: HOLD.
1. Purpose
Answer macro question 5 — what no-production-touch proof is required? — as a single master plan.
2. Sources / evidence read
Workbench no-production-touch requirements (11); pilot-slice staging IO contract §11; bad-input/delete-fast plan §10; Macro-3 no-production-touch risk map. Main process, no reader-agents.
3. Accepted baseline (carried)
The proof is a before/after comparison of production counts/checksums plus the staging evidence (CAV-3/CAV-4: read-only tooling proves state via snapshots/catalog reads).
4. Evidence / analysis — proof plan structure
| Part | Deliverable | Proves |
|---|---|---|
| Before/after snapshot | 44 | production counts/checksums identical |
| Forbidden surfaces | 45 | the exact surfaces that must be unchanged |
| Runtime proof obligations | 46 | what a runtime check must show |
| Source proof obligations | 47 | no source/law/report patched |
| Promotion firewall | 48 | no staging→production flow |
5. Contract / requirement / matrix / result
This macro itself honored no-production-touch: only read-only query_pg/list_docker + KB doc creation (Deliverable 81 ledger). For a future B2 run, the plan is the required shape of proof; no such proof is run here.
6. Owner-gated future work
Running the proof against a built workbench is Owner-gated; forbidden now.
7. What remains unresolved
The concrete snapshot harness is FUTURE_TECHNICAL_DESIGN_REQUIRED.
8. Ready for GPT/Codex review
Yes — Codex should confirm the plan covers runtime + source + promotion proof.