Incomex AI Portal
KB-7479

Macro-7 R2-B2 Preflight-Before-Write HOLD Report (2026-06-19)

16 min read Revision 1
laws-newR2-B2macro-7preflightbefore-writeholdread-onlynon-authorizingfresh-readonlyowner-gated2026-06-19

Macro-7 R2-B2 Preflight-Before-Write HOLD Report (2026-06-19)

Date: 2026-06-19 · Workstream: R2-B2-MACRO-7 (preflight-only slice; Owner chose "Preflight, then stop") Class: read-only runtime preflight + governed-file reconstruction · NO Postgres write · NO DDL/DML · NO schema/table/corpus · NO staging build · NO test · NO source/law patch · NO blocker resolved. Only write performed by this turn: this one KB report document (explicitly authorized by the Owner). Editorial revision: rev1. AgentData storage revision / content_length are authoritative at read time and are not pinned in the body.

STATUS: HOLD (before write). The read-only preflight executed cleanly — every required check ran, baseline captured, no drift, no ambiguity. "HOLD" here is the intended stop-before-write outcome, not a failure: the turn deliberately stops before any runtime write, and the Go/No-Go recommendation is do not proceed to the write-enabled build yet — resolve the gates first. Engineering reconstruction ≠ authority PASS. This report records evidence and a recommendation; it grants and executes nothing.

0. What this turn is — REQUEST / GRANT / EXECUTE separation

Carried verbatim-in-substance from the Macro-6 Owner Go/No-Go memo (read first-hand this turn) and re-checked against live runtime:

Stage Definition Authority Standing state (fresh)
REQUEST Assemble + present the complete, reviewable ask to build a disposable staging workbench Claude / GPT delegate COMPLETE — Macro-4 (workbench/IO/TD-entry-gate) + Macro-5 (110-file staging build authorization package), both Codex PASS_WITH_CAVEATS
GRANT Owner authorizes the build and resolves/delegates the coupled prerequisites (P1–P4) Owner only CONDITIONALLY STATED, NOT COMPLETE — Owner uttered a conditional grant for the workbench build in the Macro-7 prompt, but it resolves none of P2/P3/P4 and casts none of the M5 ballot. Per the chain's own rule a real GRANT is not given. Default: HOLD.
EXECUTE Write-enabled, staging-only build of the workbench, then delete-fast teardown ("Macro-7") future write-enabled run NOT STARTED — fresh check: 0 staging/workbench objects exist (no table, no schema). Not performed this turn (Owner chose preflight-then-stop).

This turn delivers the REQUEST-side re-verification only. It does not advance GRANT or EXECUTE.

1. Method (honoring the carried Codex process caveat)

  • All sources read directly from AgentData KB and live runtime by the main process — no reader-agents, no background/sub-agents, no local-prose inference, no trusting prior reports.
  • Runtime reads via query_pg (AST-validated READ ONLY role, read-only txn, statement_timeout 5s) and list_docker (read-only). KB reads via list_documents / batch_read. One oversized batch_read (75,537 chars) was decoded via main-process python char-slicing = decode-scratch only, never SSOT.
  • Zero mutating calls were issued against any database, schema, table, source file, law file, or prior report.

2. Fresh runtime baseline (2026-06-19, READ ONLY)

Substrate location confirmed this turn: the entire birth/governance substrate lives in the directus database, schema public (IU staging in schema iu_core). incomex_metadata and workflow hold none of these tables.

# Check Fresh value Note
A birth_registry total / certified / uncertified 1,213,412 / 1,402 / 1,212,010 last_born 2026-06-19 07:00:16Z; last_certified 2026-03-21 08:00:36Z (frozen)
B uncertified rows with inspect_pen/stamp/gate populated 0 all 1,402 inspect-marked rows are exactly the certified set → the B2 producer gap, fresh-confirmed
C governance_object_ownership rows 0 (0 active) GATE-5 / S2 owner unfilled
D universal_edges total / provenance-bearing 2,199 / 0 Điều 39 provenance gap (matches Codex Macro-5 "2,199 / 0-provenance")
E event_outbox rows 215,612 last 2026-06-19 07:00:16Z (= last birth → background flow)
F pg_cron extension ABSENT only pgcrypto 1.3 installed → no scheduler
G dot_agent_api_contract birth-bound 2 contracts, 0 birth-bound both KG-explain (DOT_KG_EXPLAIN producer/DRY_RUN; DOT_KG_EXPLAIN_VERIFY verifier/VERIFY_ONLY); GATE-4 channel unfilled
H wf_host_crontab_snapshot birth jobs 54 jobs, 0 birth-related last_observed 2026-06-19 02:10Z
I existing staging-like tables iu_core.iu_staging_payload, iu_core.iu_staging_record (+ 2 views) production IU staging — DO-NOT-TOUCH
J macro7 / r2_b2 / workbench object ABSENT no matching table in 120-row birth/staging scan; no matching schema (only information_schema, iu_core, public)
K docker services 11 containers Up postgres (2mo, healthy), agent-api-executor (:8090, healthy), agent-data (healthy), directus (healthy), qdrant/nuxt/nginx/kb/mcp/uptime-kuma + pg-restore-test

Direction-of-travel: uncertified grew +117 since the Macro-5 snapshot earlier today (1,213,295 → 1,213,412) while certified stays frozen at 1,402. The backlog is still growing and certification is still frozen since the 2026-03-21 one-shot bootstrap — the non-converging signal persists.

3. KB / source files read this turn (first-hand)

  • Macro-6: macro6-owner-go-no-go-memo-r2-b2-staging-workbench-2026-06-19.md (full) + reports/codex/codex-review-macro6-…-2026-06-19.md (full, PASS_WITH_CAVEATS).
  • Macro-5: reports/codex/codex-review-macro5-…-2026-06-19.md (full, PASS_WITH_CAVEATS); reports/macro5-…-execution-report-2026-06-19.md (full); macro5-build-preflight-final-go-no-go-2026-06-19.md (full, aggregate NO-GO); macro5-staging-build-authorization-ballot-2026-06-19.md (full, all defaults HOLD, none cast).
  • Macro-4: reports/codex/codex-review-macro4-…-2026-06-19.md (full, PASS_WITH_CAVEATS); reports/macro4-…-execution-report-2026-06-19.md (full, SB-1…SB-6 NO-GO, entry-gate v2 NO-GO, dot_config switches OFF).
  • Enumeration confirmed: full Macro-2…Macro-6 consolidation set + all Codex reviews (Macro-2…6) + execution reports (Macro-2…5) present in KB. No Macro-7 artifact exists prior to this report.

4. Production-untouched confirmation

Surface Action taken Proof
birth_registry (rows, certified, inspect_*, canonical_address, owner) read-only SELECT only zero write calls issued; certified frozen at 1,402 (2026-03-21)
governance_object_ownership read-only 0 rows (no row written)
universal_edges / KG read-only 2,199 / 0-prov (no edge/provenance written)
event_outbox, dot_agent_api_contract, wf_host_crontab_snapshot read-only counted only
iu_core.* production IU staging not touched only listed in catalog; never queried for data nor altered
source / law / prior-report files not patched only list_documents + read-only batch_read; one new report created (this file); no existing doc updated/patched
schema / DDL none query_pg is read-only-role + AST-validated; no CREATE/ALTER/DROP possible or attempted

All query_pg calls executed in a READ ONLY transaction as a read-only role. No DML/DDL was issued anywhere. Production is provably untouched; the only state change in the whole turn is the creation of this single KB report.

5. Staging / workbench absence confirmation

  • Table level: a 120-row scan of every birth% / staging% / r2_b2% / macro7% / workbench% / wb_2026% object in directus returned no workbench/macro7/r2_b2 object — only legitimate pre-existing birth_* tables/views and the iu_core.iu_staging_* IU surfaces.
  • Schema level: directus contains exactly 3 non-pg_* schemas — information_schema, iu_core, public. No disposable/staging/workbench schema exists.
  • Conclusion: EXECUTE has not started. The r2_b2_wb_20260619_* surface named in the Macro-7 spec does not exist. (Consistent with Macro-6's "0 staging objects" and Macro-5's "staging exists only if authorized".)

6. GATE-3 / GATE-4 / GATE-5 status (the prerequisites a real GRANT must resolve)

Grounded in the Macro-5 final preflight (PF-5…PF-8), Codex Macro-5/Macro-6, and re-verified against fresh runtime:

Gate Meaning Source verdict Fresh runtime corroboration Standing
GATE-3 Điều 0-G source authority (PEN/STAMP/GATE rule-set) adopted/recovered/patched PF-8 No-Go; Codex M5 "Remains OPEN/NO-GO; no Điều 0-G adoption/recovery/patch" no adoption artifact; B2 inspect path still unwired (0 uncert rows inspect-marked) OPEN
GATE-4 Channel authority selected (how B2 runs) PF-6 No-Go; Codex M6 "non-waivable" dot_agent_api_contract 0 birth-bound; host-cron 0 birth jobs; pg_cron absent OPEN — non-waivable
GATE-5 S2 producer-owner assigned PF-7 No-Go; Codex M6 "non-waivable" governance_object_ownership = 0 rows OPEN — non-waivable
(P1) Owner build-approval PF-5 No-Go (absent); M5-Q2 default HOLD, never cast — OPEN
(SB) Disposable-workbench build gate (SB-1…SB-6, Macro-4 D57) NO-GO (SB-4 isolation scheme undecided / M5-Q3 defer; SB-5 Owner build-auth absent; SB-6 verification harness future TD) no isolation scheme chosen; no build authorized NO-GO

The conditional grant in the Macro-7 prompt resolves none of GATE-3/4/5, casts none of the M5 ballot, and does not pick an isolation scheme — so the chain's own definition of a "real GRANT" is not met. PF-9 aggregate = NO-GO, unchanged.

7. Risk if proceeding to the write-enabled build now

  1. Same-cluster blast radius (structural). Any r2_b2_wb_* schema would be created inside the same directus Postgres database that holds production birth_registry, universal_edges, governance_object_ownership, and the iu_core IU staging. "Isolated / production-untouched" would be an asserted firewall, not an architecturally separate instance. A separate-DB option (M5-Q3 b) was never chosen (defaulted to defer).
  2. Authority risk — non-waivable gates open. GATE-4 and GATE-5 are explicitly non-waivable in the chain's own twice-Codex-accepted record. Building the workbench while they are open converts an engineering recommendation into a write ahead of the Owner acts that the delegate is forbidden to perform.
  3. Motion-without-progress / sprawl risk. The workbench shell wires no channel, assigns no owner, certifies nothing, copies no data — so it makes zero movement on the four real blockers (P1–P4) or the growing backlog (+117 today). It is the exact "add artifacts without changing the missing Owner decision" pattern Macro-6 was created to stop.
  4. Trigger/side-effect risk. The substrate carries many birth_* triggers/guards and auto-certify machinery; introducing new objects into public/a sibling schema in the live cluster is low- but non-zero-risk for unintended trigger interaction. Fail-closed is currently holding (dot_config switches OFF); a build turn must not perturb that.
  5. Transient-GUC uncertainty (carried caveat). app.birth_gate_mode live value remains unavailable via a safe read surface (CAV carried from Macro-5/6). A build turn cannot claim "no transient bypass" with certainty.

8. Go/No-Go recommendation

Recommendation: NO-GO to the write-enabled build now → HOLD and resolve the gates first.

This is not external caution overriding the Owner — it is what the Owner's own governance record (Macro-4/5/6, twice Codex-accepted) requires: a real GRANT resolves P2 channel (GATE-4) + P3 S2 owner (GATE-5) + P4 Điều 0-G (GATE-3), plus casts P1 and chooses an SB-4 isolation scheme. None are done.

  • Primary path — resolve gates first (recommended): Owner makes the three coupled decisions (channel / S2 owner / Điều 0-G), casts P1, and picks an isolation scheme. Then a narrowly-scoped Macro-7 write turn is genuinely granted and low-risk. This also produces real movement on the actual blockers.
  • Acceptable alternative — Owner-elected, tightly-scoped pre-positioning (the Owner's call, not recommended by default): If the Owner's goal is purely "LEGO speed — have the empty scratch surface ready," the Owner may explicitly authorize a build of one disposable, separate-schema, zero-data, delete-fast workbench shell — on the explicit, logged understanding that (a) it accepts the same-cluster blast-radius residual in §7.1, (b) it is pre-positioning, not progress — GATE-3/4/5 still block actual B2 TD, and (c) it runs as a fresh, separate write turn with before/after counts, never folded into a preflight. Even then, the actual B2 TD remains NO-GO.

I lean to the primary path: the thing blocking R2-B2 is three Owner decisions and a non-converging backlog, none of which a scratch schema advances.

9. Non-authorization locks (all held this turn)

  • production birth_registry write — NOT DONE
  • production inspect_pen/stamp/gate write — NOT DONE
  • certified=true / any certified change — NOT DONE (frozen 1,402)
  • canonical_address write — NOT DONE
  • KG / universal_edges / provenance write — NOT DONE (2,199 / 0-prov unchanged)
  • source / law / draft / prior-report patch — NOT DONE (one new report created; nothing existing modified)
  • governance_object_ownership row — NOT DONE (0 rows)
  • channel authority selection — NOT DONE
  • host-cron wiring / agent-api contract promotion/binding / pg_cron install / queue-worker enable — NOT DONE
  • B2 algorithm / actual B2 TD — NOT DONE
  • bad-input test / backlog processing / certification / promotion / runner-job-cron execution — NOT DONE
  • production schema alteration / staging schema-table-corpus creation / IU-staging mutation — NOT DONE
  • blocker false-resolution — NONE (CONS/CELL/HOLD-1/HOLD-2/RISK-BYPASS/GOV/Đ39/Đ35 all remain OPEN)

10. Carried caveats

  • CAV — transient GUC: app.birth_gate_mode live value unavailable via safe read surface; no "no transient bypass" certainty claimed.
  • CAV — same-cluster isolation: no separate-DB staging instance exists; any future workbench shares the directus cluster (§7.1).
  • CAV — inherited Đ0-G source gap: Điều 0-G rule-set source remains broken-ref/working-source (GATE-3 OPEN); not recovered or patched here.
  • CAV — non-converging chain: backlog growing (+117 today), certification frozen since 2026-03-21; a scratch workbench does not address this.

11. Next action

  1. GPT reviews this preflight report + the fresh runtime baseline.
  2. Codex adversarial review if desired.
  3. Owner decides the §8 fork: (a) resolve GATE-3/4/5 + P1 + SB-4 first (recommended), or (b) explicitly, in a logged separate write turn, authorize the tightly-scoped disposable shell as pre-positioning only — or (c) explicit HOLD-with-revisit.
  4. No B2 logic, no actual B2 TD, no bad-input test, no backlog processing until separately and explicitly authorized.

STATUS: HOLD (preflight complete, clean, no drift; write NOT recommended until gates resolved). Engineering reconstruction ≠ authority PASS. Default HOLD.

Back to Knowledge Hub knowledge/dev/laws-new/newlaws/reports/macro7-r2-b2-preflight-before-write-hold-report-2026-06-19.md