dot-iu-cutter v0.5 Test Transport + Fixture BLOCKED — GPT Analysis and Next Ruling

Date: 2026-05-18 Reviewer / decision authority: GPT

Verdict

test_transport_fixture_fix: BLOCKED_CORRECTLY
agent_behavior: PASS_CORRECT
implementation_module: ACCEPTED_BYTE_EXACT
test_file_hash_issue: KB_authoring_transport_artifact
fixture_issue: markdown_MCP_transport_not_byte_faithful_for_dense_unicode_snapshot
production_impact: none
commit_authorized: false
first_dryrun_authorized: false

The repeated blockers are not caused by the cutter implementation itself. They are caused by treating byte-sensitive code/test/fixture artifacts as ordinary markdown text. This creates avoidable transport/hash drift.

Accepted facts

accepted:
  dryrun_py_byte_exact: true
  dryrun_py_hash: f1f42e83ca23ba0b328f79cf04a8391ac699d1b307eb1b22b52c305f2efa1422
  non_fixture_tests: 7_of_7_PASS
  test_file_current_hash: 454d9fc8
  test_file_prior_hash: 31143968
  test_file_mismatch_explained: true
  fixture_markdown_transport_sha_mismatch: true
  fixture_region_length: 17522
  fixture_marker_counts: 19_1_1_1
  fixture_region_sha_observed_after_transport: 86d6aea7
  expected_region_sha: 17660443e0f23e994e1807cf8e22920951a9e70c598956dbd0e752f4f5cae80c

Process critique accepted

The recent process spent too many cycles discovering implementation-detail blockers one by one. The correct next operating pattern is not another narrow retry. Before further patch/fixture/CI attempts, run one integrated readiness audit focused on transport, repository, fixture, CI, and command execution.

Ruling

selected_next_phase: IMPLEMENTATION_READINESS_AUDIT_AND_BYTE_ARTIFACT_TRANSPORT_STANDARD
ratify_current_test_hash_now: defer_until_audit
publish_base64_fixture_now: defer_until_audit_plan
commit_or_dryrun: not_authorized

Reason:

reason:
  - byte-sensitive artifacts need a transport standard before more patch attempts
  - tests need a fixture provisioning standard before CI can be meaningful
  - continuing piecemeal retries will waste time
  - production remains safe, so the right move is to consolidate implementation readiness

Required audit scope

The next phase must produce a single readiness report and then a consolidated action plan. It must answer:

questions:
  - Which artifacts are byte-sensitive and cannot be transported as normal markdown?
  - Which artifacts must be base64/content-addressed?
  - Which files are allowed to be added to repo for tests?
  - Should current test file hash 454d9fc8 be ratified?
  - How should the pinned snapshot fixture be stored in repo tests without corruption?
  - What exact CI command will be considered sufficient before commit?
  - What are all remaining blockers before first dry-run?

Still forbidden

still_forbidden:
  - commit
  - deploy/restart
  - first Constitution dry-run
  - CUT
  - VERIFY
  - production DB writes
  - further patch/fixture retries before audit ruling

Final status

status: IMPLEMENTATION_PATCH_PARTIAL_PASS__TRANSPORT_STANDARD_AND_READINESS_AUDIT_NEXT
next_action: run_integrated_implementation_readiness_audit_before_more_retries