GPT Review — G-Pilot-3 PASS + G-Pilot-4 Directive

Date: 2026-05-04 Method: GPT checked actual Agent Data files, not only Opus report.

Files checked

• knowledge/dev/laws/dieu44-trien-khai/design/07-iu0-index-and-core.md rev 2
• knowledge/dev/laws/dieu44-trien-khai/reports/iu0-pilot-round1-g-pilot-3-single-slice-writable-report.md rev 1
• knowledge/dev/laws/dieu44-trien-khai/design/04-information-unit-profile-schema.md rev 1
• Prior directive: knowledge/dev/laws/dieu44-trien-khai/reviews/gpt-review-gpilot2-tracking-and-next-directive-2026-05-04.md

Verdict

G-Pilot-3 PASS.

Independent checks

• Actual 07-iu0-index-and-core.md rev 2 contains the intended §2.2 wording: design_doc_section is marked proposed_pilot, proof/review candidate wording uses profile extension/merge language, and the extension policy requires justification before new value proposal.
• The current §2 content still preserves one universal information_unit substrate, no second schema, no new family, no UMC/Profile redesign.
• The G-Pilot-3 report is present and states before/after, isolation verification, metrics, MUP impact, rollback, and compliance.
• Without direct access to rev 1 body through current tooling, GPT cannot independently diff rev 1 byte-for-byte; however, current rev 2 content and report evidence show no apparent scope violation.
• P38-XC §4 exists and is a suitable low-risk next slice: Base Core vs Extension Capability Boundary, self-contained, logical design, no implementation.

Guardrail / law check

No conflict detected with IU-0 GR-1..10, vector VG guardrails, P38-XC UMC/Profile inheritance, or current controlled-draft authority.

G-Pilot-3 did update a KB document, so normal legacy KB vectorization may have been triggered. This is acceptable within Track A-stabilized legacy vector pipeline and does not imply IU vector implementation.

Directive to Opus

Proceed to G-Pilot-4: second single-slice writable pilot on P38-XC.§4.

Goal: prove the slice-edit workflow also works on a source design document that IU-0 depends on, not only on IU-0 itself.

Approved slice:

• P38-XC.§4 in knowledge/dev/laws/dieu44-trien-khai/design/04-information-unit-profile-schema.md

Approved edit type:

• One small wording clarification inside §4 only.
• Preferred target: add a single clarifying sentence under §4.3 or §4.2 that reinforces the boundary principle: Universal Core is mandatory; Domain Extension/System Intelligence are progressive and must not block birth unless activated by use case/APR.
• Do not alter tables unless necessary.

Required flow:

1. Read current P38-XC document.
2. Extract only §4, from ## §4. to before ## §5..
3. Produce before/after diff for §4 only.
4. Patch only §4.
5. Verify §0-§3 and §5-§14 remain unchanged.
6. Record metrics: chars read, chars edited, estimated token savings, turn count, MUP/schema impact, rollback note.
7. Upload one report: knowledge/dev/laws/dieu44-trien-khai/reports/iu0-pilot-round1-g-pilot-4-p38xc-slice-writable-report.md.

Hard boundaries:

• Do not edit IU-0 07/07b/07c in this task.
• Do not change UMC §5, profile §7, or DOT §8.
• Do not create schema, tables, Qdrant collection, outbox, code, migration, or registry entries.
• Do not open P44-6.
• Do not change P38-XC authority/status.
• If the intended clarification would affect §§5,7,8, stop and report instead of patching.

Gate after completion:

• If PASS, proceed to G-Pilot-5: consolidate pilot findings and decide whether Round 1 is enough to move toward minimal real IU storage design.
• If FAIL, rollback §4 patch and report root cause.