<!-- DOC_STATUS: ACTIVE_NON_AUTHORITY -->

Codex Blocked-Review Diagnosis — FIX7 P0 Dry-Run / Execution-Readiness

• Authority: EVIDENCE_BUNDLE_NON_AUTHORITY. Diagnosis only; authorizes nothing; mutates no production.
• Host: T1 / CLAUDE CODE / MYTHOS · Date: 2026-06-11
• Codex re-asked in this macro: NO (forbidden by macro §4).

1. What Codex returned

Codex returned the final status:

CODEX_FIX7_P0_DRYRUN_EXECUTION_READINESS_REVIEW_BLOCKED

Per the user-provided macro framing: Codex did NOT reject T1 dry-run content. Codex was blocked because the planning packet, dry-run packet, TKT Base / T2 governance files, and/or the KB listing were missing from its review workspace or inaccessible due to an MCP handshake timeout. This is an evidence-access failure, not a content/quality failure.

2. Were the Codex blocked-review artifacts found in KB?

No. All three macro-listed Codex blocked-review paths returned not_found from the Incomex KB on 2026-06-11:

path	KB result	classification
knowledge/current-state/reports/fix7-codex-p0-dryrun-execution-readiness-review-2026-06-11.md	not_found	CODEX_BLOCKED_REVIEW_ARTIFACT_NOT_FOUND_IN_KB
knowledge/dev/reports/architecture/checkpoint-codex-fix7-p0-dryrun-execution-readiness-review-2026-06-11.md	not_found	CODEX_BLOCKED_REVIEW_ARTIFACT_NOT_FOUND_IN_KB
knowledge/dev/reports/architecture/codex-fix7-p0-dryrun-execution-readiness-review-2026-06-11/00-readme-first.md	not_found	CODEX_BLOCKED_REVIEW_ARTIFACT_NOT_FOUND_IN_KB

A semantic search for "Codex FIX7 P0 dry-run execution-readiness review blocked" surfaced no such Codex review document. These artifacts were not fabricated (macro §5). Their absence is consistent with the root cause: the review was blocked before any review output could be authored or published.

3. Root-cause classification

CODEX_REVIEW_WORKSPACE_EVIDENCE_ACCESS_FAILURE — the inputs Codex needed were not discoverable or not reachable from Codex's review workspace at review time. Contributing factors named by the user: (a) missing workspace artifacts (packets not present in the workspace Codex was given), and (b) MCP handshake timeout (KB listing/fetch unavailable during the review window).

This is not:

• a rejection of the dry-run result (READY_FOR_OWNER_EXECUTION_REVIEW stands, unaltered);
• an engineering defect in the packets (all packet trees recompute byte-exact — see EXPECTED_HASHES_AND_TREES.json);
• a governance/authority defect.

4. Is the underlying evidence actually present and intact in KB?

Yes. During this macro every required review input was located and read from KB, and every packet tree and the N7/N8/P7 digests were re-verified byte-exact:

• Dry-run + execution-readiness packet (21 files): tree 02b200e5…94e6 — recompute PASS.
• Implementation-planning packet (16 files): tree f470d0d0…0fe8f — recompute PASS.
• Codex authority seal (19 files): tree 3890cd34…12a234; N7 efb0c574…1853d32, N8 daa70c39…6117e1a1, P7 9ddb27c3…034550 — all PASS.
• TKT Base pack (30 files) + T2 support files — present and readable.
• All 12 standalone dry-run reports + planning/seal/base checkpoints and current-states — present and readable.

So the block was an access/handshake problem on Codex's side, not a data problem. The fix is to hand Codex a single discoverable root with explicit pointers, hashes, and read order — which is exactly this bundle.

5. What this bundle does to unblock the re-run

1. Gives Codex one root (fix7-p0-codex-review-evidence-bundle-2026-06-11/) from which every required artifact is discoverable.
2. Lists exactly which paths to read, required vs optional, in EVIDENCE_PATH_MAP.json and REQUIRED_READ_ORDER.md.
3. Pins every expected tree and digest in EXPECTED_HASHES_AND_TREES.json so Codex can verify byte-exactness independently of the handshake timing.
4. Provides reconstruction commands (RECONSTRUCTION_COMMANDS.md, commands.sh, RERUN.sh) that fetch-and-verify from KB without depending on a pre-populated workspace.
5. Records honestly which paths are missing and why (MISSING_OR_UNREADABLE_PATHS.json) — only the blocked-review OUTPUT, never an input.

6. What Codex should review next (re-run scope)

Re-run the independent execution-readiness review of READY_FOR_OWNER_EXECUTION_REVIEW over the G2/G3/G4/G5 evidence using TKT_OUTPUT_LEVEL_POLICY.md (L0–L3 ceiling) and the T2 review template. This macro does not ask Codex again — routing the re-run is the owner's action (see the bundle report's "Minimal next macro").

7. Boundary

No production mutation. No implementation execution. No REAL_RUN/QT001/apply/permit/activation/ repoint/cutover. N7/N8/P7 unchanged. Dry-run verdicts unchanged. Registry/index not folded.