15 — Self-Review & Acceptance

15.1 Acceptance criteria (mission §13) — checked

#	Criterion	Verdict	Evidence
1	Package created with all 16 docs	PASS	00–15 all created (revision 1) under the package path
2	Single read-me-first implementation index	PASS	doc 00 — rule, gates, read order, allowed/forbidden, conflict order, stale-input, copy-paste preamble
3	Source map separates current vs reference vs superseded	PASS	doc 02 — 7-class legend + per-source table (current/concept-canon/technical-ref/historical-ref/superseded/do-not-use/blocker-source)
4	Blockers precise and gate future work	PASS	doc 03 — SB-1/2/3, OP-B, C-1..C-6, L-1/2/3, SB-4..9, H-1/2 each with status/blocks/owner/next-macro/acceptance/design-now/implement-now + gate table §3.5
5	Implementation tracks clear	PASS	doc 04 — T0–T11 with prerequisite/allowed/forbidden/expected-docs/PASS + dependency graph
6	All technical-addendum scaffold docs exist	PASS	docs 05–12 (SB-1, SB-2, SB-3, scanner, event, render, Registries-Pivot, IU), each following the §10 template, no SQL/DOT code
7	Short handoff exists	PASS	doc 13 — savable one-screen recap
8	Next prompts paste-ready + state-recover from this package	PASS	doc 14 — 14 prompts, shared state-recovery header from doc 00 §0.10
9	No implementation occurred	PASS	only KB documents written; scaffolds are framing, not design
10	No unsafe mutation occurred	PASS	KB document create only; zero PG/Directus/Qdrant/Nuxt/schema/DOT/law/approval mutation

15.2 Forbidden-compliance (mission §14) — attested

• PG / Directus / Qdrant / Nuxt mutation — none.
• Schema/table/view/function creation — none.
• DOT registration/implementation — none.
• Event/job/notification emit — none.
• Law enactment / version bump / status change — none.
• normative_registry / law_catalog / governance_docs write — none.
• Approval creation / self-approval — none.
• Technical implementation disguised as scaffold — none (scaffolds contain no DDL/SQL/DOT/handler code; each is framing + acceptance criteria + pointers).
• Stale-doc implementation — none (this package explicitly classifies and quarantines stale input, doc 02).
• Hardcode — none (no code produced; the no-hardcode rule is carried into every scaffold's constraints).
• Hidden local governance island — none (this package references the concept canon and Điều 37 hub; doc 00 §0.6 and every scaffold forbid a second roof). This package is a control document, not a governance authority — it adds no governance rules of its own.

15.3 State-recovery confidence

• Read in full / verified: concept-canon doc 00 + 03; Round-4 law-hardening doc 02 + 11 + 12; patch-canonical doc 01 + 05 + 07. Confirmed existence of the GPT review, IU foundation doc, and house law. Listing confirmed all four controlling packages and the empty target package.
• The blocker register (doc 03) is transcribed verbatim-faithful from concept-canon doc 03 and Round-4 doc 11 §11.4. No blocker was invented, downgraded, or marked solved.

15.4 Known weaknesses / honest caveats

1. Live-PG counts are second-hand. The substrate facts (action-types=6, CHECK ∈ {law,agency}, envelope 3 axes, 219 IUs, template_gap=182,378, etc.) are carried from the Round-4 read-only snapshot, not re-queried this session — a control package does not need fresh evidence, but each design track (T3–T10) must re-verify read-only before relying on them. This is stated in doc 03's header.
2. Scaffolds are intentionally thin. They frame, they do not design. Anyone wanting the actual contract must run the corresponding prompt (doc 14) — the scaffold is not a substitute. This is by mandate (no implementation), but a reader expecting design will find pointers, not answers.
3. Concept-canon edits are out of scope here. If a future critique (Prompt 1) finds a concept defect, the fix is a concept-patch macro on knowledge/dev/design/one-roof-governance-concepts/, not an implementation track — this package treats the canon as read-only. Stated in doc 00 §0.7.
4. The package's own authority depends on adoption. It only works if future agents actually start here. The mandatory-read rule (doc 00 §0.1) and the copy-paste preamble (§0.10) are the mitigation; the standing risk is a future agent that ignores the index. Recommend the index be referenced from the concept-canon doc 00 and from any future prompt header.
5. No MEMORY.md pointer written. Per the no-mutation envelope this session wrote only KB docs; a memory pointer can be added separately if the user wants this package indexed in auto-memory.

15.5 Verdict

PASS. The implementation-control package is complete (16 docs), gives future agents a single mandatory entrypoint, separates current/reference/superseded sources, gates all future work behind a precise blocker register, maps tracks T0–T11, scaffolds all eight technical addenda without designing them, and ships a savable handoff plus 14 state-recovering prompts. No implementation and no unsafe mutation occurred.

Next allowed macro: doc 14 Prompt 1 (external critique of this index) ∥ Prompt 2 (council adjudication) ∥ Prompt 3 (OP-B packet) ∥ Prompt 4 (content-only law cleanup). Build (T11) remains NO-GO until every gate in doc 03 §3.5 is cleared by a recorded council/human ruling.