---

title: 02 — Approval Artifact Scan + Ratification Packet date: 2026-05-31 verdict: NO_APPROVAL_FOUND → COMMIT_FORBIDDEN_NO_APPROVAL

02 — Approval Artifact Scan + Ratification Packet (Branch A)

Classification: NO_APPROVAL_FOUND (definitive, re-verified live)

No valid human / council / sovereign artifact authorizes RG1 (Master Design ratification), RG2 (count-integrity / leaf-set acceptance), the six-object commit, the no-hardcode / pivot-only constraints as accepted, or rollback authority. Confirmed by three independent channels, re-queried at run time (not relied on from memory):

channel	what was checked	result
live PG approval_requests	25 rows matching registr/pivot/leaf/foundation/RG/approved; max id 234	none in scope. Only human review = id 211 president (2026-04-19) for S178-Fix18 admin_fallback_log — unrelated. id 234 = system_auto_approve (machine). All 16 registry rows = birth_orphan auto-applied by orchestrator-s142b/auto-apply-function (machine, reviewed_at NULL)
live PG apr_approvals	rows since 2026-05-01 or mentioning registr/pivot/foundation/six/leaf	0 rows
live PG os_proposal_approvals	e-signature collection (signature_text, name, org, esignature_agreement)	0 rows total — table never used; no sovereign sign-off exists
live PG workflow_change_requests	approved / registr / pivot	0 rows
KB / Agent Data	search for ratification/approval/outcome doc	no outcome doc; prior packages explicitly carry approval_artifact_found: NO
memory	prior 5 sessions	NO_APPROVAL_FOUND definitive

Why the machine "approvals" are invalid (Điều 32)

system_auto_approve, orchestrator-s142b, auto-apply-function are agent/orchestrator identities. Điều 32 forbids self/auto-approval standing in for human/council authority. The one human approval on record (president, id 211) is out of scope (S178 DOT fix, not registries-pivot foundation).

Did the mission prompt itself carry approval wording?

No. The Macro-1 prompt is a conditional mission spec ("If COMMIT_ALLOWED … If COMMIT_FORBIDDEN …"). It contains no sovereign sign-off sentence naming RG1+RG2 and the six objects. → not treated as candidate approval.

Decision: COMMIT_FORBIDDEN_NO_APPROVAL. Do not commit. Defer; keep SQL hot.

---

Ratification Packet (for the human/council — agent records, never signs)

A. The decision being asked

Ratify RG1 (Registries-Pivot Master Design v0.1) and RG2 (the leaf-scoped count-integrity model) and authorize the six-object read-only foundation commit, under the no-hardcode / pivot-only constraints, with rollback authority.

B. Exact scope to authorize

1. RG1 — accept Master Design v0.1 (knowledge/dev/design/registries-pivot-os-agency/).
2. RG2 — accept that the accounting universe is the leaf set (160 rows; composition_level<>'meta' AND entity_type NOT LIKE '%_total' AND entity_type<>'all'), that count_integrity_status = FAILED is the honest live state (3 drift + 5 unmeasured, not a defect to paper over), and that phantom is a LAW_DEFINITION_GAP deferred to RG4.
3. Six objects (read-only views + 1 STABLE fn, no base-table change): v_registry_leaf_set, v_count_integrity, v_count_drift, v_living_lists, v_registries_pivot_tree, fn_registries_pivot_node_substrate.
4. Constraints accepted: every count pivot-backed or explicitly PIVOT_MISSING; no frontend count logic; scalar-EXISTS (never fan-out join).
5. Rollback authority: 999_rollback.sql (drops the 6 objects; removes no data).

C. Risks (all LOW)

• Pure read-layer over existing tables; drop = zero data loss.
• Invariant closes exactly (leaf_gap 5,347 == drift_gap 5,347) — no double-count.
• count_integrity_status will read FAILED by design (honest), not OK.
• net_gap is a live moving target (CAT-023 birth race); reviewers must judge the shape (3 small drifts + 5 unmeasured), not the absolute number.

D. What stays deferred even after RG1+RG2

• Missing-pivot commit (PIV-500/301/302/303/311) — needs its own gate (doc 04).
• parent_code commit (drilldown) — needs its own gate (doc 05).
• registry_pin / display_policy / phantom-law / Directus exposure — Macro 2 (doc 07).

E. Exact approval wording for the next terminal command

The signer pastes one of the following as the first line of the next session so the agent can record it (verbatim) and verify scope:

APPROVE RG1+RG2 + SIX-OBJECT FOUNDATION COMMIT.
Signer: <name>, <role/council seat>.  Date: <YYYY-MM-DD>.
Scope: ratify Master Design v0.1 (RG1) and leaf-scoped count-integrity model (RG2);
authorize CREATE of v_registry_leaf_set, v_count_integrity, v_count_drift,
v_living_lists, v_registries_pivot_tree, fn_registries_pivot_node_substrate
(read-only layer, scalar-EXISTS, no base-table change).
Constraints: counts pivot-backed or PIVOT_MISSING; no frontend count logic.
Rollback authority: 999_rollback.sql. This is a human/council decision, not agent self-approval.

On receiving it, the agent must: (1) write it to approval_requests (or apr_approvals) as the recorded artifact; (2) re-run the BEGIN..ROLLBACK rehearsal; (3) commit the six objects in ONE transaction off-peak; (4) verify; (5) keep 999_rollback.sql ready.

The agent records and verifies. It never signs. (Điều 32)