10 - Cross-Layer Boundary Self-Review (recheck-6)

Confirms the recheck-6 patch touched only the construction-document content-addressing layer and left every hard boundary intact.

Invariants (unchanged)

AUTHORITY_SURFACES            = 27   (no surface added; envelope/extractor/DAG are construction-doc, not runtime)
RUNTIME_EVIDENCE_TABLES       = 11   (non-authority; unchanged)
NEW_READINESS_GATES           = 0    (the 4 new guards are TEST/VERIFICATION, not gate DATA rows)
NEW_TOP_LEVEL_HASH_CONTRACTS  = 0    (H01..H07 stay 7; FIX7-CANON-V1 + seal graph are build-time integrity)
PRODUCTION_MUTATION           = 0

Accepted items NOT reopened

Full-path membership hash f2bda8…fe251; doc-00 self-reference resolution (Option 1); blueprint-checkpoint NON_AUTHORITY_INDEX (REPORT_ONLY); invariants/boundary; PG-first + typed-set separation (U_legacy_object / U_effective_privilege_principal / U_entry_vector). None were edited except where recheck-6 strictly required (the cycle removal + byte-exactness), and those edits are additive.

Hard blocks (all still BLOCKED)

Implementation; Stage 2.6B; qt001_backfill_permit; REAL_RUN; QT001 apply; manifest activation; repoint; owner/ACL cutover. The package split (PKG-A..I, doc 07) is unchanged except that PKG-A's preconditions now also require the four new guards green and PKG-I validates "all 58". No package was unblocked.

Layer check

layer	touched this pass?
runtime schema / surfaces / gates / hash contracts	no
legacy set model / disposition	no (Option Beta + recheck-3 separation intact)
construction-document content-addressing (FIX7-CANON-V1, envelope, extractor, record/key schema, seal graph)	yes (the entire recheck-6 scope)
guards (doc 06)	yes (+4 TEST/VERIFICATION guards, rule 11)

Law boundary (prompt-muc-tieu-mo-for-claude-code.md)

No governance_change performed; no DDL/DML; no production mutation; AUTHOR_MODE_ONLY blueprint revision. The seal itself is performed by Codex at recheck 7 (not by T1). Verdict: RECHECK6_CROSS_LAYER_SELF_REVIEW_PASS.