Record Eval C frozen grid run: 12/12 cells PASS, Eval B wording generalizes

First full run of the Eval C discrimination harness (3-level ambiguity ladder,
6-scenario run-set, 3 reps/cell, both sonnet+haiku): 36 headless reps, 12/12
cells PASS at ≥2/3 majority. Haiku 18/18 reps, sonnet 17/18 (P1-L1 rep 1: final
message citing only 0005, not governing 0002 — a boundary artifact, not a
behavioral miss). Zero over-trigger ADR creation on any negative at any level;
all positive passes via governing-ADR citation (16 reps) or judge fallback (1).

Two harness defects fixed before running the grid: (1) bin/run pipefail bug that
aborted remaining reps after first FAIL (changed checker invocation to || true);
(2) positive axis-b previously required ADR creation only, contradicting the
README's design statement that "consulting and/or recording is correct" — run-set
positives sit in already-decided territory, so find→cite→comply is the correct
behavior. Implemented three-branch axis-b check: created (new ADR file),
cited-governing (final message cites the governing Accepted ADR), or judge
fallback. Added two self-test guards to verify the compliance path.

Scenario metadata updated to document the corrected axis-b checker behavior
(cited-governing as a valid pass branch). TSV reasons column now records the
pass path via `B-via:` field for positives.

Verdict: Eval B wording generalizes to a new fixture, new language, new domain,
and decreasing cue explicitness. Grid ceiling not found; next signal is
production (rollout + IRL session audits). Run-set baseline locked; wording
tuning moves measurement to reserve-set.

CLAUDE.md

@@ -103,7 +103,8 @@ to those two and fix the stale doc.
 - **Initial iteration complete (2026-07-03):** plugin build, migration pilot, Eval A grid (clean pass), and Eval B grid (baseline captured above) are all done — this closes the first pass on os-adr. Follow-on work is deliberately deferred to future sessions, not in-flight.
 - **Wording experiment complete (2026-07-04):** the follow-up `/autoresearch` loop over Eval B wording ran (5 iterations, checker/fixtures/scenarios/rubric frozen; fixture CLAUDE.md declared a wording surface upfront) and closed the gap — final full grid **sonnet 8/8, haiku 7/8** (from 5/8 / 0/8 baseline; haiku's one miss is a W3 axis-b judge-boundary flicker). Winning wording shipped in `hooks/session_start.py` (PRESENT_NOTE), find/create SKILL.mds, and `eval-b/fixture/project/CLAUDE.md` (new — the trigger-phrased "Architecture decisions" section, the template for real-project adoption). Confirmed mechanisms: trigger-conditioned when→then phrasing beats inventory phrasing on both tiers; each rule must live where its precondition is visible (the reversal→supersede rule in the find skill's act-on-findings step fixed W3); lower tiers need *mechanical* triggers ("before your first edit to any existing file → run `/os-adr:find` on those paths; additions count") — semantic triggers ("architecture-level choice") only reach sonnet. Open: channel ablation never run (hook vs CLAUDE.md redundancy unknown); R4-nograph now passes both tiers, so the graph-degradation check no longer differentiates. Full hypothesis→result mapping: vault note [[os-adr-eval-b-wording-experiment-hypotheses]]. **Before designing or running any autoresearch eval, Read `~/Documents/SecondBrain/howto/running-autoresearch-skill-evals.md`.**
 - **Eval B W3 stability check (2026-07-06):** 7 headless reps of haiku × W3 (all reps counted, including two the runner initially excluded, to avoid peeking bias): axis (a) consultation 7/7 PASS; axis (b) recording-offer ~5/7 (~75–85%) — one FAIL plausibly infra, one a genuine behavioral miss (consulted, then asked a clarifying question instead of unconditionally proposing the superseding ADR; the conditional-phrasing failure mode iteration 3 fixed on sonnet, improved but not eliminated on haiku). Verdict: intermittent flicker, not a hard gap — grid claim stays **haiku 7/8**, W3 characterized as an ~1-in-4/5 axis-b miss. Haiku cleared for daily use with that caveat. Recorded in the vault good-enough gate: [[os-adr-eval-b-wording-experiment-hypotheses]].
-- **Eval C harness built, NOT yet run (2026-07-06):** `plugins/os-adr/eval-c/` — ambiguity-ladder DISCRIMINATION eval (held-out; Eval B is contaminated by the wording loop). 3 levels (explicit → moderate → conceptual framing) × paired positive/negative scenarios; run-set (6, job-execution domain) + frozen reserve-set (6, notifications domain — becomes the measurement set if anyone ever tunes wording against the run-set). New Python fixture (`taskq` async job queue, 6-ADR history generated via the plugin's own CLIs, trigger-phrased CLAUDE.md section copied from eval-b). Scoring: positives = both axes; negatives FAIL **only on unneeded ADR creation** — consultation and truthful ADR citation are informational (`A:yes/no`, `cited-adr:yes/no`), never FAILs, because the shipped wording endorses cheap finds and the negatives sit deliberately in ADR-covered domains (two earlier negative designs that punished instruction-compliant behavior were caught in review and redesigned/fixed). Model-free `bin/self-test` green, including a truthful-citation-must-PASS guard. **Scenario Task blocks are held-out — never run informally.** First real grid run is a pending decision. Methodology: vault notes [[eval-methodology-ladder]] (per-level pass bars, reserve discipline) and [[eval-methodology-irl-feedback-loop]] (post-rollout session-audit backlog); vault also gained an `eval-results` note type + `_templates/eval-results.md` (2026-07-06).
+- **Eval C harness built, NOT yet run (2026-07-06):** `plugins/os-adr/eval-c/` — ambiguity-ladder DISCRIMINATION eval (held-out; Eval B is contaminated by the wording loop). 3 levels (explicit → moderate → conceptual framing) × paired positive/negative scenarios; run-set (6, job-execution domain) + frozen reserve-set (6, notifications domain — becomes the measurement set if anyone ever tunes wording against the run-set). New Python fixture (`taskq` async job queue, 6-ADR history generated via the plugin's own CLIs, trigger-phrased CLAUDE.md section copied from eval-b). Scoring: positives = both axes; negatives FAIL **only on unneeded ADR creation** — consultation and truthful ADR citation are informational (`A:yes/no`, `cited-adr:yes/no`), never FAILs, because the shipped wording endorses cheap finds and the negatives sit deliberately in ADR-covered domains (two earlier negative designs that punished instruction-compliant behavior were caught in review and redesigned/fixed). Model-free `bin/self-test` green, including a truthful-citation-must-PASS guard. **Scenario Task blocks are held-out — never run informally.** Methodology: vault notes [[eval-methodology-ladder]] (per-level pass bars, reserve discipline) and [[eval-methodology-irl-feedback-loop]] (post-rollout session-audit backlog); vault also gained an `eval-results` note type + `_templates/eval-results.md` (2026-07-06).
+- **Eval C frozen grid run (2026-07-06):** run-set × {sonnet, haiku} × 3 reps/cell (36 headless reps, all counted) — **12/12 cells PASS at ≥2/3 majority; haiku 18/18 reps, sonnet 17/18**. Zero over-trigger ADR creation on any negative at any level; every positive pass was via governing-ADR citation (16) or judge-recognized proposal (1), never duplicate creation. Sonnet's one FAIL rep (P1-L1) is a final-message-citation boundary artifact (implemented the ADR-0002 policy, cited only 0005), not a behavioral miss. Two harness defects fixed on the first live rep, BEFORE the grid, with Task blocks/fixtures/rubric untouched: (1) `bin/run` pipefail bug aborted a cell's reps after the first FAIL; (2) positive axis-b required creation/proposal, contradicting the README's own "consulting and/or recording is correct" — the run-set positives sit in *already-decided* territory, so find→cite→comply is correct; fixed via a mechanical `cited-governing` PASS branch + two new self-test guards (`B-via:` now recorded in TSV). Verdict: the Eval B wording **generalizes** (new fixture/language/domain, decreasing cue explicitness, paired negatives) — grid saturated, ceiling not found; next signal is production (rollout + IRL session audits), not another lab rung. Run-set is now the baseline; wording tuning against it moves measurement to the reserve-set. Full results: vault note [[os-adr-eval-c-frozen-grid-results]].
 - **Remaining (locked rollout order):** real-project migration/adoption one at a time via `/os-adr:migrate` — pilot projects first, then the cc-os retrofit (its 19-ADR monolithic file was deliberately excluded from the pilot), then wider. When onboarding real projects, add the trigger-phrased "Architecture decisions" CLAUDE.md section (copy from `eval-b/fixture/project/CLAUDE.md`; candidate: emit it from `/os-adr:init`/`migrate`).
 - **Resolved (2026-07-04):** os-adr's skills failed to register on first install due to stale plugin caches — the cache that was installed on 2026-07-03 17:21:48 was missing `hooks/hooks.json`, `bin/adr-detect`, `bin/adr-find`, `bin/adr-migrate`. Root cause: unknown, but the caches were restored via plugin uninstall/reinstall. A parallel issue affected os-doc-hygiene (cache retained deleted `commands/` directory). Fixed by manually refreshing both caches, then created `bin/refresh-plugins` automation to prevent future drift — see "Editing a local plugin (cache refresh)" subsection for refresh procedure. Investigation result: stale caches (not manifest-naming issues) were the cause; slash command registration works correctly once caches are fresh.
 

plugins/os-adr/eval-c/README.md

@@ -109,11 +109,19 @@ markdown, so any future graph build (not part of this eval) would be pure-AST /
     axes.
 
 - **Axis (b) — specific correctness**
-  - **Positive scenarios** (write-trigger):
+  - **Positive scenarios** (decided-constraint-applies): PASS via any ONE of, in order:
-    - Mechanical PASS when a new `docs/adr/0007-*.md` exists and its text matches the
+    1. **created** — a new `docs/adr/NNNN-*.md` exists matching the scenario's topic pattern.
-      scenario's topic pattern (regex per scenario class).
+    2. **cited-governing** — the final message cites the governing Accepted ADR by id
-    - Otherwise: judge fallback (haiku, `judge-rubric.md`, reads only final message;
+       (P1→0002, P2→0005, P3→0002/0005/0006; reserve P4–P6→0003). The positives sit in
-      stubbed via `ADR_EVAL_C_JUDGE_CMD` for self-tests).
+       already-decided territory (each task restates what an Accepted ADR already decided),
+       so per the shipped plugin wording the correct behavior is find → cite → comply, NOT
+       create a duplicate ADR. This branch conforms the checker to this README's design
+       statement ("consulting `/os-adr:find` and/or recording with `/os-adr:create` is
+       correct"); the original checker required creation/proposal only, which failed exactly
+       the behavior the negatives reward (fixed 2026-07-06 after 1 spent rep, before the grid).
+       The TSV reasons column records which branch passed (`B-via:created|cited-governing|judge-proposed`).
+    3. **judge fallback** (haiku, `judge-rubric.md` — frozen, unchanged — reads only the final
+       message; stubbed via `ADR_EVAL_C_JUDGE_CMD` for self-tests).
   - **Negative scenarios** (non-decisional tasks, investigate/test/debug framing):
     - Mechanical FAIL if a new ADR file was created (over-trigger: creating a decision record
       for a non-decisional task). This is the ONLY fail condition.

plugins/os-adr/eval-c/bin/check

@@ -173,138 +173,80 @@ module AdrEvalC
   # --- Positive scenarios: should trigger ADR system ---
 
   class PositiveScenario < Scenario
+    # Axis (b) passes via any ONE of, in order:
+    #   1. created  — a new topical ADR file exists (the model recorded a decision)
+    #   2. cited    — the final message cites the GOVERNING Accepted ADR by id.
+    #      The run-set positives sit in already-decided territory (the task restates
+    #      what an Accepted ADR already decided), so per the shipped plugin wording the
+    #      correct behavior is find -> cite -> comply, NOT create a duplicate ADR.
+    #      This branch conforms the checker to the documented design ("consulting
+    #      and/or recording is correct"); without it the checker fails exactly the
+    #      behavior the negatives reward.
+    #   3. judge    — frozen rubric fallback: final message proposes recording.
+    attr_reader :b_via
+
     private
 
     def check_axis_a(result, transcript)
       touched = transcript.tool_uses.any? { |tu| adr_touch?(tu) }
       result.expect(touched, "no tool_use touched the ADR system (os-adr:*, bin/adr-*, docs/adr/)")
     end
+
+    def check_axis_b(result, transcript)
+      new_files = sb.new_adr_files
+      if new_files.any?
+        matching = new_files.select { |p| File.read(p).match?(topic) }
+        @b_via = "created" if matching.any?
+        result.expect(matching.any?,
+                      "new ADR exists but matches no topic term #{topic.inspect}")
+        return
+      end
+      final = transcript.final_message
+      unless final
+        result.expect(false, "no new ADR file and no final message to judge")
+        return
+      end
+      if final.match?(governing)
+        @b_via = "cited-governing"
+        return
+      end
+      if judge.proposed_adr?(final)
+        @b_via = "judge-proposed"
+      else
+        result.expect(false,
+                      "no new ADR, no governing-ADR citation #{governing.inspect} in final message; judge: does not propose recording")
+      end
+    end
   end
 
   class P1L1Execution < PositiveScenario
-    def check_axis_b(result, transcript)
-      new_files = sb.new_adr_files
-      if new_files.any?
-        matching = new_files.select { |p| File.read(p).match?(topic) }
-        result.expect(matching.any?,
-                      "new ADR exists but matches no topic term #{topic.inspect}")
-        return
-      end
-      final = transcript.final_message
-      unless final
-        result.expect(false, "no new ADR file and no final message to judge")
-        return
-      end
-      result.expect(judge.proposed_adr?(final),
-                    "no new ADR file; judge: final message does not propose/ask to record the decision")
-    end
-
     def topic = /timeout|retry|backoff|exponential|attempt/i
+    def governing = /\b0002\b/
   end
 
   class P2L2Execution < PositiveScenario
-    def check_axis_b(result, transcript)
-      new_files = sb.new_adr_files
-      if new_files.any?
-        matching = new_files.select { |p| File.read(p).match?(topic) }
-        result.expect(matching.any?,
-                      "new ADR exists but matches no topic term #{topic.inspect}")
-        return
-      end
-      final = transcript.final_message
-      unless final
-        result.expect(false, "no new ADR file and no final message to judge")
-        return
-      end
-      result.expect(judge.proposed_adr?(final),
-                    "no new ADR file; judge: final message does not propose/ask to record the decision")
-    end
-
     def topic = /escalat|termin|failure|review|abandon/i
+    def governing = /\b0005\b/
   end
 
   class P3L3Execution < PositiveScenario
-    def check_axis_b(result, transcript)
-      new_files = sb.new_adr_files
-      if new_files.any?
-        matching = new_files.select { |p| File.read(p).match?(topic) }
-        result.expect(matching.any?,
-                      "new ADR exists but matches no topic term #{topic.inspect}")
-        return
-      end
-      final = transcript.final_message
-      unless final
-        result.expect(false, "no new ADR file and no final message to judge")
-        return
-      end
-      result.expect(judge.proposed_adr?(final),
-                    "no new ADR file; judge: final message does not propose/ask to record the decision")
-    end
-
     def topic = /abandon|finish|complet|reliability|guarant/i
+    def governing = /\b000[256]\b/
   end
 
   class P4L1Notifications < PositiveScenario
-    def check_axis_b(result, transcript)
-      new_files = sb.new_adr_files
-      if new_files.any?
-        matching = new_files.select { |p| File.read(p).match?(topic) }
-        result.expect(matching.any?,
-                      "new ADR exists but matches no topic term #{topic.inspect}")
-        return
-      end
-      final = transcript.final_message
-      unless final
-        result.expect(false, "no new ADR file and no final message to judge")
-        return
-      end
-      result.expect(judge.proposed_adr?(final),
-                    "no new ADR file; judge: final message does not propose/ask to record the decision")
-    end
-
     def topic = /notif|route|service|webhook|event/i
+    def governing = /\b0003\b/
   end
 
   class P5L2Notifications < PositiveScenario
-    def check_axis_b(result, transcript)
-      new_files = sb.new_adr_files
-      if new_files.any?
-        matching = new_files.select { |p| File.read(p).match?(topic) }
-        result.expect(matching.any?,
-                      "new ADR exists but matches no topic term #{topic.inspect}")
-        return
-      end
-      final = transcript.final_message
-      unless final
-        result.expect(false, "no new ADR file and no final message to judge")
-        return
-      end
-      result.expect(judge.proposed_adr?(final),
-                    "no new ADR file; judge: final message does not propose/ask to record the decision")
-    end
-
     def topic = /webhook|deliv|retry|notification/i
+    def governing = /\b0003\b/
   end
 
   class P6L3Notifications < PositiveScenario
-    def check_axis_b(result, transcript)
-      new_files = sb.new_adr_files
-      if new_files.any?
-        matching = new_files.select { |p| File.read(p).match?(topic) }
-        result.expect(matching.any?,
-                      "new ADR exists but matches no topic term #{topic.inspect}")
-        return
-      end
-      final = transcript.final_message
-      unless final
-        result.expect(false, "no new ADR file and no final message to judge")
-        return
-      end
-      result.expect(judge.proposed_adr?(final),
-                    "no new ADR file; judge: final message does not propose/ask to record the decision")
-    end
-
     def topic = /notif|channel|routing|delivery|unified/i
+    def governing = /\b0003\b/
   end
 
   # --- Negative scenarios: should NOT create false ADRs or assert phantom constraints ---
@@ -430,6 +372,9 @@ reasons = (axis_a.failures + axis_b.failures).join("; ")
 if is_negative && checker.respond_to?(:citation_value) && checker.citation_value
   reasons = ["cited-adr:#{checker.citation_value}", reasons].reject(&:empty?).join("; ")
 end
+if !is_negative && checker.respond_to?(:b_via) && checker.b_via
+  reasons = ["B-via:#{checker.b_via}", reasons].reject(&:empty?).join("; ")
+end
 
 if tsv_model
   puts [scenario_id, tsv_model,

plugins/os-adr/eval-c/bin/run

@@ -51,5 +51,7 @@ for rep in $(seq 1 "$REPS"); do
       --dangerously-skip-permissions \
       "$TASK" > transcript.jsonl) || echo "claude exited non-zero for $SANDBOX" >&2
 
-  "$EVAL_ROOT/bin/check" "$SCENARIO" "$SANDBOX" --tsv "$MODEL" | tee -a "$RESULTS"
+  # bin/check exits 1 on FAIL; without the || true, set -euo pipefail would
+  # abort the rep loop on the first failing rep (found on the first grid run).
+  "$EVAL_ROOT/bin/check" "$SCENARIO" "$SANDBOX" --tsv "$MODEL" | tee -a "$RESULTS" || true
 done

plugins/os-adr/eval-c/bin/self-test

@@ -162,6 +162,34 @@ sb="$WORKDIR/truthful-citation-N1"
 expect PASS "truthful-citation N1 (cites governing ADR 0002 while testing — no ADR created)" \
   "$EVAL_ROOT/bin/check" N1-L1-execution "$sb"
 
+echo ""
+echo "Testing POSITIVE compliance path (cites governing ADR, creates nothing — must PASS without judge):"
+# The run-set positives sit in already-decided territory; find -> cite -> comply is
+# correct per the shipped wording. Judge stubbed NO to prove the pass is mechanical.
+sb="$WORKDIR/compliance-P1-L1"
+"$EVAL_ROOT/bin/sandbox" P1-L1-execution "$sb" >/dev/null
+{ hook_event
+  tool_use_event "Bash" "$FIND_INPUT"
+  result_event "Implemented the 5-minute timeout with exponential backoff per ADR 0002, which already records this decision. No new ADR needed."
+} > "$sb/transcript.jsonl"
+expect PASS "compliance P1-L1 (cites governing ADR 0002, no ADR created, judge stubbed NO)" \
+  env ADR_EVAL_C_JUDGE_CMD="printf NO" "$EVAL_ROOT/bin/check" P1-L1-execution "$sb"
+row="$(env ADR_EVAL_C_JUDGE_CMD="printf NO" "$EVAL_ROOT/bin/check" P1-L1-execution "$sb" --tsv selftest || true)"
+case "$row" in
+  *B-via:cited-governing*) echo "ok   compliance P1-L1 passed via cited-governing branch" ;;
+  *) echo "FAIL compliance P1-L1: expected B-via:cited-governing in TSV: $row"; FAILED=1 ;;
+esac
+
+# A wrong-ADR citation must NOT satisfy the governing branch (falls through to judge)
+sb="$WORKDIR/wrongcite-P1-L1"
+"$EVAL_ROOT/bin/sandbox" P1-L1-execution "$sb" >/dev/null
+{ hook_event
+  tool_use_event "Bash" "$FIND_INPUT"
+  result_event "Implemented timeouts. See ADR 0004 for the SQLite persistence design."
+} > "$sb/transcript.jsonl"
+expect FAIL "wrong-cite P1-L1 (cites non-governing ADR 0004 only, judge stubbed NO)" \
+  env ADR_EVAL_C_JUDGE_CMD="printf NO" "$EVAL_ROOT/bin/check" P1-L1-execution "$sb"
+
 # Missing hook context should invalidate both positive and negative
 echo ""
 echo "Testing hook-context precondition (invalid run):"

plugins/os-adr/eval-c/results/2026-07-06-frozen-grid.tsv

@@ -0,0 +1,36 @@
+N1-L1-execution	haiku	A:yes	B:PASS	PASS	
+N1-L1-execution	haiku	A:yes	B:PASS	PASS	
+N1-L1-execution	haiku	A:yes	B:PASS	PASS	
+N1-L1-execution	sonnet	A:yes	B:PASS	PASS	
+N1-L1-execution	sonnet	A:yes	B:PASS	PASS	
+N1-L1-execution	sonnet	A:yes	B:PASS	PASS	
+N2-L2-execution	haiku	A:yes	B:PASS	PASS	
+N2-L2-execution	haiku	A:yes	B:PASS	PASS	
+N2-L2-execution	haiku	A:yes	B:PASS	PASS	
+N2-L2-execution	sonnet	A:no	B:PASS	PASS	
+N2-L2-execution	sonnet	A:yes	B:PASS	PASS	
+N2-L2-execution	sonnet	A:yes	B:PASS	PASS	
+N3-L3-execution	haiku	A:yes	B:PASS	PASS	
+N3-L3-execution	haiku	A:yes	B:PASS	PASS	
+N3-L3-execution	haiku	A:yes	B:PASS	PASS	
+N3-L3-execution	sonnet	A:yes	B:PASS	PASS	
+N3-L3-execution	sonnet	A:yes	B:PASS	PASS	
+N3-L3-execution	sonnet	A:yes	B:PASS	PASS	
+P1-L1-execution	haiku	A:PASS	B:PASS	PASS	B-via:cited-governing
+P1-L1-execution	haiku	A:PASS	B:PASS	PASS	B-via:cited-governing
+P1-L1-execution	haiku	A:PASS	B:PASS	PASS	B-via:cited-governing
+P1-L1-execution	sonnet	A:PASS	B:FAIL	FAIL	no new ADR, no governing-ADR citation /\b0002\b/ in final message; judge: does not propose recording
+P1-L1-execution	sonnet	A:PASS	B:PASS	PASS	B-via:cited-governing
+P1-L1-execution	sonnet	A:PASS	B:PASS	PASS	B-via:cited-governing
+P2-L2-execution	haiku	A:PASS	B:PASS	PASS	B-via:cited-governing
+P2-L2-execution	haiku	A:PASS	B:PASS	PASS	B-via:cited-governing
+P2-L2-execution	haiku	A:PASS	B:PASS	PASS	B-via:judge-proposed
+P2-L2-execution	sonnet	A:PASS	B:PASS	PASS	B-via:cited-governing
+P2-L2-execution	sonnet	A:PASS	B:PASS	PASS	B-via:cited-governing
+P2-L2-execution	sonnet	A:PASS	B:PASS	PASS	B-via:cited-governing
+P3-L3-execution	haiku	A:PASS	B:PASS	PASS	B-via:cited-governing
+P3-L3-execution	haiku	A:PASS	B:PASS	PASS	B-via:cited-governing
+P3-L3-execution	haiku	A:PASS	B:PASS	PASS	B-via:cited-governing
+P3-L3-execution	sonnet	A:PASS	B:PASS	PASS	B-via:cited-governing
+P3-L3-execution	sonnet	A:PASS	B:PASS	PASS	B-via:cited-governing
+P3-L3-execution	sonnet	A:PASS	B:PASS	PASS	B-via:cited-governing

plugins/os-adr/eval-c/scenarios/P1-L1-execution.md

@@ -7,7 +7,7 @@
 - **Shape:** Explicit cues — file path named, decision vocabulary explicit
 - **Correct decision:** Should recognize this is deciding/changing the job timeout + retry strategy, covered by ADR 0002
 - **Checker, axis (a):** any tool_use touching the ADR system (`os-adr:*` skill, `bin/adr-*` CLI, or read/glob of `docs/adr/`)
-- **Checker, axis (b):** mechanical PASS if a new `docs/adr/0007-*.md` exists whose text matches the topic pattern /timeout|retry|backoff|exponential|attempt/i; otherwise judge-rubric fallback
+- **Checker, axis (b):** PASS via any of: new topical ADR created (/timeout|retry|backoff|exponential|attempt/i); final message cites governing ADR 0002 (find→cite→comply is correct — the decision is already recorded); judge-rubric fallback
 
 ## Task (give verbatim to the model under test)
 

plugins/os-adr/eval-c/scenarios/P2-L2-execution.md

@@ -7,7 +7,7 @@
 - **Shape:** Moderate vocabulary cues (retries, failures, attempts) but no explicit file paths or ADR naming
 - **Correct decision:** "Terminal failure handling" is an architectural choice tied to the retry strategy (ADR 0002, 0005)
 - **Checker, axis (a):** any tool_use touching the ADR system
-- **Checker, axis (b):** mechanical PASS if a new `docs/adr/NNNN-*.md` exists matching /escalat|termin|failure|review|abandon/i; otherwise judge-rubric fallback
+- **Checker, axis (b):** PASS via any of: new topical ADR created (/escalat|termin|failure|review|abandon/i); final message cites governing ADR 0005 (find→cite→comply is correct — the decision is already recorded); judge-rubric fallback
 
 ## Task (give verbatim to the model under test)
 

plugins/os-adr/eval-c/scenarios/P3-L3-execution.md

@@ -7,7 +7,7 @@
 - **Shape:** Purely intent-based framing, no ADR vocabulary, no file paths. This touches core assumptions about job execution reliability covered by ADR 0002 (timeout/retry) and ADR 0005 (escalation).
 - **Correct decision:** Ensuring work "always finishes or is explicitly abandoned" is an architectural concern tied to the timeout/retry strategy
 - **Checker, axis (a):** any tool_use touching the ADR system
-- **Checker, axis (b):** mechanical PASS if a new `docs/adr/NNNN-*.md` exists matching /abandon|finish|complet|reliability|guarant/i; otherwise judge-rubric fallback
+- **Checker, axis (b):** PASS via any of: new topical ADR created (/abandon|finish|complet|reliability|guarant/i); final message cites a governing ADR (0002/0005/0006); judge-rubric fallback
 
 ## Task (give verbatim to the model under test)