SAFETY-02: a loop can be fresh, tracking and inside its rating and still push the wrong way

The stale-input watchdog asks whether the meter is still talking. The saturation
freeze asks whether the inverter can follow. The output clamp asks whether the
number is too big. A loop can pass all three while charging the battery out of
the grid, because the only thing wrong is the sign.

On 2026-08-20 a commercial controller did exactly that four times in one day,
for up to 77 minutes at a stretch, reaching a commanded -14 768 W against a
±5000 W inverter. app/watchdog.py compares the emitted setpoint against the
authoritative P1 figure and, when they oppose each other with both over 300 W
for 180 s continuously, files a failsafe SET claim at P_SAFETY, commands 0 W and
latches there until an operator starts control again.

Validated against that day rather than against an argument: sim/replay_sign.py
in the infra repo drives this module over the committed captures of both
2026-08-20 and the healthy 2026-08-23 and reaches 18 trips on the fault day -
every one inside a window NOTES.md §4.7 accounts for - and 0 on the healthy day.
The four episodes do share one signature: 0.3 / 0.9 / 10.5 / 0.0 % sign
agreement inside them against 92.9 % healthy.

Three decisions the ticket could not make:

- It is DISARMED whenever the grid-following loop is not what is driving. Sign
  agreement is a property of a loop that follows the meter, and a maintenance
  grid charge opposes the meter by design - 2500 W of charge into a house
  drawing 500 W is +3000 W on the meter against a -2500 W command, for hours.
  The gate tests the emitted number, not the winning claim's name, because a
  limit claim can let the loop "win" and still replace its value.
- The trip LATCHES. Commanding 0 W removes the command side of the comparison,
  so the disagreement always clears the moment the trip works.
- sign_disagree_w at or above max_w is refused at startup. The arbiter never
  lets a command exceed max_w, so such a threshold leaves the watchdog incapable
  of firing while the status page still reports it armed.

What it does not catch, said out loud: an inverter that ACTS opposite to its
command moves the meter further the same way, leaving command and meter in
agreement. That is the saturation freeze's job.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01Du77usMj8XNKNFZGmUiWDa

goodwe_controller/CHANGELOG.md

@@ -1,5 +1,58 @@
 # Changelog
 
+## 0.5.0
+
+**SAFETY-02 — the sign-disagreement watchdog.** The add-on now watches whether
+the setpoint it is emitting and the grid figure it is regulating on point the
+same way. If they oppose each other, both over `sign_disagree_w` (300 W), for
+`sign_disagree_s` (180 s) **continuously**, it files a failsafe claim at
+`P_SAFETY`, commands **0 W**, and latches there until an operator starts control
+again. New module `app/watchdog.py`; new options `sign_disagree_w` and
+`sign_disagree_s`.
+
+This is the gap the existing failsafes leave open. The stale-input watchdog asks
+whether the meter is still talking, the saturation freeze asks whether the
+inverter can follow, the output clamp asks whether the number is too big — a
+loop can pass all three while charging the battery out of the grid, because the
+only thing wrong is the sign. On 2026-08-20 a commercial controller did exactly
+that four times in one day, for up to 77 minutes at a stretch, and reached a
+commanded −14 768 W against a ±5000 W inverter.
+
+Validated against that day. `sim/replay_sign.py` in the infra repo drives this
+module over the committed RS485 captures of both 2026-08-20 (the four episodes)
+and 2026-08-23 (healthy): **18 trips on the fault day, every one inside a window
+`NOTES.md` §4.7 accounts for, and 0 on the healthy day.** The four episodes do
+share one signature rather than merely resembling each other — sign agreement
+runs 0.3 / 0.9 / 10.5 / 0.0 % inside them against 92.9 % on the healthy day.
+
+Three decisions worth knowing about:
+
+- **It is disarmed whenever the grid-following loop is not what is driving.**
+  Sign agreement is a property of a loop that follows the meter. A maintenance
+  grid charge opposes the meter *by design* — 2500 W of charge into a house
+  drawing 500 W is +3000 W on the meter against a −2500 W command, for hours —
+  and armed unconditionally this would trip on every maintenance cycle. The gate
+  tests the emitted number, not the winning claim's name: a limit claim can let
+  the loop "win" and still replace its value with one pointing the other way.
+- **The trip latches.** Commanding 0 W removes the command side of the
+  comparison, so the disagreement always clears the moment the trip works.
+  Un-latched, this would trip, clear, and hand the actuator back to the loop that
+  was driving the wrong way, every three minutes forever.
+- **`sign_disagree_w` at or above `max_w` is refused at startup** (validator rule
+  5). The arbiter never lets a command exceed `max_w`, so such a threshold makes
+  the watchdog incapable of firing while the status page still reports it armed.
+  A disarmed guard that advertises itself as armed is the failure mode this
+  project keeps refusing to ship.
+
+What it does **not** catch, stated so nobody assumes otherwise: an inverter that
+acts opposite to what it was told moves the meter *further* the same way, so
+command and meter agree while everything runs away. That is the saturation
+freeze's job, which compares the command against the battery's actual power.
+
+`test_validate.py`'s "the smallest sane max_w still starts" case now names a
+reachable sign threshold, because a 1 W ceiling genuinely does disarm the 300 W
+default and is now correctly refused.
+
 ## 0.4.0
 
 **CFG-01.** The add-on now refuses to start on a configuration it cannot honour,