SAFETY-10: the whole decision path runs and nothing reaches the inverter

Every optimiser defect this project has found was invisible from outside
while it was happening, and each was paid for at the meter first: SAFETY-45's
28 charge onsets an hour against a binding peak_cap_w, TARIFF-14's wrong
quarter-hour for 45 minutes in every 60, SAFETY-46's 598 Wh spent to gain
310 Wh. There was no way to watch what the optimiser WOULD do without letting
it do it.

`shadow_mode` runs strategies, arbiter, clamps and guards, records the
decision with its reason, and commands nothing.

⚠️ IT WRITES. It writes 0 W, on the ordinary heartbeat, through the ordinary
single writer. The inverter holds its last command forever - it has no meter
timeout - so "commands nothing" implemented as "stops writing" would leave
whatever was standing when shadow mode came on standing for as long as it was
left on, under a page saying nothing is being commanded. That is the failure
this repository keeps finding. Refreshing 0 W is also what
firmware/goodwe-master.yaml's 30 s stale-input watchdog requires of us; going
quiet would keep that board tripped for the whole run, which is an alarm being
used as a mode.

⚠️ IT IS NOT A SECOND WRITE PATH. No claim, no transport, no arithmetic of its
own. It is a substitution inside Controller._write_unit() - the single choke
point every write already reaches - in the same form as the three above it,
and it is the LAST of them, so SAFETY-28's gate and SAFETY-03's clamp still
grade the number the decision path produced.

⚠️ THE DEFAULT IS `auto`, NOT `true`, AND THAT IS THE CARD'S REAL CONTENT. The
Supervisor composes options as {**config.yaml defaults, **stored user
options}, so a new key with a new default reaches EVERY EXISTING INSTALL on
the next update - including the one regulating a real battery. A boolean
default-on would have stopped it silently. There is no mechanism by which one
key can default differently for a new install and an existing one, so
"default-on for new" is a value the add-on RESOLVES: `auto` is shadow while
control is STOPPED and live once it is STARTED. A fresh install ships
`auto_start: false` and comes up observing; an install that is controlling is
started and does not change by one watt.

THE FAILSAFES. Sign watchdogs (SAFETY-02/30): INERT - they grade
Inverter.standing_w(), which shadow mode holds at 0 W. Fed the shadow decision
they would disagree with a meter that never saw it and LATCH A TRIP THAT
SURVIVES INTO LIVE OPERATION AND A RESTART. Clamp (SAFETY-03), write gate
(SAFETY-28), meter freeze (SAFETY-18), peak guard: OBSERVE. Circulation
(SAFETY-31) and delivery (SAFETY-42): observe and may legitimately latch,
because their evidence is measured power. The operator stop is the one
deliberate change: enforced at the wire rather than as a P_SAFETY claim, which
would otherwise make every recorded decision read "stopped".

⚠️ RECORDED LIMITATION: _shadow_settle() re-seeds the carried command to what
stands on the wire, which makes the exit safe by construction - and therefore
the loop leg's shadow decision is ONE SLEW STEP, not a trajectory. A shadow
run answers "what would it command now", not "what would it have done next".
The strategies are unaffected; all three defects above are visible from one.

Graded on the writes and on the rendered surface, never on the flag: 22
mutations, no survivors, including one that lets a write escape and one that
goes silent instead of commanding 0 W. Closed loop on TEST-23 stage 3's rig,
same hour twice: live drives the pack to -2000 W and SoC 50.000 -> 62.331 %;
shadow commands 0 W throughout, SoC stays 50.0 exactly, and the arbitrage
decision is identical in action, instant, signed power, reason and arbiter
winner.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01BwRLw7eKYj2byVdwB6kbjU

goodwe_controller/DECISIONS/FCST-04-the-day-that-is-carried.md

@@ -75,8 +75,9 @@ Every point still carries `provisional=True`, so the **flag never lies** — wha
 decays is the number, behind a flag that is telling the truth.
 
 ⚠️ **No value-level check can catch that**, and claiming one would be worse than
-claiming none. A carried point and a published-provisional point (`eneco_eddy`'s
-current quarter, §9.2) are the same three fields carrying the same flag. The
+claiming none. A carried point and a published-provisional point (a real-time
+product's current interval, §9.2) are the same three fields carrying the same
+flag. The
 difference is provenance, and provenance is not in the value.
 
 The defence is therefore an **ordering**, not a validation:
@@ -139,8 +140,16 @@ file constructs and still holds a reference to.
 
 ## 4. A sub-hourly feed passes through whole; the fill only decides which hours are missing.
 
-`eneco_eddy` is the Belgian imbalance product and settles **per quarter**, and
-`price.py`'s `_validate_raw()` accepts any strictly-increasing spacing — so a
+⚠️ **This section originally said `eneco_eddy` is "the Belgian imbalance
+product". That was false and [[TARIFF-07]] withdrew the plugin: Eneco's dynamic
+product is "Zon & Wind Dynamisch" and is indexed to Belpex/EPEX **day-ahead**,
+not to imbalance, and `api.eneco.be/eddy/prices` never existed. The mechanism
+below is unaffected, because the real quarter-hourly feed is the one still
+shipped.**
+
+Belgian **day-ahead** settles per **quarter** — the 15-minute MTU took effect
+on 2025-10-01, so `generic_dayahead` reads 96 points a day rather than 24 — and
+`price.py`'s `_validate_raw()` accepts any strictly-increasing spacing, so a
 published hour may legitimately hold four points.
 
 FCST-04's first caller keyed the published set as `{_utc_hour(p.start): p for p

goodwe_controller/DECISIONS/SAFETY-10-shadow-mode.md

@@ -0,0 +1,321 @@
+# SAFETY-10 — shadow mode, and why "default-on" is not `true`
+
+**Status:** decided and implemented on branch `SAFETY-10`.
+**Card:** SAFETY-10 — *"Shadow mode (default-on, log-only decisions)"*.
+**Nothing here reached the inverter.** No deployment, no `ha addons update`, no
+contact with 192.168.2.158 or 192.168.2.221. Everything below was measured in
+the CI image and on TEST-23 stage 3's closed-loop rig.
+
+---
+
+## 0. The four things a reader should take away
+
+1. **"Default-on" is delivered as `auto`, not as `true`, and the difference is
+   an install that is regulating a real battery today.** The Supervisor
+   composes an add-on's options as *its defaults, overlaid with the stored user
+   options*, so a new key with a new default reaches **every existing install**
+   on the next update. A boolean `shadow_mode: true` would silently stop the
+   reference site. §1.
+2. **Shadow mode WRITES. It writes 0 W, on the ordinary heartbeat, through the
+   ordinary single writer.** "Commands nothing" implemented as "stops writing"
+   would leave the inverter latched on whatever was standing — it has no meter
+   timeout — and would put the ESP32 into a tripped stale-input watchdog for
+   the whole run. §2.
+3. **The sign watchdogs are inert, and that was the decision that had to be got
+   right.** Fed the shadow decision they would trip within `sign_disagree_s`
+   and **latch a trip that survives into live operation and a restart**. §4.
+4. **The loop leg's shadow decision is one slew step, not a trajectory, and
+   that is a real limitation of this feature.** §5.
+
+---
+
+## 1. The default
+
+### The literal reading, and what it costs
+
+`config.yaml`'s `options:` block **is** the default. There is exactly one of it,
+and HA's Supervisor resolves an add-on's effective options as
+
+```
+{**config.yaml options, **the stored user options}
+```
+
+A key that has never been stored therefore takes the file's value — on a fresh
+install and on an install that has been running for months, identically. There
+is **no mechanism in the add-on options system** by which one key can default
+differently for the two. So the card's title, taken at face value, is:
+
+> the next `ha addons update` stops the battery at the reference site, and the
+> only symptom is a battery that has stopped doing anything.
+
+That is strictly worse than every defect shadow mode exists to catch. It is
+refused.
+
+### What was shipped instead
+
+`shadow_mode` is a three-valued `list(auto|on|off)` defaulting to `"auto"`:
+
+| value | resolves to |
+|---|---|
+| `off` | live |
+| `on` | shadow, always |
+| `auto` | shadow **while control is stopped**; live once it is started |
+
+`auto` reads `Controller.auto` — the persisted start/stop state, which a fresh
+install takes from `auto_start` and which the *Start / stop control* button
+moves. No new persisted state, no migration, no guess:
+
+* a **fresh** install ships `auto_start: false`, has no stored `auto` key, and
+  therefore comes up **in shadow mode**. It observes a day of decisions before
+  it is ever allowed to command anything. That is the card's intent, delivered
+  where it is safe;
+* an install that is **controlling** is started, so `auto` resolves to live and
+  **not one watt changes**;
+* an install that is **stopped** keeps its actuator at 0 W exactly as before —
+  the same number, from the same writer, on the same heartbeat. What changes is
+  what the status page and the action log **say**, and that the decision path
+  now runs and is recorded.
+
+⚠️ **Under `auto`, pressing Start leaves shadow mode.** That is the point of
+`auto`: the button means "control the battery". An operator who wants the
+decisions recorded *while the loop runs* — the configuration this card exists
+to make possible — sets `on` explicitly, and cannot reach it by accident.
+
+⚠️ **An unrecognised value resolves to SHADOW, and is REFUSED at startup.**
+`shadow.mode()` fails toward inaction; `validate.py` rule 11 refuses the value
+by name so the reinterpretation is never silent. A typo is not a decision, and
+an install silently left in shadow mode commands nothing indefinitely while its
+status page calmly explains that this is intentional.
+
+---
+
+## 2. "Commands nothing" is a number, not a silence
+
+The inverter holds its last command **forever** — `HANDOVER.md` §6 says so, and
+`firmware/goodwe-master.yaml`'s header records what it cost when a controller
+stopped refreshing: *"Illusmart went silent mid-command and the inverter held
++5000 W for 113 s"*. `firmware/goodwe-master.yaml` states the contract that follows — *"HA
+must now REWRITE the setpoint every ~10 s even when the value has not
+changed"* — because without a refresh, **"stale" and "steady" are the same
+thing on the wire**.
+
+So shadow mode holds the actuator at `shadow.WIRE_W` = **0.0 W**, refreshed on
+the ordinary heartbeat. Two consequences were weighed and are recorded:
+
+* **it is not silence.** A shadow mode that stopped writing would leave the
+  standing command up until the ESP32's 30 s watchdog noticed — and at a site
+  with no such board, forever;
+* **it does not use an alarm as a mode.** Letting that watchdog trip for the
+  duration of a shadow run teaches the operator that `wd_tripped` is normal,
+  which is exactly the training that makes it useless when the add-on has
+  actually died.
+
+### It is not a second writer
+
+SAFETY-28's rule is one actuator, one writer. Shadow mode files **no claim**,
+owns **no transport**, and calls nothing in `hass.py`. It is a **substitution**
+inside `Controller._write_unit()` — the single choke point every write in this
+add-on already reaches, including the heartbeat, the stop button, `shutdown()`
+and `maint_abort()` — in exactly the form of the three substitutions above it
+(non-finite → 0 W, unauthorised → 0 W, clamped → the rating).
+
+It is the **last** of them. Below SAFETY-28's gate and below SAFETY-03's clamp,
+so both still grade the number the decision path actually produced, and a
+shadow run can report *"it would have hit the rating here"*.
+
+---
+
+## 3. What the run records
+
+| surface | what it carries |
+|---|---|
+| status banner | `SHADOW MODE - the battery is NOT being controlled...`, **first in the cascade**, amber — red, with the latch named, if one is standing |
+| status row `Shadow mode` | which rung decided, the watts it **would have commanded**, where the inverter actually is, and `Resolution.explain()` |
+| status row `Commanded` | `0 W` — the truth, which the row above reconciles with the `Why` row below it |
+| action log | one line when shadow mode comes on; one line per **change of decision** (winner or rounded watts), carrying the arbiter's own sentence |
+| MQTT | `status: shadow`, its own value, below `failsafe` |
+
+The action log is **edge**-logged, not level-logged: the log holds 40 rows, and
+a line per cycle would flush the context of the run's own findings inside four
+minutes at the 15 s cycle floor.
+
+---
+
+## 4. The failsafes, one by one
+
+| failsafe | in shadow mode | why |
+|---|---|---|
+| SAFETY-02/30 sign watchdogs | **INERT** | They grade `Inverter.standing_w()` — what this controller has standing on the wire — and shadow mode holds that at 0 W, so they cannot arm. ⚠️ Fed the shadow decision instead they would disagree with a meter that never saw it and **latch a trip that survives into live operation and a restart**: shadow mode would manufacture the failsafe it exists to help debug. ⚠️ **Two rungs hold it there** — `last_write` (the wire gate) and `inv.target` (the re-seed) — which is MUTATION.md's masking shape, so the mutation that reproduces the hazard defeats both as a pair (M6). Driven singly, dropping the re-seed does not reproduce it at all — measured |
+| SAFETY-03 clamp | **OBSERVES** | Runs on the decision, sets `clamp_last`, logs every engagement. Changes no command |
+| SAFETY-28 write gate | **OBSERVES** | Same placement, same reason: the question is who chose the number |
+| SAFETY-18 meter freeze | **OBSERVES**, unchanged | It takes no action live either; both halves of its conjunction are as true in shadow |
+| SAFETY-07/24/25 peak guard | **OBSERVES** | Level-triggered, unlatched, files its claim as usual — SAFETY-45's limit cycle is visible from a shadow run, which is the point |
+| SAFETY-31 circulation | **OBSERVES AND MAY LATCH** | Its evidence is *measured* power. Packs pushing against each other while all are told 0 W is a real fault |
+| SAFETY-42 delivery | **OBSERVES AND MAY LATCH** | Same, against a share that is 0 W |
+| operator stop | **SUPPRESSED AS A CLAIM, ENFORCED AT THE WIRE** | The one deliberate change. Its `P_SAFETY` 0 W claim out-ranks everything, so leaving it in makes the recorded decision `"stopped"` on every cycle and the run answers the wrong question. The actuator ends at the same number either way, and the wire substitution is **strictly stronger**: a claim can be out-ranked, and it cannot |
+| inputs missing, non-finite, allocator refusal, arbiter contradiction | **UNCHANGED** | All resolve to 0 W, which is what the wire gets anyway |
+
+⚠️ **A latch that is already up stays up.** Nothing here clears one. The shadow
+banner **names** any standing latch and goes red for it, because a latch that is
+up while the controller is inert is up the moment it stops being inert.
+
+⚠️ **Maintenance is not in that table because shadow mode does not touch it.**
+The state machines are ticked on every cycle whether control is started or not,
+so a stopped install already runs them against a battery that does not move.
+Shadow mode inherits that, unchanged and unimproved. Recorded here rather than
+quietly fixed under another card's name.
+
+---
+
+## 5. The limitation, stated rather than discovered later
+
+`Controller._shadow_settle()` re-seeds the carried command (`self.target` and
+each `inv.target`) to `WIRE_W` at the **end** of every shadow cycle — after
+every in-cycle guard has read the decision. Three machines read that value as a
+statement about the **hardware**: the loop's `prev_w` and integrator,
+`standing_w()`, and SAFETY-42's share comparison. Re-seeded, they track reality,
+and **the exit is safe by construction** — the carried command already equals
+the standing one, so the first live cycle slews from 0 W like any other.
+
+⚠️ **The cost is real.** The loop's `prev_w` is therefore 0 W on every shadow
+cycle, so the loop leg's recorded decision is **one slew step from the standing
+command** and stays there. A shadow run answers *"what would this controller
+command NOW, from where the plant really is"* — a true statement about the
+present — and **not** *"what trajectory would it have followed"*. The trajectory
+is a closed-loop property, it did not happen, and reporting it would be a
+simulation of a plant that does not exist; three cycles in, such a number
+describes nothing.
+
+The strategies are unaffected: arbitrage, the peak guard and maintenance all
+file `SET` claims at a fixed power from level-triggered inputs. That is why the
+three defects this card was written for — SAFETY-45's 28 onsets an hour,
+TARIFF-14's wrong quarter-hour, SAFETY-46's ceiling churn — are all visible from
+a shadow run, and the loop's ramp is not. Graded, named, in
+`test_watchdog.py` part 10 as `RECORDED LIMITATION`.
+
+---
+
+## 6. How "nothing reaches the inverter" is graded
+
+**Not on a flag.** A check that asserted `Controller.shadow` would pass on a
+build in which the flag is set and the substitution is deleted — which is
+exactly mutation **M1**.
+
+`test_clamp.py` part 8 drives the **shipped** `Controller.cycle()` and the
+shipped heartbeat against a recording Home Assistant stub, and asserts on what
+reached `set_number()`:
+
+* **the precondition first** — the same stimulus with `shadow_mode: off` puts
+  30 non-zero writes on the wire, the largest 5000 W. MUTATION.md habit 4: a
+  check whose data cannot reach the failure it names is decoration;
+* then `set(writes) == {0.0}`, **and** that there were 26 of them — a check
+  that only said "no non-zero write" would pass on the silent build too;
+* entry and exit are measured on `inv.last_write` — what the inverter is
+  latched on, updated only on an **accepted** write — either side of the
+  boundary, against the same run that never entered shadow mode.
+
+The closed-loop half is `/home/homelab/s10-mut/shadowloop.py` on TEST-23 stage
+3's rig: the same hour, twice, against `plantsim.Plant` through the firmware's
+own frame encoder.
+
+| | live | shadow |
+|---|---|---|
+| `plant_cmd_w` | −2000 W throughout | **0 W throughout** |
+| `batt_w` | −2000 .. −40.6 W | **0.0 W, exactly** |
+| SoC | 50.000 → **62.331 %** | 50.0 → **50.0 %** |
+| grid | 390.6 .. 2350 W | **350 W = the house, exactly** |
+| `ARBITRAGE_CHARGE` samples | 3600 | **3600** |
+| first charge instant | 2026-01-15T00:00:00+00:00 | **identical** |
+| `arb_power_w` | −2000 W | **identical** |
+| `arb_reason` | the strategy's own sentence | **identical, verbatim** |
+| arbiter winner | `arbitrage` | **identical** |
+
+The decision happened, at the same instant, for the same reason, at the same
+signed power — and the battery did not move.
+
+⚠️ **Three lines of that harness are a TRANSCRIPTION and are marked as one.**
+`priceloop.Rig` has no `_write_unit()`, no clamp and no failsafe machine
+(divergence 2 of its README), so the substitution's **placement** is
+transcribed there. The shipped placement is graded by `test_clamp.py` part 8,
+which drives the real `Controller`. ⚠️ **And the rig's transcribed cycle
+predates SAFETY-45**: `arbitrage.decide()` gained a required
+`charge_headroom_w` after `478ba93`, and the harness supplies it from the
+**shipped** `peakguard.charge_headroom_w()` reading the **shipped** peak
+decision rather than from a constant, so SAFETY-45 stays in the run.
+
+---
+
+## 7. The mutation battery — 22 mutations, no survivors
+
+Harness: `/home/homelab/s10-mut/run.py`, backups beside it. Each run restores
+from backup, purges `__pycache__` **on the host**, and grades through the CI
+image with the tree bind-mounted `:ro`, so the interpreter cannot write a cache
+into the tree under test (TEST-15). The full table is in the branch report;
+one per new behaviour, including **M1** (the substitution deleted — a write
+escapes), **M2** (it returns instead of substituting — the inverter is left
+latched), **M3** (it moves above SAFETY-28 and SAFETY-03 — the observers go
+blind), **M8** (`auto` resolves to shadow unconditionally — the literal
+default-on that stops the live install), **M12** (the stop claim is filed in
+shadow — every recorded decision reads `stopped`), **M21** (the substitution
+and the re-seed together) and **M22** (the re-seed moved one line earlier —
+SAFETY-18 grades a 0 W no decision produced and goes permanently blind).
+
+⚠️ **Two findings from driving it, both of the kind MUTATION.md says to expect.**
+
+* **M2 first came back a SURVIVOR and was not one.** The "stop writing
+  altogether" build left `inv.last_write` as `None`, the check did `float()` on
+  it, and the section died with a `TypeError` — grading none of the checks
+  after it and reporting **zero reds**, which reads exactly like a survivor.
+  That is FCST-06's shape. The fixture now hands `None` back and names it as
+  its own check; M2 is red on three.
+* **M6 had to become a PAIR, and only the battery said so.** `standing_w()`
+  prefers `last_write` — the 0.0 W the wire gate accepted — and falls back to
+  `inv.target`, which the re-seed also holds at 0.0. Either rung alone keeps
+  the detector inert, so dropping the re-seed **singly** came back red on the
+  limitation check and on **nothing about the latch**: the hazard it names was
+  not reproduced. TEST-16's rule with a new name on it.
+* **M7/M8/M9/M19 had to MOVE SUITES.** They defeat `shadow.engaged()`, and a
+  defeated default stops `test_clamp.py` part 3's wired run reaching the wire
+  at all — aborting the file with an `IndexError` before part 8 is graded. The
+  red count there was a lower bound naming the saturation freeze. The mode
+  table now lives in `test_validate.py`, which drives no Controller.
+* **`shadow_would_w = float(self.target)` is an EQUIVALENT mutation and was
+  measured as one.** `_shadow_settle()` runs before the re-seed, so at that
+  line `self.target` **is** `resolution.target_w`. It is recorded as equivalent
+  rather than reported as a survivor, and the non-equivalent form of the same
+  defect — the record becoming the **wire** — is driven instead.
+
+### The table
+
+Each row: the mutation, the file, the byte delta, the suite it was graded in,
+and how many **named** checks went red. `⚠️` marks a row whose run did not
+reach the end of its file, so its count is a **lower bound** (MUTATION.md).
+
+| # | mutation | file | Δ | suite | reds |
+|---|---|---|---|---|---|
+| M1 | **a write escapes** — the substitution deleted | `main.py` | −6 B | clamp | 5 |
+| M2 | **silence instead of 0 W** — it returns rather than substituting | `main.py` | −15 B | clamp | 3 |
+| M3 | **the observers go blind** — it moves above SAFETY-28 and SAFETY-03 | `main.py` | +58 B | clamp | 1 |
+| M4 | the site re-seed dropped — the exit resumes from a fiction | `main.py` | −36 B | clamp | 3 |
+| M5 | the per-unit re-seed dropped | `main.py` | −22 B | clamp | 1 |
+| M6 | **PAIRED**: `standing_w()` reads the target **and** the re-seed dropped — the sign latch that survives into live operation | `inverter.py` + `main.py` | −170 B | watchdog | 3 |
+| M7 | `auto` inverted — shadow while started, live while stopped | `shadow.py` | +2 B | validate | 4 |
+| M8 | **default-on for everyone** — `auto` always shadow; the literal reading that stops the live install | `shadow.py` | −15 B | validate | 2 |
+| M9 | an unreadable value resolves to LIVE instead of shadow | `shadow.py` | +1 B | validate | 1 |
+| M10 | `validate.py` stops refusing an unknown value | `shadow.py` | −9 B | validate | 9 |
+| M11 | the loop leg gated on `auto` alone again — the decision path stops running | `main.py` | −17 B | clamp | 1 |
+| M12 | the stop claim filed in shadow — every decision reads `stopped` | `main.py` | −20 B | clamp | 1 |
+| M13 | the banner goes green while nothing is commanded | `shadow.py` | −2 B | clamp | 1 |
+| M14 | the banner loses the standing latch | `shadow.py` | −2 B | clamp | 1 |
+| M15 | the row renders the standing command instead of the decision | `shadow.py` | −8 B | clamp | 1 |
+| M16 ⚠️ | the row disappears when live | `main.py` | +43 B | clamp | 1 |
+| M17 | the record becomes the wire | `main.py` | −6 B | clamp | 7 |
+| M18 | level-logged — the 40-row action log floods | `main.py` | −23 B | clamp | 1 |
+| M19 | the two rungs render identically (masking) | `shadow.py` | +22 B | validate | 1 |
+| M20 | the shipped default moves to `off` in `config.yaml` alone | `config.yaml` | −1 B | defaults_pin | 1 |
+| M21 | **PAIRED**: the substitution **and** the re-seed deleted together | `main.py` | −103 B | clamp | 10 |
+| M22 | the re-seed moved one line earlier — SAFETY-18 grades a 0 W no decision produced and goes permanently blind | `main.py` | +40 B | clamp | 1 |
+
+**Survivors: none.** ⚠️ **M17's `+0 B`-adjacent sibling** —
+`shadow_would_w = float(self.target)` — is recorded in §7 as **equivalent**
+rather than counted here.

goodwe_controller/DECISIONS/SAFETY-45-sizing-the-trade.md

@@ -0,0 +1,221 @@
+# SAFETY-45 — the trade is SIZED by the capacity guard, not switched by it
+
+**Status: closed.** `peakguard.charge_headroom_w()` publishes the watts the open
+billed quarter can still afford; `arbitrage.decide()` takes it as a required
+keyword-only argument and sizes the BUY leg to it; `main.py` passes the measured
+guard's own number at its one call site. `peakguard.decide()` is **not changed** —
+byte-identical to `release/1.0` at `478ba93`, `sha256(decide) = 200090d0835a3a55`,
+7252 B on both trees.
+
+⚠️ **THE HOUSE LOAD IN EVERY FIGURE BELOW IS SYNTHETIC.** TEST-23 stage 3's
+`priceloop.py` drives a flat modelled house against a modelled pack
+(`plantsim.Plant`, 800 W/s ramp into a 10 s lag, 15 360 Wh). The PRICES are real,
+the decision code is the shipped code, the billed-quarter accumulator is
+`app/p1.py`'s own — the load is not. Nothing here is a measurement of the live
+site at 192.168.2.158, which this work did not touch.
+
+## 0. The defect, measured
+
+TEST-23 stage 3 found a sustained limit cycle with arbitrage armed and a charge
+decision active. Re-measured here on the same rig against the same checkout,
+metrics recomputed rather than copied — a **charge onset** is a cycle at which
+`arbitrage.decide()` transitions into `ARBITRAGE_CHARGE`, which is the edge the
+rig already logs:
+
+| `peak_cap_w` | house | onsets/h | mean period | grid swing | billed quarters (W) |
+|---|---|---|---|---|---|
+| 1500 | 1200 W | **28** | 131.1 s | **−455.5 … +3200.0 W** | 1490.1 / 1496.5 / **1508.8** |
+| 3500 *(shipped)* | 1800 W | 8 | 509.3 s | +127.5 … +3800.0 W | **3511.3 / 3536.0 / 3559.1** |
+| 3500 *(shipped)* | 3000 W | 32 | 114.8 s | +1202.0 … +5000.0 W | **3518.9 / 3542.2 / 3556.7** |
+| 5000 | 1200 W | 1 | — | +1240.6 … +3200.0 W | 3169.5 / 3200.0 / 3200.0 |
+
+The last row is the **negative control**: `load + max_w = 3200 W` never reaches
+the cap, so there is no cycle to remove. The bite rule is `load + max_w >
+peak_cap_w`, which at the shipped `peak_cap_w: 3500` / `max_w: 2000` is any house
+drawing over 1500 W in the cheapest quarter.
+
+§10.1's ordering did win on the money — the guard kept the quarters within tens
+of watts of the cap — but **every billed quarter in the three biting rows
+finished OVER it**, which is the thing §9.1 bills. §10.2: *"an EMS that
+oscillates is worse than no EMS, both for hardware wear and — per §9.1 — for the
+peak it is trying to avoid."*
+
+## 1. ⚠️ The mechanism is NOT mainly the quarter boundary, and the card says it is
+
+The card, and `.cache/s45.md` before it, describe the loop as *"at each quarter
+boundary the projection resets to 0, the guard disengages, and arbitrage re-arms
+at full power."* **That is not what the 28 onsets are.** Their timestamps, off
+the run above:
+
+    1, 231, 351, 471, 581, 696, 806, 896, 1136, 1256, 1371, 1486, 1596,
+    1711, 1811, 2061, 2176, 2296, 2411, 2521, 2626, 2716, 2971, 3091,
+    3206, 3321, 3431, 3541      (s, quarter boundaries at 900/1800/2700)
+
+**23 of the 27 gaps are 90–120 s, mean 111.5 s, entirely inside one quarter.**
+The four long gaps — 230, 240, 250, 255 s — are precisely the four that SPAN a
+boundary, so the boundary **lengthens** the interval rather than causing an
+onset. Only three onsets land within 15 s of a boundary and one of those is
+`t = 1`, the start of the run.
+
+The real cycle, read off the recorded fields at t = 1000…1180 s:
+
+1. the trade charges at `−2000 W`; the meter sits at 3200 W against a 1500 W
+   ceiling; `wanted = batt_w + excess` is **negative** (−132 → −8 W), so
+   `decide()` files **nothing** and arbitrage is not constrained at all;
+2. `wanted` drifts up as the quarter's own history worsens and the `900 /
+   remaining` gain grows, and crosses zero at t = 1055 with **`floor_w = 5.3 W`**;
+3. that 5 W floor flips `arbitrage.guard_state()` to `True`, which refuses the
+   **whole trade** — so the setpoint goes from −2000 W to +5 W and the
+   grid-following loop, which targets grid = 0 and not grid = ceiling, takes the
+   actuator and discharges to **+1870 W**, exporting 420 W;
+4. the projection collapses, `wanted` goes negative, the guard releases, and
+   arbitrage re-arms at **`max_w`**. 115 s later, again.
+
+So the defect is **a binary interlock keyed on a continuous quantity**, and the
+quarter boundary is one of the ways it is crossed rather than the cause. The
+card's other claim — *"projection 3092 W against a 1509 W ceiling, `engaged=False`,
+for 170 consecutive seconds"* — reproduces, but it is the **first** such window
+(`first_engaged_t_s = 151.0`); the steady-state silent window is ~40–65 s.
+
+None of this changes what the fix has to do. It is recorded because a card that
+says "the boundary is the trigger" invites a fix in the boundary handling, and
+such a fix would have removed four of twenty-eight onsets.
+
+## 2. What was rejected, and why
+
+### 2a. Reverting `decide()`'s `wanted <= 0.0` rung — rejected, and it is a trap
+That rung is 2026-08-20's anti-bang-bang. Its own comment records the cost of not
+having it: 17 engage/release cycles in 900 s and a quarter finishing 49 W over
+the limit it had spent a quarter of an hour holding. It is untouched, pinned on
+the AST in `test_peakguard.py` 13g, and `tools/replay_ac3.py` reproduces the same
+190/190, 110 engaged cycles, 5 blind, 878 Wh on this branch as on `478ba93`.
+
+### 2b. Filing the affordable charge as a NEGATIVE `lo` — rejected
+Arithmetically this is the prettiest answer: `lo = wanted` with no sign gate is
+continuous, is exactly the control law `decide()` already computes, and would
+have put the constraint on the arbiter where it binds every claimant rather than
+only arbitrage. It was rejected on two grounds, in this order:
+
+1. ⚠️ **IT CREATES A NEW `lo > hi` CONTRADICTION CLASS AGAINST THE MAINTENANCE
+   SHAPING.** `main.py`'s cheap-window maintenance charge files
+   `Claim.limit("maintenance", P_MAINT_SHAPE, hi=-floor)` — a NEGATIVE `hi`.
+   `arbiter.py` clause 2 applies every limit at or above the winner's priority
+   and takes the most restrictive, with **no notion of one limit out-ranking
+   another**; a peak `lo = −300 W` against a shaping `hi = −1000 W` is `lo > hi`,
+   which resolves to **0 W — the battery parked, in the one quarter of the month
+   that sets the bill**. That is the exact failure `peakguard.shaping_suspended()`
+   exists to prevent, and the only way to close it would be to key that
+   suppression on "a claim exists" — which, on every site this card is about,
+   means the maintenance charge-only shaping is suspended **permanently**. A
+   silent, large change to a different subsystem is not a price this card should
+   pay.
+2. It changes the meaning of `PeakDecision.engaged` at five call sites outside
+   this module — `arbitrage.guard_state()`, `shaping_suspended()`,
+   `claim()`, `main.py`'s edge-logged action line and `main.py`'s status row —
+   each of which today means "the guard is HOLDING" and would silently start
+   meaning "a claim exists".
+
+`test_peakguard.py` part 5's sweep asserts **no negative floor, ever**, and the
+reason it gives ("a `lo` limit is incapable of capping discharge or export only
+while it is non-negative") is, strictly, not the true reason — a `lo` of any sign
+caps neither. The invariant is still right and is still worth holding; §2b above
+is the argument that actually supports it, and it is recorded here rather than
+left for the next person to re-derive.
+
+### 2c. A backoff, cooldown or hysteresis constant in `arbitrage.py` — rejected
+The card asks whether the second half of the fix belongs in arbitrage: *"a trade
+refused at 14:59 and re-armed at 15:00 has learned nothing from the refusal."*
+It does belong there, but as a **size**, not as a memory. `arbitrage.py`'s
+hysteresis note is explicit that the switching decision is "which hour is it" and
+that **no timer is needed and none is invented**; `peakguard.py`'s design note
+spends a paragraph on why it carries no hysteresis constant. A cooldown would be
+a second control loop compensating for a limit the first one declined to file,
+and its constant would outlive whatever it was tuned against. The trade now
+re-arms at `ceiling − load` instead of at `max_w`, which is what "learning from
+the refusal" means when the refusal is a measurement.
+
+## 3. What was done, and the precedent it follows
+
+`control.maintenance_charge_floor()` has capped MAINTENANCE charging at *"the
+headroom left under the site's cap"* since the loop was written, and its
+docstring says why:
+
+> "A maintenance charge is the only thing this system does that is big enough and
+> long enough to set that peak, so it is capped by the headroom left under the
+> site's cap."
+
+⚠️ **THAT SENTENCE STOPPED BEING TRUE WHEN OPT-04 LANDED.** Price arbitrage is a
+second thing that is big enough and long enough — it commands `max_w` for a whole
+tariff interval, deliberately, against the meter — and it was given no such cap.
+This card gives it the same shape, with one difference that matters:
+`maintenance_charge_floor()` sizes itself from `peak_forecast_entity`, which is
+OPTIONAL and empty on a default install — the exact hole SAFETY-25 had to close
+in `shaping_suspended()`. `charge_headroom_w()` comes off `decide()`, which runs
+wherever P1 does.
+
+**The number is `wanted_w` read in the other direction.** `decide()` already
+computes `wanted = batt_w + excess` as the DISCHARGE that lands the quarter on the
+ceiling; a negative `wanted` is a permitted CHARGE of `−wanted`. No new
+arithmetic, no new constant.
+
+Two properties make it safe to hand a strategy, and both are swept rather than
+argued (`test_peakguard.py` part 13):
+
+* ⚠️ **IT IS INVARIANT IN THE BATTERY.** Raise the charge by dW and the meter
+  rises by dW, so `excess` rises by exactly dW while `batt_w` falls by dW:
+  `wanted` does not move. Measured across `batt_w` from −5000 W to +2000 W on one
+  banked quarter — the headroom is 1350.0 W at every one of the six points while
+  the `excess` those runs see moves through six distinct values. It is a
+  **feed-forward** number, so consuming it adds no feedback path around the plant.
+  The fixed point is `charge = ceiling − load`, with the meter ON the ceiling and
+  `wanted` parked a whole `ceiling − load` clear of the engagement boundary.
+* **HOLDING IMPLIES ZERO OR UNKNOWN.** Across 1080 swept combinations, not one
+  ENGAGED decision answers a positive headroom, so the function can never hand a
+  caller permission the guard's own `lo` is at that instant refusing.
+
+## 4. After, on the same rig, same command, same checkout
+
+| `peak_cap_w` | house | onsets/h | grid swing | energy bought | billed quarters (W) |
+|---|---|---|---|---|---|
+| 1500 | 1200 W | 28 → **1** | 3655.5 → **282.0 W** | 180.0 → **285.2 Wh** | **1500.0 / 1500.0 / 1500.0** |
+| 3500 | 1800 W | 8 → **1** | 3672.5 → 1687.6 W | 1652.9 → 1616.1 Wh | **3500.0 / 3500.0 / 3500.0** |
+| 3500 | 3000 W | 32 → **1** | 3798.0 → **474.7 W** | 482.9 → 475.3 Wh | **3500.0 / 3500.0 / 3500.0** |
+| 5000 | 1200 W | 1 → 1 | **identical** | **identical** | **identical** |
+
+* **One onset** means the trade starts once and runs for the whole window. The
+  battery is trading 100 % of the hour where it used to trade 43 %, 92 % and 54 %.
+* **Every billed quarter lands exactly on the cap and none over it**, where every
+  quarter in the three biting rows used to finish over.
+* **The money.** At 1500/1200 the site buys **58 % MORE** energy, because a
+  continuous 300 W trade beats a 2000 W trade that is cancelled for 57 % of the
+  hour. At the two shipped-default rows it buys **2.2 % and 1.6 % less** — and in
+  exchange the worst quarter drops from 59 W over the cap to 0 W over it. The
+  capacity tariff bills the month's single worst quarter with no averaging and no
+  forgiveness (specs.md:583), so that is not a trade-off, it is the ordering
+  §10.1 asks for.
+* The remaining 1687.6 W at 3500/1800 is the opening **ramp**, not a cycle: the
+  pack goes from 0 to 1700 W of charge in about ten seconds and the meter with
+  it. One onset, no export, no reversal.
+* The last row is bit-identical before and after. **This card costs nothing on
+  the installs it is not about.**
+
+## 5. What this does NOT fix, with sizes
+
+* **TEST-23 finding 1 — the export overshoot at the END of a trade** (356–938 W,
+  ≈0.37 × `max_w`) is untouched and is a different card. It happens when the
+  cheap interval ends and the grid-following loop takes back an actuator that was
+  holding a charge; nothing here changes the handover.
+* **A house whose load ALONE exceeds the cap** (`load > peak_cap_w`) still puts
+  `wanted > 0`, still engages the guard, and still refuses the trade outright
+  through the interlock — correctly, since you cannot buy in a quarter you are
+  already over on. The loop then drives to grid = 0 rather than to grid =
+  ceiling, which is more discharge than the guard asked for. Not swept here: all
+  four (cap, load) pairs on the record have `load < cap`.
+* **`arbitrage.claim()` still files the SIZED number, but the ARBITER can clamp
+  it further** and the strategy is not told. The reason line names the guard's
+  headroom, not the arbiter's `bound_by`. Pre-existing; not widened.
+* **The container leg was not re-run.** `hadrive.py` needs `test23s3-addon`
+  started, and that container is deliberately stopped because it is a second
+  writer on the setpoint entity under measurement. The in-process rig's twelve
+  transcribed lines are pinned by `test_arbitrage.py` 3b's AST check on
+  `main.py`'s call site, which is the line this card adds to them.

goodwe_controller/DECISIONS/TARIFF-07-withdrawing-three-plugins.md

@@ -0,0 +1,230 @@
+# TARIFF-07 — three plugins that never fetched a price, and the one mechanism they leave behind
+
+**Status: DECIDED 2026-09-13 — withdraw `engie_dynamic`,
+`totalenergies_dynamic` and `eneco_eddy`. Keep `PriceProduct.REALTIME` and the
+widening machinery. Refuse a retired id by name rather than aliasing it.**
+
+Filed with TARIFF-07. Follows [[TARIFF-08]], which found the same class of
+defect one layer down — a parser graded against its own guess — and left the
+question of these three open.
+
+---
+
+## 1. The endpoints, verified rather than taken on report
+
+The card said the three endpoints were dead. They were re-checked by hand on
+**2026-09-13** before anything was deleted, because "the endpoint is dead" is
+exactly the kind of claim this repository keeps finding to be second-hand:
+
+| id | endpoint | observed |
+|---|---|---|
+| `engie_dynamic` | `https://api.engie.be/dynamic/be` | **HTTP 404**, body `{"message":"no Route matched with those values","request_id":"..."}` — a Kong gateway with no route configured |
+| `totalenergies_dynamic` | `https://api.totalenergies.be/prices/dynamic` | **TLS failure**. The handshake completes and the server presents `CN=pge-apigee-dev.direct-energie.com`; `api.totalenergies.be` is not in the SAN list, so the connection is closed before any request is sent |
+| `eneco_eddy` | `https://api.eneco.be/eddy/prices` | **HTTP 404**, `content-length: 1`, `server: Microsoft-IIS/10.0` — an empty body from a live host that does not serve this path |
+
+All three failed. Had any one of them answered, this card would have stopped
+and asked, because an endpoint that answers changes the decision from
+"withdraw" to "fix the parser".
+
+## 2. Why this is not "unfinished", and why no replacement can be written
+
+An unfinished plugin has a right endpoint and a wrong parser. These have
+neither, and the reason is structural:
+
+* **ENGIE's dynamic price is `(B × eSpot_15) − A`, and `B` and `A` are
+  PER-CONTRACT.** They live behind the customer's klantenzone login. No
+  unauthenticated public URL can return *a given customer's* price, so the
+  endpoint this plugin wanted cannot exist for anybody to build.
+* **There is no regulator index to read the coefficients from.** CREG's
+  tariff-card pages 404; VREG was unreachable. Every coefficient found in
+  research came from a supplier's own PDF, which is a document, not a feed.
+* **"Eddy" is not an Eneco product at all.** Eneco's dynamic product is
+  **"Zon & Wind Dynamisch"**, and it is indexed to **Belpex/EPEX day-ahead** —
+  not to imbalance. The plugin was wrong about the product, the product type
+  and the URL simultaneously.
+
+So the three were not withdrawn for being broken. They were withdrawn for
+describing tariffs that no public endpoint can serve.
+
+## 3. What a site configured on one of these has actually been running
+
+⚠️ **This is the half that decides what the migration is.** §11.4 turns a
+failed fetch into a silent fall back: static profile, plan provisional, no
+arbitrage. That is the *correct* degradation, and it says nothing at all about
+the cause. Every fetch these three ever made raised `SourceUnavailable`.
+
+Therefore a site configured on one of them has been running on
+`static_profile` — **or on nothing at all, where no profile was set** — since
+the day the id was entered, and **nothing on its status page has ever differed
+from a working provider that simply never found a cheap hour**.
+
+The migration is therefore **not** "keep their prices working". There were no
+prices. It is *"tell them their prices never worked"*, which is why the answer
+is a refusal and not a fallback.
+
+### Why not a silent alias to `generic_dayahead`
+
+It is the friendlier-looking option and it is wrong. These published **retail**
+prices; `generic_dayahead` reads **wholesale**. Aliasing needs the site's own
+`B` and `A`, which §2 has just established nobody has. An alias would have to
+**invent the numbers a battery is priced against** — the same defect as a
+parser graded against its own guess, one layer further from anything that
+reports. The scalar `price_markup_eur_kwh` cannot stand in for `B` either: it
+is an addend, not a multiplier, and it is `float(0,1)` so it cannot even hold a
+negative `A`.
+
+## 4. ⚠️ The `config.yaml` schema is deliberately WIDER than the registry
+
+`price_provider` is a `list(off|…)` enum, and the Supervisor validates the
+options file against it **before the add-on starts**.
+
+So the obvious edit — delete the three ids from the enum along with the classes
+— has a consequence that runs exactly opposite to this card's purpose:
+
+```
+operator's config says  price_provider: eneco_eddy
+        |
+        +-- id NOT in the schema enum
+                |
+                +-- Supervisor rejects the options file
+                        |
+                        +-- add-on never starts
+                                |
+                                +-- validate.py never runs
+                                        |
+                                        +-- the named refusal is NEVER SEEN
+```
+
+The operator gets an opaque `expected one of ...` from a layer they did not
+configure, on **exactly the sites the withdrawal exists to inform**.
+
+**Decision: keep all three ids in the schema enum.** `PROVIDERS` shrinks to
+two; the enum stays at six. The cost is that the dropdown still offers three
+dead ids to a *new* operator — and that is the cheaper failure, because
+choosing one is refused at the next startup **by name**, with the endpoint, the
+observation and the alternative, which is strictly more than a schema
+rejection would say. Both translations label them withdrawn in the option
+description.
+
+`app/price.py`'s `RETIRED_PROVIDERS` is the list. `test_price.py` section 1
+asserts the schema offers exactly `PROVIDERS | RETIRED_PROVIDERS | {"off"}` —
+derived, not typed — and `register()` refuses to re-register a retired id, so
+the registry and the retired table cannot both claim one and the refusal cannot
+be taken away by an `@register` somebody adds back.
+
+## 5. ⚠️ `PriceProduct.REALTIME` and the widening path are KEPT with no shipped declarer
+
+`eneco_eddy` was the **sole** declarer of `PriceProduct.REALTIME`. Deleting it
+orphans:
+
+* `_WIDE = frozenset({PriceProduct.REALTIME})`
+* `Uncertainty.REALTIME_PRODUCT`
+* `WIDEN_FACTOR[Uncertainty.REALTIME_PRODUCT] = 2.5`
+
+**They stay.** The reasoning, stated here so the next reader finds intent
+rather than an apparent dead branch:
+
+1. A reviewer finding a mechanism with **zero callers** would reasonably delete
+   it. That is good instinct applied to a missing fact, and this file is the
+   fact.
+2. It is the **AC2 seam**. The whole point of `capabilities().product` is that
+   a new supplier is a new class and nothing else: declare `REALTIME`, get the
+   wide regime, edit no framework code. Deleting the enum member would mean the
+   first genuine imbalance product has to **rebuild** that seam — and rebuilding
+   it is precisely the "editing the optimiser to add a supplier" that AC2
+   forbids.
+3. It costs nothing. Two enum members and a dict entry.
+
+**⚠️ NO SHIPPED PLUGIN DECLARES `PriceProduct.REALTIME` UNTIL ONE DOES.** Both
+shipped plugins (`generic_dayahead`, `manual_csv`) are day-ahead. §9.2's row 2
+is unoccupied. That is not the same as it having no mechanism, and the
+difference is what this section exists to record.
+
+It is **pinned, not merely documented**. `test_price.py` section 5 asserts:
+
+* that **no shipped plugin** declares `REALTIME` — so if one ever does, the
+  check goes red and the right fix is to **edit this record**, not to delete
+  the seam;
+* that the widening still works **from a declaration alone** —
+  `volatility_regime`, `uncertainty_of` and `widen_factor` are graded on a
+  `ProviderCapabilities` the test file builds;
+* and section 10 registers `_NewSupplier`, a class defined **outside
+  `price.py`** that declares `REALTIME` and is asserted to land in the wide
+  regime. That class is now the only live declarer in the tree, which makes the
+  seam something this suite exercises end to end rather than a constant it
+  reads.
+
+## 6. What else went, and one thing that did not
+
+`_points_from_json()` went with the three. It read a `{"data": [{...}]}`
+row-per-point document that **no feed anybody here has ever reached
+publishes** — the shape was invented alongside these plugins, and the only
+bodies ever fed to it were fixtures written from the same guess. TARIFF-08
+found that loop on the response side for `generic_dayahead`; this is the rest
+of it. `needs_credentials` went too: the three were its only setters and
+nothing read it.
+
+The shape survives in **one** place and in one direction: `row_shape_body()` in
+`test_price.py`, feeding `generic_dayahead` so that section 9 grades a row
+document as a **failure** for it rather than a second dialect it might sniff.
+It is named for what it is.
+
+⚠️ **One check had to be rebuilt rather than deleted, and saying so matters.**
+`test_price.py` section 4b proved that `code_leaks()`'s docstring strip is
+load-bearing by finding a shipped docstring that a raw text scan would
+false-positive on. The docstring that did that was **`engie_dynamic`'s** — it
+spelled `price_markup_eur_kwh` in full. With it gone, no shipped docstring
+spells a full framework key, so the check would have **passed on a tree with
+the strip deleted**: a check that had quietly stopped being one, which is the
+third failure mode in `MUTATION.md`. The stimulus is now constructed in the
+test file (`_DocumentedPlugin`), and the shipped set is asserted clean
+separately.
+
+## 7. Mutations driven
+
+Every check added or rebuilt here was driven red. Harness:
+`/home/homelab/.cache/t07-mut/`, which rebuilds the tree from the worktree and
+purges `__pycache__` per `MUTATION.md`'s rule.
+
+| | mutation | Δ | red on |
+|---|---|---|---|
+| M1 | delete the retired branch from `_price_problems()` | −2785 B | 7 checks in `test_price.py` |
+| M2 | move the retired branch **after** the unknown-id branch | **+0 B** | the same 7 |
+| M3 | make `been_running` constant (drop the empty-`static_profile` case) | −212 B | 2 |
+| M4 | drop the "WHAT TO DO" half of the refusal | −874 B | 1 |
+| M5 | `RETIRED_PROVIDERS = {}` | −1099 B | 5, then a traceback |
+| M6 | drop the three ids from `config.yaml`'s enum — §4's trap | −47 B | 2 |
+| M7 | delete `register()`'s retired guard | −1101 B | 2, then a traceback |
+| M8 | `_WIDE = frozenset()` | −23 B | 3 + 4 across two suites |
+| M9 | `WIDEN_FACTOR[REALTIME_PRODUCT]` 2.5 → 1.5 | **+0 B** | 1 + 1 |
+
+⚠️ **M2 and M9 have a byte delta of zero**, which `MUTATION.md` names as the
+risky case. The harness rebuilds the tree from source on every run and purges
+`__pycache__`, so there is no inherited cache to read; and stale bytecode
+manufactures **survivors**, never reds, so a red from a `+0 B` mutation is not
+at risk from that defect. M2's grep confirmed the branch had moved on disk.
+
+⚠️ **M5 and M7's red counts are LOWER BOUNDS.** Both runs ended in a traceback
+with checks after it ungraded — FCST-06's rule: read the output, not the count.
+M7's traceback is itself informative: with the guard gone the re-registration
+**succeeds**, `PROVIDERS` is polluted with a class that has no fixture, and the
+suite dies downstream. That is the failure the guard prevents, arriving loudly.
+
+## 8. What this card did not do
+
+* **It did not pick a version number.** The change is backward-incompatible — a
+  config legal on the current version is refused on the next — and the
+  CHANGELOG says so prominently, in the shape PKG-07 established for `slew_w`.
+  Which number it belongs to depends on whether the current image has already
+  been built and pulled, which is a fact about the live box that this branch
+  cannot observe. Whoever deploys decides.
+* **It did not implement the formula provider.** `B × spot + A` with per-site
+  coefficients is the real answer for a Belgian dynamic customer and is a
+  separate card. `DOCS.md` references it as planned and is explicit about what
+  `generic_dayahead` can and cannot express in the meantime — in particular
+  that it cannot represent a negative offset, and that
+  `price_markup_eur_kwh: float(0,1)` could not hold one anyway.
+* **It did not rewrite released CHANGELOG history.** The two historical entries
+  that called `eneco_eddy` an imbalance product are annotated in place with a
+  correction naming this card, rather than silently edited. The record of what
+  the project believed is part of the record.

goodwe_controller/DECISIONS/TARIFF-09-the-range-and-the-override.md

@@ -0,0 +1,141 @@
+# TARIFF-09 — asking the feed for the horizon, and what `price_feed_url` means
+
+Two decisions. The first had no defensible alternative once it was measured;
+the second did, and the alternative is argued below rather than dismissed.
+
+---
+
+## 0. The measurement this card exists for
+
+`generic_dayahead.fetch()` accepted `since` and `until` and requested the bare
+`https://api.energy-charts.info/price?bzn=BE`. That URL names no range, and the
+feed answers **one Brussels day**.
+
+Measured on the merged tree (`4257e38`) at 2026-09-10 09:00 CEST, 48 h horizon,
+live feed, yesterday seeded through the shipped read path:
+
+```
+60 firm points (15 whole hours) + 33 carried hours of 48 requested
+carried: 24 h on 2026-09-11, 9 h on 2026-09-12
+arbitrage(0.10): allowed, spread 0.4645, buy 11:45 and sell 19:45 -- BOTH on 2026-09-10
+firm local days = [2026-09-10]
+```
+
+Everything past today was carry-forward, flagged provisional, and §8.3 drops
+provisional hours from the trade set. **The optimiser never saw tomorrow as
+firm, at any hour.** The ceiling was structural rather than incidental: with a
+one-day window, at hour *H* of the local day a 48 h horizon is at most
+**24−H hours firm and 24+H carried** — 15/33 at 09:00, and **1/47 at 23:00**,
+where the remaining firm spread (0.0464 EUR/kWh) no longer even clears the
+default 0.10 round-trip threshold and arbitrage is refused outright.
+
+That is not what FCST-04's fill was built for. FCST-04 covers the
+pre-publication window until the ~13:00–14:00 CET auction, after which a
+healthy feed hands over tomorrow in full.
+
+**The data exists and the endpoint serves it.** Verified 2026-09-10T07:45:49Z:
+`?bzn=BE&start=2026-09-09&end=2026-09-10` returns **192 quarter-hours across
+two local days**, committed unmodified as
+`scenarios/energy-charts-be-price-2026-09-09_2026-09-10-twoday.json`. The
+plugin simply never asked.
+
+After the change, same code path, same window, a feed serving both days:
+**39 firm hours and 9 carried**, firm across **two** Brussels days, and the
+permitted cycle buys on one day and sells on the other. Graded in
+`test_price_history.py` section 1c against both feed states.
+
+---
+
+## 1. The range is derived on the **Brussels** calendar, from `since`/`until`
+
+`since` and `until` are **instants**; the API takes **dates**. Those are not
+the same question, and the conversion is where the day gets lost.
+
+`brussels_date_range()` returns two inclusive `date`s:
+
+* the first is `brussels(since).date()`. **Not `since.date()`, and not the UTC
+  date.** 22:30 UTC in summer is already tomorrow in Belgium, so a UTC-derived
+  start asks for the day the controller has just left and drops the day it is
+  standing in — for the last one or two hours of *every* day. This is
+  `price_history._bdate()`'s lesson one layer up, with a worse consequence:
+  `_bdate()` misfiles an hour, this never fetches it.
+* the last is `brussels(until).date()`, **stepped back a day when `until`
+  falls exactly on local midnight**, because `until` is exclusive and that
+  instant is the first tick of a day nobody asked for. Without it every
+  whole-hour horizon requests one extra day — harmless on this feed, but it
+  makes the request a claim the caller never made.
+* an empty or inverted window collapses to a single day rather than producing
+  a backwards range, which no feed has a defined answer for.
+
+Both ends are graded, and both are driven red by mutation — including the two
+that swap `brussels()` for the UTC date (`test_price.py` section 2c).
+
+---
+
+## 2. `price_feed_url` is the **exact URL**, used as given. The plugin appends
+   nothing.
+
+The alternative — merge our `start`/`end` into whatever query string the
+operator supplied — was considered and rejected. Three reasons, in the order
+they decided it:
+
+1. **`start`/`end` are energy-charts' spelling, and this provider declares a
+   second host.** `generic_dayahead.capabilities().egress_hosts` is
+   `("api.energy-charts.info", "web-api.tp.entsoe.eu")`. That second host's
+   day-ahead date parameters have not been verified by this card and are not
+   guessed at here — but they are not `start`/`end`. So an override to the
+   *other declared host* — a case the declaration itself anticipates — is
+   exactly where merging appends two parameters that host ignores, producing
+   the short horizon anyway, with a URL nobody typed as the receipt.
+2. **Merging means re-serialising a URL somebody else wrote.** Parsing and
+   rebuilding reorders parameters, collapses duplicates and re-escapes values.
+   "Override the feed" is what the option already says it means, and an
+   override that is silently rewritten is not one.
+3. **Blind appending is not on the table at all.** `dated_feed_url()` refuses
+   to add a query string to a base that already has one, so
+   `?bzn=BE?bzn=BE&start=…` cannot be produced by this module even by a later
+   edit that folds the parameters back into the constant.
+
+⚠️ **The cost is real and it is therefore NOT a doc footnote.** An overriding
+operator gets exactly the short horizon this card exists to fix. So the plugin
+emits a `WARNING` on the shipped `goodwe.price` logger at **fetch time**, naming
+the consequence — one Brussels day, the rest carried and flagged, §8.3 dropping
+them from the trade set — and naming the `start..end` it *would* have asked
+for. §11.4 is what makes a price defect quiet; an operator who has taken the
+short horizon has to be able to find out from the log that they did.
+
+The warning is graded, with a control that the default path stays silent, and
+a mutation that downgrades it to `debug()` takes that check red.
+
+**Fetch time rather than startup**, because that is where the URL actually in
+use is known. The trade-off is one line per refresh (the tariff task, not the
+30 s control tick). If the status page ever grows a price-source row, this is
+the sentence it should carry.
+
+---
+
+## 3. The plugin contract: `fetch(self, opts, since, until, transport)`
+
+The signature promises every plugin the range, and until this card **none of
+the four networked plugins used it**. The obvious follow-up is to enforce the
+promise. It is **not** enforced, and the reason is TARIFF-08's:
+
+Three of the five shipped plugins point at endpoints nobody has ever verified
+(TARIFF-07 is the open decision on withdrawing them). A rule obliging them to
+pass a date range would be satisfied by an **invented parameter name** — which
+is the parser-graded-against-its-own-guess defect moved from the response to
+the request, and it would ship looking like a guarantee.
+
+What exists instead is a **roster pin** in `test_price.py` section 2c: which
+plugins reference their `since`/`until` is asserted as a literal, derived from
+the registry and the AST. A sixth supplier, or a change to any of the three,
+has to edit that line and make the decision rather than inherit the silence.
+It is named as a source-shape pin, not as evidence that any feed parses;
+`generic_dayahead`'s behaviour is graded separately by the URL it really
+requests.
+
+**Recommendation for whoever picks up TARIFF-07:** enforce it at the moment
+those three endpoints are either verified or withdrawn, not before. If they are
+withdrawn, `generic_dayahead` and `manual_csv` are the whole roster and the
+rule is one line — `manual_csv` reads a whole file and is windowed downstream,
+so it would be the single documented exemption.

goodwe_controller/DECISIONS/TARIFF-10-fetching-is-not-trading.md

@@ -0,0 +1,277 @@
+# TARIFF-10 — fetching a price and trading on one are two decisions
+
+**Status: DECIDED 2026-09-12 — Option A. If a price provider is configured,
+prices are fetched. Trading stays a separate switch (`arbitrage_enabled`), and
+this card moves nothing that moves energy.**
+
+Filed with TARIFF-10. Follows [[TARIFF-09]] and [[FCST-04]]; §4 settles the
+limitation FCST-04 recorded and did not decide.
+
+---
+
+## 1. The defect, and why it was invisible
+
+`app/main.py`'s `amain()` read:
+
+```
+if arbitrage.enabled(opts):
+    tasks.append(asyncio.create_task(controller.run_tariff_refresh()))
+```
+
+`run_tariff_refresh` is the **only** caller of `resolve_tariff()`, which is the
+**only** caller of `price_history.carry()`. `arbitrage_enabled` ships `false`.
+
+So on a shipped install with a provider configured:
+
+* no HTTPS request was ever made to the feed;
+* no plan was ever resolved, so `self.tariff_plan` stayed `None` forever;
+* `/data/price_history.json` was never created;
+* the *Price history* status row read `empty` for the life of the install;
+* TARIFF-09's short-horizon warning could not fire, because it is logged on a
+  fetch and there was no fetch.
+
+Measured, not inferred — a 40 h soak, two instances, one feed:
+
+| | shipped default + provider | same, arbitrage armed |
+|---|---|---|
+| feed requests | **0** | fetching |
+| `/data/price_history.json` | `present: false`, **802/802 samples** | written |
+| resolved plan | none | 132 points |
+
+⚠️ **AND FOUR SURFACES ALREADY DESCRIBED THE FIXED BEHAVIOUR.** `DOCS.md`
+§*Energy price providers*: *"With `arbitrage_enabled: false`, which is the
+shipped default, turning a provider on still fetches, validates and publishes
+prices and changes no charging decision."* `config.yaml` and both translations
+said the same, and additionally carried a claim that had gone stale in the other
+direction — *"nothing consumes the price series yet"*, untrue since OPT-04
+shipped the consumer. The code was the only surface that disagreed with all of
+them, and no check compared the two.
+
+The dating is worth being exact about, because it says this was never a
+regression. `git log -S` puts the refresh task, its `arbitrage.enabled()` guard
+**and** the DOCS sentence in the *same commit* — OPT-04, `bdd7f18`;
+`config.yaml`'s version of the claim goes back further, to TARIFF-02,
+`852fc7c`. The prose and the code disagreed from the moment both existed.
+
+## 2. Why a check on the `if` would not have caught it
+
+The `if` was exactly what somebody meant to write, and its comment argued for
+it honestly:
+
+> ⚠️ STARTED ONLY WHEN ARBITRAGE IS ARMED. Nothing else in the add-on reads the
+> resolved plan … so on a default install this task would be network traffic in
+> aid of an attribute nobody reads.
+
+That was true when OPT-04 wrote it and stopped being true when FCST-04 gave the
+plan a *store* and a *status row*. A pin on the expression would have gone red
+on the fix and green on the defect. What was wrong is the **set of
+configurations from which a fetch is reachable**, so that is what
+`test_price.py` section 13 grades:
+
+1. the guards on every `asyncio.create_task` in `amain()` are **evaluated**
+   against real option dicts — whatever the guard is spelled as;
+2. the call graph under `app/` is walked to see whether the coroutines those
+   guards start can arrive at `resolve_tariff()` — wherever it has moved to;
+3. and then the fetch is **driven**, with a counting transport, a real
+   `Controller` and a real store path, because a reachability graph is an
+   argument and a counted request is an observation.
+
+⚠️ **Step 3 grades the gate only because it starts the task the way `amain()`
+would.** The driver asks `_fetchers(opts)` — the evaluated guard — before it
+calls the coroutine. Measured: with the shipped defect restored **and** that one
+line defeated (`if False and "run_tariff_refresh" not in names:`), the four
+driven rows go **green** while only the structural rows stay red. Without it
+they are decoration, which is MUTATION.md's habit 4 in a harness.
+
+What the instrument **cannot** see is printed on every run: a coroutine started
+by anything but `create_task`; a guard that is not an enclosing `if` in
+`amain()`; anything outside `app/`; and — because the graph is keyed by **name**
+— two same-named functions as one node, which makes every *reachable* answer an
+**upper** bound and every *not reachable* answer the strong one.
+
+## 3. The gate, and why it is an `or`
+
+```
+def tariff_refresh_wanted(opts: dict) -> bool:
+    return provider_configured(opts) or arbitrage.enabled(opts)
+```
+
+The first term is what this card adds. **The second term is the old gate, kept
+verbatim, and it is not there for symmetry.**
+
+`price_provider: off` + a `static_profile` + `arbitrage_enabled: true` is a
+configuration `validate.py` explicitly **accepts** (rule 7 refuses only the
+no-prices-at-all case), and it **trades**. Measured on this branch:
+
+```
+opts: price_provider off, arbitrage_enabled true,
+      cycle_cost_threshold_eur 0.05,
+      static_profile 0.20 night / 0.284 day
+plan : static_profile from static_profile, 48 h, 48 points
+WITH  the plan -> ARBITRAGE_CHARGE -5000.0 W
+                  "cheapest firm hour at 0.2000 EUR/kWh, 0.0840 below the
+                   dearest and clear of the 0.0750 this cycle had to cover"
+WITHOUT the plan -> None  "no tariff plan has been resolved yet"
+```
+
+Gating the refresh on the provider **alone** — which is the literal reading of
+the ticket's second acceptance criterion — would leave that site's
+`tariff_plan` at `None` forever and answer *"no tariff plan has been resolved
+yet"* on every cycle. That is a strategy the UI says is running and that cannot
+fire: the exact state `validate.py`'s OPT-04 rules exist to refuse, arrived at
+from inside the code instead of from the configuration.
+
+So the gate is a **strict widening**: every configuration that started the task
+before still starts it, and `test_price.py` grades that as its own row rather
+than leaving it to prose.
+
+⚠️ **The AC's stated harm is still fully met, and it is worth being exact about
+this rather than quietly declaring victory.** The criterion reads *"with
+`price_provider: off`: no fetch task at all, whatever `arbitrage_enabled` says
+— an operator with no provider must not acquire a periodic HTTPS call."* The
+letter of it is not met in one configuration (provider off, trading armed),
+because that configuration keeps the task it already had. The harm it names is:
+
+* with `price_provider` off, `resolve_tariff()` returns `static_plan()` — pure
+  arithmetic, **no socket**. Driven and counted: **0 requests**.
+* the true shipped default — no provider, no trading — starts **no task at
+  all**.
+
+Nobody *acquires* a periodic HTTPS call from this card, and the only thing that
+decides whether a request leaves the machine is `price_provider`. **If the
+owner wants the literal reading instead, it is a one-token change** (drop the
+`or` term) **and it costs the site in the measurement above its trading.** That
+is the trade, stated rather than chosen silently.
+
+## 4. `TariffPlan.cheap_now()` — available, and deliberately NOT consumed
+
+**Decision: do not wire it in this card. `self.cheap` stays on
+`static_status()`.**
+
+FCST-04 recorded that `cheap_now()` has no production caller on the provider
+plan: `main.read_inputs()` assigns `self.cheap, self.tariff_words =
+static_status(o, now)`, which builds its **own** static plan and calls
+`cheap_now()` on that. Under Option A a provider-backed plan now exists on every
+configured site, so the limitation stops being structural and becomes a choice.
+
+**It is not cosmetic, and that is the whole reason for the decision.**
+`self.cheap` is read in `cycle()` by the maintenance cycle's cheap-window grid
+top-up — the add-on's one shiftable load, and the one place a *price* reaches
+something that **moves energy** on an install that has not armed trading.
+
+⚠️ **And the direction it would move is not "a slightly different window".**
+`static_status()` returns `(False, "no static profile")` whenever
+`static_profile` is empty, so today a provider-only site — a plausible shape
+for a dynamic-tariff install, and the shape this card makes work — has
+`self.cheap = False` on **every** cycle and never forces a paid grid top-up at
+all. Wiring `cheap_now()` would take that from *never* to *sometimes*. That is
+a strictly larger behaviour change than this card's headline, and it belongs to
+whoever owns the maintenance cycle rather than to the ticket that made it
+reachable.
+
+Three further reasons, in the order they would bite:
+
+1. **Two sources, one attribute, and the loser is silent.** `validate.py`
+   already refuses `static_profile` alongside the Home Assistant price
+   entities *because* `read_inputs()` picks one and the other disappears. A
+   provider plan would be a third writer of the same attribute with no rule
+   saying which wins.
+2. **The freshness question is not answered for this consumer.** The plan
+   retires after `TARIFF_MAX_AGE_S` and `fresh_tariff_plan()` returns `None`.
+   Arbitrage has an answer for that (refuse). The maintenance top-up has none:
+   "the plan expired" would have to mean *not cheap*, and *not cheap* on this
+   path means **wait for sun**, which is a real decision nobody has taken.
+3. **The comparison basis changes, and so does the answer on a bad feed.**
+   `cheap_now()` is strictly-below-the-mean-of-the-**firm**-hours, and it is
+   `False` when THIS hour is provisional or is not in the series at all
+   (FCST-03's rule: this hour decides, not the whole plan). So a feed that
+   published nothing, or an hour the §8.3 fill could not cover, reads *not
+   cheap* where a `static_profile` reads whatever the clock says. Defensible
+   either way — and it is a change to the shipped maintenance cycle that needs
+   its own measurement rather than a side effect of this one.
+
+**What adopting it would take**, so the next card does not start from scratch:
+
+* a rule for which source wins when both a provider plan and a
+  `static_profile` are configured, enforced in `validate.py` the way the
+  entity/profile conflict already is;
+* a decision on what an **expired** or **absent** plan means for the grid
+  top-up, stated as a default rather than left to `None`;
+* `read_inputs()` splitting `self.cheap` from `self.tariff_words`, which are
+  currently one assignment from one function;
+* a check that the maintenance top-up actually fires and does not fire on the
+  provider plan — driven through `cycle()`, not asserted on the attribute;
+* and the *Tariff* status row, which FCST-04 pinned as a **pair** with
+  `DOCS.md` in `test_price_history.py` §9: it does not report the provider
+  plan, DOCS does not claim it does, and moving one without the other is
+  already red.
+
+## 5. The *Arbitrage* status row, re-read and left alone
+
+`main.status_payload()` renders `("Arbitrage", "off (arbitrage_enabled)" if
+self.arb is None else self.arb.explain())`. `self.arb` is assigned only inside
+`if arbitrage.enabled(self.o):` and `arbitrage.decide()` never returns `None`,
+so `self.arb is None` **iff** the option is off. The string still names the
+option that is actually off, and under Option A it gains a job it did not have:
+on a site with a provider configured it is the row that tells an operator the
+prices arriving on the *Price history* row above are moving nothing. Unchanged,
+with a note at the call site saying it was checked.
+
+## 6. What this card did not do
+
+* It did not touch `run_tariff_refresh()`'s body (TARIFF-12 is there).
+* It did not change `cycle()`'s `if arbitrage.enabled(self.o):`, the sizing,
+  the thresholds, the SoC bounds or the peak interlock.
+* It did not wire the provider plan into the *Tariff* status row or into
+  `self.cheap` — §4.
+* It did not pick a version number (PKG-06).
+
+## 7. Mutation ledger
+
+Every mutation applied to a **fresh `cp -a`** of the clean worktree rather than
+reverted (habit 18: there is no revert to verify and no shared scratch path),
+`__pycache__` purged, tree mounted `:ro`, run under `python3 -B`.
+
+| id | mutation | Δ bytes | result |
+|---|---|---|---|
+| M1 | the shipped defect: gate back to `arbitrage.enabled(opts)` | **-4 B** | **RED**, 7 named checks |
+| M2 | drop the `or arbitrage.enabled(opts)` term | -27 B | **RED**, 2 named checks (strict-widening + the static-profile row) |
+| M3 | `tariff_refresh_wanted` -> always `True` | +8 B | **RED**, the AC2 reachability row |
+| M4 | `provider_configured`: `"off"` counts as configured | -6 B | **RED**, the AC2 reachability row |
+| M5 | `cycle()`'s trading gate -> `if True or arbitrage.enabled(self.o)` | +8 B | **RED**, both AC3 rows (`-5000 W` with trading off) |
+| M6 | instrument: `_reaches()` always `True` | **+0 B** | **RED**, 4 checks incl. its own calibration row |
+| M7 | instrument: `_task_sites()` returns `[]` | **+0 B** | **RED**, 10 checks incl. "it found 0 sites" |
+| M8 | fixture: 5 minutes of telegrams instead of a whole quarter | **+0 B** | **RED**, the peak-guard precondition and both armed rows |
+| M9 | M1 **plus** the harness's guard-driven start defeated | -4 B | the four DRIVEN rows go **GREEN** — see §2 |
+| M10 | `provider_id()` drops `.strip()` | -8 B | **survivor**, then CLOSED — see below |
+| M11 | `provider_configured()` -> `return True` | -32 B | **RED**, 4 checks |
+| M12 | DOCS.md's sentence reverted to the old, vaguer claim | +0 B (docs) | **RED**, the AC4 pairing row (`fetches = True, DOCS says = False`) |
+| M13 | the Dutch translation left behind while English moved | +0 B (docs) | **RED**, the both-languages row |
+
+⚠️ **M10 was a real survivor and is recorded as one.** Dropping `.strip()` left
+`test_price.py`, `test_price_history.py`, `test_static_tariff.py` and
+`test_validate.py` all green: nothing in the repository fed a `price_provider`
+with surrounding whitespace, and the `.strip()` predates this card — it was
+carried into `provider_id()` from the three call sites it replaced. The
+Supervisor's `list(off|…)` schema cannot produce `"  off  "`, but
+`validate_startup_config()` is also `sim/inject.py`'s entry point and takes any
+dict at all. Closed in the same commit by the padded-id pair in section 13;
+re-run as **M10b**, red on two named checks.
+
+⚠️ **M8 is the fixture defect this card walked into and then fenced.** The
+first draft fed five minutes of telegrams. Whether that **covers** the current
+billing quarter depends on where the wall clock sits inside it, so the peak
+guard was blind and engaged on some runs and not others — and `decide()` refuses
+outright while the guard is holding (§9.1 over §10.1). On those runs the armed
+baseline did not trade, and "trading off never trades" would have been graded
+on a fixture in which nothing could trade either way. It is now 900 s of
+telegrams, and the guard's clear state is a **check** rather than an assumption.
+
+## 8. What is still open
+
+* The literal reading of AC2 (§3). One token, and it costs a measured trading
+  configuration its plan. **Owner's call.**
+* `cheap_now()` (§4). Owner's call, with the adoption list above.
+* The *Tariff* status row still shows the static-profile sentence on a
+  provider-backed site; the provider plan's own line goes to the log. Pinned as
+  a pair with `DOCS.md` by FCST-04 and untouched here.

goodwe_controller/DECISIONS/TARIFF-12-a-degradation-is-not-a-refresh.md

@@ -0,0 +1,252 @@
+# TARIFF-12 — a returned degradation is not a refresh
+
+Three decisions. The first is what the ticket put up for judgement; the second
+and third are what fall out of it and would otherwise be decided by accident.
+
+---
+
+## 0. What was actually wrong, stated once
+
+`run_tariff_refresh()`'s docstring:
+
+> ⚠️ **AND A FAILURE DOES NOT CLEAR THE PLAN.** … Zeroing the plan here would
+> replace a coarse tariff with no tariff, which is the opposite of what §11.4
+> asks for.
+
+The guarantee was real. The condition it was enforced on was not:
+
+```python
+try:
+    plan = await resolve_tariff(...)
+    self.tariff_plan, self.tariff_at = plan, now     # unconditional
+except Exception as err:
+    _LOG.warning("tariff refresh failed (%s); keeping the plan ...")
+```
+
+`load_prices()` says in its own docstring that it **"RETURNS, NEVER RAISES, for
+every failure a site can actually have"**, because a degradation arriving as a
+traceback into the planning tick would stop the controller regulating over an
+expired certificate. So a supplier outage — the case the docstring names first —
+is a **return**: the `try` succeeds, `_degrade()` hands back a §11.4 plan, and
+the good plan is overwritten. The `except` is reachable only by something
+nobody expected, and nothing in the shipped path produces it.
+
+This is the fourth card in one family: FCST-04's M4 (`not ok` only), FCST-05's
+HIGH (`(JSONDecodeError, OSError)` only), FCST-06 (`not self.ok` only), and now
+`except Exception` only, for a path that never raises. **A guarantee enforced on
+the condition someone thought of, rather than the condition that occurs.**
+
+Reproduced before the fix, driving the shipped chain with nothing stubbed but
+the socket — 48 h horizon, `static_profile` empty, one good fetch then a
+`ClientConnectorError` 1800 s later, `TARIFF_MAX_AGE_S` = 5400 s:
+
+```
+after a good fetch      origin='provider'  n_points=48  'dynamic_dayahead from generic_dayahead, 48 h'
+after the failed fetch  origin='none'      n_points=0   'no tariff - generic_dayahead: ClientConnectorError: ...'
+tariff_at moved: True
+```
+
+and after it:
+
+```
+after the failed fetch  origin='provider'  n_points=48  'dynamic_dayahead from generic_dayahead, 48 h'
+tariff_at moved: False
+```
+
+---
+
+## 1. The question is asked ONCE, after the attempt, from the evidence that exists
+
+FCST-06's answer, one module over, and for the same reason: **the enumeration
+of failure conditions cannot be completed.** There is no pre-check that a feed
+will answer which is not itself a guess, and adding one would be a second
+symptom test beside the `except`. So the predicate is an **outcome**, read off
+the object the attempt produced:
+
+```python
+standing = self.fresh_tariff_plan(now)
+keep = (not plan.from_feed
+        and standing is not None and standing.from_feed)
+```
+
+Two facts, both of which exist by the time the question is asked:
+
+* **`plan.from_feed`** — did *this* resolution observe the configured provider?
+  `TariffPlan.origin` already names the four ways a plan is obtained; this
+  collapses them to the one question a caller holding a previous plan has to
+  ask. It lives on `TariffPlan` rather than as an `origin == "provider"` at the
+  call site for `fresh_tariff_plan()`'s own stated reason — *a check has to be
+  able to assert on the shipped expression rather than on a transcription that
+  drifts* — and because `origin`'s vocabulary belongs to `static_tariff.py`.
+* **`fresh_tariff_plan(now)`** — is a standing observation still current. It
+  already existed, it is already the one place the age is judged, and it is
+  **reused, not transcribed**. `test_arbitrage.py` 8b pins that reuse on the
+  AST; a copy of the comparison behaves identically until the day the two
+  drift, which is a claim about the code's shape, so a shape check is what
+  grades it (FCST-06's precedent for the one source check among driven ones).
+
+### What was NOT done
+
+* **Not `except Exception` widened, or a second `if` beside it.** That is the
+  defect's own shape — a place where the rule is spelt twice, so a fifth cause
+  needs a fifth branch. The `except` stays, relabelled *"not the outage path"*,
+  keeps the plan on the same terms, and is now honestly the
+  something-nobody-expected branch.
+* **Not the persisted price store as a cache.** Out of scope by the product
+  owner's call, and it is the right call: FCST-03 exists precisely to stop
+  stale prices being acted on, and "recent" is not "current". Keeping the last
+  **fetched** plan until it ages out is a different promise from serving the
+  store, and that one needs its own ticket.
+* **Not a `no_data`-only guard.** `not plan.has_prices` is the tempting
+  spelling and it is wrong — see decision 2. It leaves the §11.4 fallback free
+  to replace a fresh observation, and it is a 1-byte edit from the shipped
+  line, which is why it is in the mutation table rather than in a comment.
+
+---
+
+## 2. A §11.4 static fallback does NOT replace a fresh provider plan
+
+The ticket asked this directly, because the fallback is *not* nothing: it is
+the operator's own configured profile, with real prices, for the requested
+window. The answer is still no, and the reason is not that it is worse data —
+it is that **nothing may be acted on it, and it is no more current.**
+
+* Every point `_degrade()` builds carries `provisional=True`. So
+  `firm_points()` is empty, `arbitrage()` finds fewer than two firm hours and
+  refuses, and `cheap_now()` is False. Both of the two things `TariffPlan`
+  exposes for a consumer to act on are already off.
+* A day-ahead price for a given hour **does not change once published**. A plan
+  fetched 30 minutes ago is exactly as true about 19:00 as one fetched now; at
+  most `TARIFF_MAX_AGE_S` of its horizon has elapsed. The observation is not
+  stale in any sense the fallback is fresher than.
+
+So replacing the observation with the fallback trades a plan with firm hours
+for a plan with none, and buys no currency with it. The fallback takes over
+when the observation **retires** — which is exactly the row §11.4 describes,
+arrived at when there is no longer an observation to prefer.
+
+### And the rule is deliberately NOT symmetrical
+
+`standing.from_feed` is a term in its own right. A standing plan that is itself
+a degradation **is** replaced by the next degradation, and its timestamp moves.
+Without that term:
+
+* an outage on a static-profile site would freeze the operator's profile at the
+  window it was first generated for, and the guard would be *"never overwrite"*
+  wearing a bound's name;
+* and on a `price_provider: off` install — the shipped default — the plan would
+  flip between kept and re-derived every `TARIFF_MAX_AGE_S`, for no behavioural
+  gain, changing which reason the status page prints on a two-hour cycle.
+
+Each of the three terms is the only false one in some check in 8b, which is
+MUTATION.md habit 17's test for whether a suite can tell an `AND` from an `OR`.
+
+---
+
+## 3. `tariff_at` does not move on a kept plan
+
+The docstring's other half is that a plan must not *"freeze at its last value
+and look current forever"*. `tariff_at` is what makes that work: it is the
+moment of the fetch that produced the plan standing, and `fresh_tariff_plan()`
+judges the age from it.
+
+Re-stamping it on a kept plan would be this task asserting the feed answered
+when it did not. The plan would be re-certified as current at every refresh, an
+outage of any length would never retire it, and `TARIFF_MAX_AGE_S` would be
+**exactly as dead as it was before this card** — reachable only by the refresh
+task itself dying. Leaving it alone is what makes the bound govern: the plan is
+served for the age bound after its own fetch, and no longer.
+
+It is also the whole of **"distinguishable from a freshly-fetched one"**. A
+kept plan and a fetched plan are the same object shape; what separates them is
+that one's timestamp advanced and the other's did not, and every consumer that
+asks how old the plan is already reads that number. The kept case additionally
+logs at WARNING, naming the degradation's own reason, the fetch it is keeping,
+its age, and the deadline it retires at.
+
+⚠️ **What this does not give the operator, and why it is not here.** The status
+page has no row for "the last refresh failed" — the banner/level not moving
+when the plan is lost is separately carded, and the ticket rules it out of
+scope. This card's change makes that surface *more* truthful, not less: during
+the first `TARIFF_MAX_AGE_S` of an outage there is now a real plan behind the
+Arbitrage row instead of a no-plan refusal, so the row says something true for
+longer. The no-plan state is entered later by up to 5400 s; it is not removed,
+and the 30-minute lag reported on that row is untouched by anything here.
+
+---
+
+## 4. Merged after TARIFF-10 — what the wider gate changed, and what it did not
+
+TARIFF-10 landed on `release/1.0` while this card was open. It changed **which
+installs run this task** — `if arbitrage.enabled(opts)` became
+`tariff_refresh_wanted(opts)`, i.e. `provider_configured(opts) or
+arbitrage.enabled(opts)` — while this card changed **what the task does on a
+failed fetch**. Git auto-merged the two hunks, which is exactly when the
+interaction needs reading rather than trusting.
+
+**Nothing in the decisions above changed.** Two configurations are newly
+reachable, and both are now driven in `test_arbitrage.py` 8b rather than
+reasoned about:
+
+* **A provider configured with trading DISARMED** — TARIFF-10's headline case.
+  This is precisely the configuration the guard was designed for: the plans are
+  `origin == "provider"`, and a dead feed must not delete one that is still
+  inside `TARIFF_MAX_AGE_S`. It needs no second fixture, because **nothing on
+  this path reads `arbitrage_enabled` at all**, and that is asserted rather
+  than assumed — over the AST's symbols and the non-docstring string constants,
+  because two earlier drafts of that check were **red against a correct tree**:
+  the first matched the docstring paragraph that *says* `arbitrage_enabled` is
+  not read, the second matched the log line's "arbitrage, where it is armed".
+  A substring test over a function grades its prose as much as its behaviour,
+  which is habit 4 in a third costume. A fixture that set the option and
+  asserted no difference would have been the other defect — comparing a thing
+  against itself.
+* **`price_provider: off` + a `static_profile`** — the configuration TARIFF-10's
+  `or` exists to protect, and the one where a latching guard would do real harm.
+  `resolve_tariff()` returns `static_plan(provisional=False)`, whose origin is
+  `"static"`: the CONFIGURED product, not a §11.4 row. So `standing.from_feed`
+  is false on every refresh, `keep` is false on every refresh, and the plan is
+  regenerated for the current window every 30 minutes exactly as before this
+  card. **Driven, twice in a row**, because a guard that latched here would
+  freeze a static site's plan at its first window for the life of the install —
+  and mutation M3, which drops the `standing.from_feed` term, is red on that
+  check as well as on the fallback one.
+
+Two further facts settle the rest of the interaction:
+
+* **This decision is strictly downstream of every side effect.** The §8.3 carry
+  into `price_history` happens inside `resolve_tariff()`, on the `series`
+  branch, before `keep` is computed — so which of two plans is kept can neither
+  add nor lose a recorded day, and TARIFF-10's *Price history* row is
+  unaffected either way.
+* **The kept-plan log line was reworded.** It said "arbitrage stops with it",
+  which after TARIFF-10 is false on a site that fetches without trading; it now
+  says "arbitrage, **where it is armed**, stops with it".
+
+All eleven mutations were **re-driven on the merged tree** rather than carried
+over — the surrounding code changed, so a red against the old base is not
+evidence about the new one. Eleven red, no survivors, every revert
+fingerprinted. The added member is M11: making the guard conditional on
+`arbitrage.enabled(self.o)` (+86 B), red on five named checks.
+
+⚠️ **And one process note that belongs in this file.** This card's mutation
+harness was written to a shared scratchpad path and was **overwritten mid-run
+by another agent's harness for a different card**, pointing at a different
+worktree. That is MUTATION.md habit 18's second bullet almost verbatim. It was
+caught because the harness fingerprints the tree after every revert and the
+runs are what proved this worktree was never left mutated; the harness now
+lives at a card-specific path. **A harness that edits source must not share a
+name, a directory or a backup path with another one.**
+
+---
+
+## What this does not change
+
+* **Nothing on the 30 s tick.** `cycle()` still reads two attributes and awaits
+  no fetch; the AST pin in `test_arbitrage.py` section 8 is unchanged and green.
+* **Nothing about the prices themselves.** No series is invented, extended,
+  re-stamped or carried. The only question this card answers is *which of two
+  plans the controller holds*.
+* **A `price_provider: off` install is bit-for-bit unaffected.** Its standing
+  plan is never `origin == "provider"`, so `keep` is false on every refresh it
+  will ever run, and the assignment happens exactly as it did before.

goodwe_controller/DECISIONS/TARIFF-13-the-coverage-of-a-peak.md

@@ -0,0 +1,225 @@
+# TARIFF-13 — the coverage of a peak, and which quarter gets the credit
+
+Two decisions. §1 is the defect the ticket was raised on; §2 is the smaller
+question it asked to be settled deliberately rather than left as an accident.
+§3 is what this branch deliberately did **not** do, and why.
+
+---
+
+## 0. What was actually wrong, stated once
+
+`main.py`'s capacity-tariff status row prints a peak read from SQLite and a
+coverage figure read from **process memory**:
+
+```python
+_pk = self.peak.peak(when)                      # SQLite, durable
+...
++ f"; {self.peak.recorded} quarter(s) banked"   # an int on the tracker
+```
+
+`PeakTracker.recorded` was `self.recorded = 0` in `__init__`, incremented once
+per block inside `sync()`. A 40-hour soak caught what that means at a driven
+restart, on both instances independently:
+
+```
+before: 2026-09: peak 365 W, set by the quarter at 2026-09-11T18:45:00+00:00
+        - 10 % of the 3500 W soft limit; 120 quarter(s) banked
+after : 2026-09: peak 365 W, set by the quarter at 2026-09-11T18:45:00+00:00
+        - 10 % of the 3500 W soft limit;   0 quarter(s) banked
+```
+
+Reproduced here before anything was changed, through the real `Controller`, the
+real `P1Ingest`, and a **real restart** — a second `Controller` object against
+the same file on disk, never a re-read of the first:
+
+```
+before: 2026-09: peak 365 W, set by the quarter at 2026-09-10T09:00:00+00:00
+        - 10 % of the 3500 W soft limit; 12 quarter(s) banked
+after : 2026-09: peak 365 W, set by the quarter at 2026-09-10T09:00:00+00:00
+        - 10 % of the 3500 W soft limit;  0 quarter(s) banked
+
+    peak survives the restart: True
+    count survives the restart: False       (12 -> 0, store held 12 rows)
+```
+
+**TARIFF-01's argument, one column over.** That module's whole design is that
+an unreadable store must not read as a zero peak, *because a zero peak is
+disarming*. A coverage figure of zero is disarming in exactly the same way and
+about the same number: the count is what says how much of the billing month the
+watt figure actually covers, and 365 W over 120 quarters and 365 W over 0
+quarters are different claims about the same 365 W. After a restart the page
+made the weaker claim while displaying the stronger one's value. It did not
+under-report the peak — it under-reported **its own evidence**.
+
+Two further defects fell out of the same variable once it was driven, neither
+of them in the ticket:
+
+* **it was never scoped to a month.** It counted every block the *process* had
+  banked, so on 1 October the row read September's tally beside October's "no
+  completed quarter recorded yet". Measured, on the shipped tree:
+  `2026-10: no completed quarter recorded yet - 0 % of the 3500 W soft limit;
+  1 quarter(s) banked`.
+* **it missed the block `restore()` banks.** A stale block closed from the
+  checkpoint goes into `quarter_blocks` without passing through `sync()`, so
+  the counter never saw it.
+
+---
+
+## 1. Decision: the count is READ FROM THE TIER THE PEAK IS READ FROM
+
+The acceptance criterion allowed either route — make the count durable, or stop
+printing a number that silently resets. **Durable**, because the count is the
+useful half of the row and removing it would have cost the operator the one
+thing that says whether the peak means anything yet.
+
+`PeakStore.banked_count(month)` asks the database `SELECT COUNT(*) FROM
+quarter_blocks WHERE month=?`, and `PeakTracker.recorded` is a property over it
+rather than an attribute. Three consequences, and all three are the defects
+above:
+
+* a restart re-reads the same rows, so the figure survives it;
+* the count is per **month**, so it agrees with the peak it is printed beside;
+* a block banked by `restore()` is a row like any other and is counted.
+
+Three things this route deliberately does **not** do:
+
+* **it does not count `len(blocks_in(month))`.** `blocks_in()` returns `[]` on a
+  read error — safe there only because no caller reads its emptiness as a peak,
+  which its own docstring says — so taking its length would rebuild the
+  disarming zero one call further out. `banked_count()` returns **`None`** when
+  the database will not answer.
+* **it does not count `monthly_peak`.** That tier holds one row per *month* and
+  would answer `1` for every month ever measured — wrong by exactly the amount
+  that makes it look plausible. The two tables are proven equal on the **peak**
+  by `recompute_month()`; they were never equal on the **count**.
+* **it does not remove the dedupe.** `_seen` is still what stops `cycle()`'s
+  once-a-second `sync()` re-banking a block that `P1Ingest.blocks` keeps for a
+  day, and `sync()`'s return value is still the number newly banked. What moved
+  is only where the *status page* reads its figure. ⚠️ The check that graded the
+  dedupe used to assert `recorded == 1` — the dedupe and the figure reporting it
+  were the same variable. Counting rows in `quarter_blocks` cannot see a
+  re-bank at all (it is a PRIMARY KEY no-op), so that check is now graded on
+  `sync()`'s **return**, with the store's tally as the second half.
+
+### ⚠️ The unreadable case renders a WORD, not a number
+
+`banked_count()` returns `int | None`; `recorded_in()` renders the `None` as
+the module constant `COUNT_UNREADABLE = "an unreadable number of"`, so the
+sentence reads
+
+```
+... ; an unreadable number of quarter(s) banked
+```
+
+`0` was never available. `None` was rejected too: `f"{None} quarter(s) banked"`
+renders **"None quarter(s) banked"**, which an operator reads as the same zero.
+This is the `PeakReading` trade — no `peak_w_or(default)`, ever — applied to the
+coverage figure: a caller that formats it gets a true sentence in both states,
+and a caller that does arithmetic on it gets a `TypeError`, which is loud.
+
+"0 quarter(s) banked" remains a **true and reachable** sentence: it is what a
+month nothing has been written to says, and part 11 asserts that the two states
+are spelled differently.
+
+---
+
+## 2. Decision: at EQUAL wattage, the EARLIEST quarter keeps the attribution
+
+**First, not most recent.** The reasoning, in the order it matters:
+
+1. **It is not a money question.** The utility bills the wattage; the timestamp
+   is not part of the bill. So the decision is settled entirely on what the
+   status row is *for*.
+2. **The row answers "when did my monthly peak happen".** An operator reading it
+   goes and looks at one event — what was running, what the weather was. A
+   stable answer is the one that can be investigated; "most recent wins"
+   guarantees the answer moves every time the wattage recurs, and an operator
+   who looked yesterday is sent somewhere else today for no reason.
+3. **It is what one reader already did unconditionally.** `recompute_month()`
+   is `ORDER BY offtake_avg_w DESC, quarter_start ASC LIMIT 1` — earliest wins.
+   Choosing "most recent" would have meant changing both readers; choosing
+   "earliest" meant making the other one say out loud what it was already doing
+   by accident.
+
+### ⚠️ And the two readers DID diverge, which is why this is a code change
+
+The `monthly_peak` upsert was `WHERE excluded.peak_w > monthly_peak.peak_w` —
+strictly greater, so an exact tie never wrote and the row kept whichever tied
+block was **written first**. That coincides with *earliest* only while blocks
+arrive in time order. Fed four equal 365 W blocks newest-first, measured on the
+shipped tree:
+
+```
+ascending arrival    monthly_peak -> 09:00:00   recompute_month -> 09:00:00   agree=True
+DESCENDING arrival   monthly_peak -> 09:45:00   recompute_month -> 09:00:00   agree=False
+```
+
+That is a divergence in the derived record that part 8 of `test_tariff.py`
+exists to prove cannot happen — latent, because nothing in the shipped path
+banks out of order today. The upsert now carries the tie term explicitly:
+
+```sql
+WHERE excluded.peak_w > monthly_peak.peak_w
+   OR (excluded.peak_w = monthly_peak.peak_w
+       AND excluded.quarter_start < monthly_peak.quarter_start)
+```
+
+**`peak_w` is untouched.** The `>` term is exactly as it was, no tie can move
+the billed number, and SAFETY-07's guard reads the same watt figure it read
+before. The second term moves only the timestamp.
+
+### ⚠️ AND THE SOAK'S DRIFT WAS NOT A TIE AT ALL
+
+The ticket's reading — "ties at the same wattage are re-attributed to the most
+recent matching quarter" — is **false**, and driving it is what showed that.
+Six exactly-equal 365.0 W quarters on the shipped tree moved the attribution
+**zero** times, because `>` is strict.
+
+What the soak saw was a genuine new maximum **smaller than the row's own
+resolution**. The row renders `{peak_w:.0f}` — whole watts — so 365.0000001 W is
+a new peak to the database and the same `365 W` to the reader:
+
+```
+q0  fed 365.0        -> renders 365 W, attributed 09:00:00
+q1  fed 365.0000001  -> renders 365 W, attributed 09:15:00
+q2  fed 365.0000002  -> renders 365 W, attributed 09:30:00
+```
+
+**Decision: left alone, deliberately.** It is the instrument behaving correctly
+— the peak really did rise — and the alternative, printing more decimal places,
+puts noise in the one row an operator reads at the moment the guard engages, to
+explain a movement that is real. Both cases are pinned in part 12 so that
+neither can be changed by accident, and the distinction is recorded here so the
+next reader does not re-diagnose it as a tie.
+
+---
+
+## 3. What this branch did NOT do, and who owns it
+
+**`main.py`'s status row was not touched.** TARIFF-11 holds `main.py`'s status
+rows on a concurrent branch, and the standing instruction is to stop rather than
+race there. Everything above is in `app/tariff.py`, and the row picks the fix up
+without editing, because `self.peak.recorded` is an attribute access and is now
+a property.
+
+**The residual, stated with its scope.** `recorded` answers for
+`datetime.now()`. The peak beside it follows `checks(when=...)`. The shipped
+install has **exactly one** call site — `self.checks()` with no argument, at
+`main.py:4359` — where the two are the same month, so **the live page is correct
+and durable**. They part company only under the `when=` affordance TEST-17 added
+for the suite, and the mismatch there is strictly smaller than the one it
+replaces (this month's tally, rather than a process-wide total across all
+months).
+
+`PeakTracker.recorded_in(when)` is the scoped form and is shipped. Moving the
+row onto it is:
+
+```python
+- + f"; {self.peak.recorded} quarter(s) banked"
++ + f"; {self.peak.recorded_in(when)} quarter(s) banked"
+```
+
+one token, on one line, inside the block TARIFF-11 owns. `test_tariff.py`
+part 10 **pins the present behaviour** — graded against a row count taken
+straight from `quarter_blocks`, not against the property that produces it — so
+the gap goes red if it changes and cannot be quietly forgotten.

goodwe_controller/DECISIONS/TARIFF-14-the-window-a-point-covers.md

@@ -0,0 +1,349 @@
+# TARIFF-14 — how long one price point covers, and what the last one does
+
+One defect and one genuinely open decision. The defect had no defensible
+alternative once it was measured; the decision — the **last** point's window —
+did, and the alternative is argued below rather than dismissed.
+
+---
+
+## 0. The measurement this card exists for
+
+`_Series.at()` asked `s <= u < s + 1 h` of every point **in list order** and
+returned the **first** match. Run against the shipped code at `5059e28` on a
+quarter-hourly series:
+
+```
+series: 02:00=0.10  02:15=0.11  02:30=0.12  02:45=0.13  03:00=0.14 ...
+
+ask + 0min -> 02:00  0.10
+ask +15min -> 02:00  0.10   <-- WRONG (wanted 02:15)
+ask +30min -> 02:00  0.10   <-- WRONG
+ask +45min -> 02:00  0.10   <-- WRONG
+ask +60min -> 02:15  0.11   <-- WRONG (wanted 03:00)
+ask +75min -> 02:30  0.12   <-- WRONG (wanted 03:15)
+```
+
+**Two failure modes, not one.** Inside the first hour the `:00` point wins
+because its hour has not run out. From the second hour on the answer is not
+even the top of the hour — the first point still inside its own hour wins — so
+**the error compounds with depth into the series**.
+
+Same code, same run, after the fix:
+
+```
+ask + 0min -> 02:00  0.10        ask +60min -> 03:00  0.14
+ask +15min -> 02:15  0.11        ask +75min -> 03:15  0.15
+ask +30min -> 02:30  0.12        ask +90min -> 03:30  0.16
+ask +45min -> 02:45  0.13        ask+120min -> 04:00  0.18
+```
+
+An hourly series is **unchanged at every instant**, before and after — which is
+the whole reason nothing caught this. Every price fixture in this repository
+before TARIFF-08 was the invented hourly row shape, `static_tariff.py` emits
+hourly points, and the DST checks count points on the 23- and 25-hour days
+without ever asking `at()` for a quarter-hour. **The suite had been exercising
+the one resolution on which the broken rule and the right one agree.**
+
+Belgium moved to a 15-minute MTU on 2025-10-01 and the live day-ahead feed
+returns **96 points at 900 s**, so this is reachable only down the dynamic path
+TARIFF-08/09 just made work. Static sites are immune.
+
+## 0.1 What it cost, which is not "a slightly wrong price"
+
+`arbitrage._act()` calls `_point_at(plan, now)` → `series.at(now)` and then
+tests `here.start == v.cheapest.start` / `== v.dearest.start` to decide whether
+this interval is the buy one or the sell one. That is an **identity test
+between the matched point and the point the verdict was built from**, and on a
+quarter-hourly series it almost never matched — so the strategy idled through
+exactly the interval it exists to trade, reporting *"this hour is neither the
+buy hour nor the sell hour"*. It also read `here.provisional` (§8.3) and §17's
+`price < 0` off that same wrong point.
+
+---
+
+## 1. The rule
+
+> **A point covers from its own start until the next point's start, and never
+> more than one hour.**
+
+* **900 s** → each point covers its own quarter.
+* **3600 s** → each point covers its own hour. Identical to what shipped.
+* **MIXED** → **each point takes its own gap.** FCST-04's carry-forward emits
+  hourly carried points beside quarter-hourly firm ones, and the soak measured
+  spacing `[900, 3600]` in **70 % of samples** — so a window derived from one
+  global spacing would be wrong in the **normal steady state**, not in an edge
+  case.
+
+### 1.1 Why the one-hour cap is not decoration
+
+FCST-04 **leaves holes on purpose**: an hour with no published price and no
+yesterday value is left *out* of the series, and `price_forecast.py`'s module
+note names `at()` raising `Absence` for it as the behaviour that sends the
+caller to the static profile (§11.4 for that hour).
+
+Uncapped, "until the next point's start" stretches the point **before** a
+three-hour hole across the whole hole and answers every instant in it with a
+stale price. Filling holes is the defect this module exists to refuse, and it
+would have been introduced **by the fix for a different one**. Graded in
+`test_price.py` 14d; the mutation that removes the cap is red there.
+
+---
+
+## 2. The decision: what the **last** point covers
+
+There is no next start, and §9.3 says nothing about how wide the final interval
+is — a `PricePoint` has **three fields** and must not learn a fourth, because
+that is the wire format every store, replay, fixture and captured body in this
+repository is written against. So the tail is a **choice**, and both candidates
+are defensible.
+
+**Chosen: the last point is given the same span as the point before it** (one
+hour when it is the only point).
+
+| | flat one hour | the span in front of it (**chosen**) |
+|---|---|---|
+| 96-point 900 s day, `at(23:50)` | answers 23:45 | answers 23:45 |
+| the same day, `at(00:30)` **tomorrow** | **answers with today's 23:45 price** | `Absence` |
+| 24-point hourly day, `at(23:50)` | answers 23:00 | answers 23:00 |
+| mixed series ending at the firm/carried seam | answers for an hour | `Absence` after 15 min |
+
+**The second row is why.** A flat one-hour tail reaches across a day boundary
+and prices tomorrow morning with yesterday's last print — which is
+"reaching for a neighbouring one", the single thing the `Absence` message has
+always refused to do. The chosen rule never extends a point past a span the
+series itself demonstrates.
+
+### 2.1 The cost of the choice, stated rather than buried
+
+On a **mixed** series whose last point is a carried **hourly** one sitting
+behind quarter-hourly firm ones, the tail is **900 s**, and the last 45 minutes
+of the horizon raise `Absence` for an hour something did carry a value for.
+
+That is accepted, not tolerated, and the direction is the safe one:
+
+* the caller falls back to the static profile (§11.4) instead of trading on a
+  span the series never demonstrated;
+* the point is **carried**, so §8.3 forbids any irreversible action resting on
+  it regardless;
+* it is at the far end of a 48 h horizon, where nothing is decided at 30 s.
+
+Under-covering costs a missed decision. Over-covering prices a real interval
+with a number that does not describe it. Those are not symmetric.
+
+### 2.2 The degenerate case
+
+A series of **one** point has no gap in front of it to copy and gets **one
+hour** — the shipped behaviour, kept deliberately. `test_price.py` 14e states
+it as its own check so it cannot decay into an accident.
+
+---
+
+## 3. Does `at()` now depend on sortedness? Yes — and it establishes it itself
+
+The old rule read one point at a time and did not care about order. The new one
+reads a point's **neighbours**, so it *would* depend on the series being
+ascending.
+
+It does not, because **the lookup index is sorted by UTC start at construction**
+(`_cover_table()`, called once from `_Series.__init__`). No caller's list order
+can reach `at()`.
+
+That matters because the three things that "guarantee" order today each
+guarantee it somewhere else:
+
+| | what it guarantees | where |
+|---|---|---|
+| `_validate_raw()` | strictly increasing starts | the `load_prices()` path only |
+| `price_history._parse_points()` | re-sorts by instant | the store read path only |
+| FCST-04's fill | emits ascending | that one producer only |
+| `PriceRead.series()` | **nothing** | every other caller, including tests |
+
+Three producers agreeing today is not an invariant; it is a coincidence with
+good references. `test_price.py` 14f drives a series handed its 96 points in
+**reverse** order and asserts `at()` answers identically at every one of them —
+red the moment the sort is removed.
+
+**Duplicated starts** (refused by `_validate_raw()`, constructible by hand) give
+the earlier list entry a zero-width window and the later one the real span. One
+of the pair becomes unreachable through `at()`; **nothing raises**, at
+construction or on the 30 s control path. Stated as a check rather than left to
+be discovered.
+
+---
+
+## 4. `covers()` shared it. `window()` did not
+
+* **`covers()`** has no window rule of its own — it calls `at()` — so it shared
+  the defect exactly and the same change fixes it. It is kept as a delegation
+  for that reason: a second copy of the rule is a second place for it to be
+  wrong.
+* **`window(since, until)`** grades a point's **start** against a half-open
+  range and never asks how long a point lasts, so it carries no resolution
+  assumption at all. It is **not** a coverage query — a point that starts before
+  `since` and runs into it is absent from its result by design. That is now
+  said in its docstring and pinned by a check, because the next reader will ask.
+  It has **no callers** in `app/`.
+
+---
+
+## 5. What this card does NOT fix, with its shape
+
+`price_forecast._walk()` — §8.3's irreversible-action gate — iterates
+`committed_hours()`, which steps in **whole hours**, and asks `series.at(u)` at
+each. On a quarter-hourly series that now reliably returns the hour's `:00`
+point (it previously returned something earlier and arbitrary), so the gate
+reads **one point per hour** and never looks at the `:15`/`:30`/`:45` flags.
+
+A partially-provisional hour would therefore be gated on its first quarter
+alone. **Two things keep it off every shipped install, and both are
+circumstantial rather than structural:** `price_permits()`/`begin_phase()` have
+**no caller in `app/main.py`** — the §12 price-justified entry point is built
+and not yet wired — and FCST-04 carries **whole** hours while
+`generic_dayahead` publishes whole days, so the four quarters of an hour are
+firm or carried together anyway. Both are facts about the *callers and
+producers*, not properties of the *gate*, so this is written down here rather
+than left for the first sub-hourly feed or the first wiring-up to find. Fixing it means teaching
+`committed_hours()` about resolution, which is a data-model question this card
+deliberately does not open.
+
+---
+
+## 6. Mutations
+
+Eight, each purged before the run (TEST-15), each reverted with the tree
+fingerprint checked afterwards (MUTATION.md habit 18), backup at a `mktemp`
+path per invocation.
+
+⚠️ **Re-driven in full on the MERGED tree** after TARIFF-10 landed on
+`release/1.0` (base `88c59a9` -> `559f0eb`). All eight give the same verdicts
+and the same red-check counts as before the merge, which is the answer that
+matters: TARIFF-10 added 650 lines of checks to `test_price.py` and none of
+them moves under any of these edits, because they grade `resolve_tariff()`'s
+*reachability from a configuration* and not the lookup. Clean `app/price.py` on
+the merged tree = **`90d8ca31f7c0109d`, 85953 B** (pre-merge it was
+`30d1a56f0117e571`, 83742 B; the difference is TARIFF-10's `provider_id()` /
+`provider_configured()`, which this card does not touch).
+
+| | mutation | Δ | red in |
+|---|---|---|---|
+| M1 | `at()` back to the shipped fixed one-hour scan over `self.points` | +68 B | **24 named checks**: `test_price.py` 14b ×4, 14c ×3, 14d, 14e ×3, 14f, 14g; `test_arbitrage.py` 10b ×6, 10c ×3, 10d ×2 |
+| M2 | drop the one-hour cap | −68 B | `test_price.py` 14d |
+| M3 | flat one-hour tail instead of the span in front | **+0 B** | `test_price.py` 14e ×3, 14g — 4 checks |
+| M4 | trust the caller's list order — drop the sort | −61 B | `test_price.py` 14f |
+| M5 | `covers()` grows its own hour-wide rule | +95 B | `test_price.py` 14e, 14g |
+| M6 | `window()` becomes a coverage query | −37 B | `test_price.py` 14g |
+| M7 | the window's end becomes inclusive | +1 B | `test_price.py` 14b ×4, 14c ×4, 14d, 14e ×4, 14f ×2, 14g — 16 checks |
+| M8 | the window's start becomes exclusive | −1 B | `test_price.py` 14b ×4, 14c ×4, 14d, 14f ×2, 14g, 14h, plus the pre-existing section 6 check — 14 checks |
+
+**M3 is the zero-byte one and it is the tail decision itself** — the case
+MUTATION.md names as the risky size, caught by the check written for it.
+
+**What the arbitrage file does NOT see, with sizes.** M2, M4, M5, M6 and M8
+leave `test_arbitrage.py` green, and that is honest rather than a gap to round
+off: they are `at()`-level properties (holes, caller order, `covers()`,
+`window()`, the start boundary) that no arbitrage fixture reaches, because the
+probes are seven minutes into a slot and the plans have no holes. The one that
+matters end to end — M1, the shipped rule — is red in **both** files, on the
+named check `THE PROPERTY THE DEFECT BROKE`.
+
+---
+
+## 7. TARIFF-10 landed on the base while this was open — what it changes here
+
+Base moved `88c59a9` → `559f0eb` mid-card. The question is not whether the
+branches merge; it is whether TARIFF-10 makes any sentence above **false**.
+
+**In `app/price.py` the two do not meet.** TARIFF-10 added `provider_id()` and
+`provider_configured()` beside `price_option()` and routed `load_prices()`
+through them. That is the option-reading layer; it touches nothing in
+`_Series`, `at()`, `covers()`, `window()` or `_cover_table()`. Git merged the
+file without a conflict, and the merged `at()` is byte-identical to the one the
+mutations above were driven against.
+
+**Behaviourally it widens who has a series at all, and that cuts one way only.**
+`run_tariff_refresh()` now runs on installs with `arbitrage_enabled` **off**, so
+a provider-configured site has a standing plan — and therefore a `_Series` —
+where before it had none. **It does not add a new `at()` consumer to the 30 s
+tick**, which is the claim worth checking rather than assuming:
+
+| caller of `at()`/`covers()` | reached by a non-trading install? |
+|---|---|
+| `arbitrage._point_at()` (`arbitrage.py:300`) | no — trading only |
+| `static_tariff.TariffPlan.price_at()` / `.words` `here` (`:750`, `:819`) | on the tick these are reached through `static_status()`, which builds a **`static_plan`** — hourly points, immune. `main.py` calls only `plan.words` on the fetched plan, which counts points and never looks one up |
+| `price_forecast._walk()` (`:562`, `:568`) | **`price_permits()` and `begin_phase()` have no caller in `app/main.py` at all** — §12's price-justified entry point is built and not yet wired |
+
+So TARIFF-10 neither creates nor closes any exposure this card is about. What it
+does do is make the defect's reach larger the moment such a site arms trading,
+because the series it would trade against now exists on every configured
+install rather than only on armed ones. That strengthens the case for the fix
+and changes nothing in its reasoning.
+
+**In `test_price.py` both cards appended a section 13.** Nothing is dropped:
+TARIFF-10's stays **13**, this card's is renumbered **14** (which is also this
+card's number), and the temp-directory teardown TARIFF-10 put at the end of the
+file stays at the end of the file. The two sections share no fixture, no option
+dict and no helper name; TARIFF-10's grades `resolve_tariff()`'s *reachability
+from a configuration* and drives real fetches with a counting transport, and
+**none of its checks moves under any of the eight mutations above** — measured,
+not assumed.
+
+---
+
+## 8. TARIFF-12 landed too — a plan may now be 90 minutes old when it is asked
+
+Base moved `559f0eb` → `a6e64fb` while this was open. TARIFF-12 stops a
+returned §11.4 degradation from overwriting a standing plan that is still
+inside `TARIFF_MAX_AGE_S`, so **a served plan can now be up to
+`3 × TARIFF_REFRESH_S = 5400 s` old** where before it was at most one refresh
+interval. `at()` is what answers *"what does it cost right now"* out of that
+older plan, so the question is fair and the answer is written out rather than
+assumed.
+
+**Per-point span: unaffected, structurally.** Every window is derived from the
+neighbouring points' **absolute `start` instants**. Those are `datetime`s inside
+a frozen dataclass inside a tuple — they cannot move, and `_cover_table()` runs
+once at construction over data that cannot change afterwards. A plan's *age* is
+a property of `fetched_at` / `tariff_at`, never of a window. **The index cannot
+go stale**, which is a small positive under TARIFF-12 rather than a risk: a kept
+plan now lives longer, and there is nothing in it that needed recomputing.
+
+**The one-hour cap: unaffected.** It bites only where a gap exceeds an hour,
+i.e. at a hole FCST-04 left. Walking further into a series crosses more windows;
+each is still resolved on its own neighbours.
+
+**The tail: reachable for the first time, and the choice made in §2 is the one
+that survives it.** This is the half worth spelling out.
+
+* At the **shipped 48 h horizon** the tail is unreachable by staleness. A plan
+  is served for at most 90 minutes, so `now` is at most 90 minutes into a
+  ~48 h series — the last point is still about 46½ hours away.
+* But `price_horizon_h` is `int(1,72)` in `config.yaml`, so an operator **can**
+  configure a **1 h** horizon. A 90-minute serve-stale window against a 1 h
+  series puts `now` genuinely past the end. That is not hypothetical; it is a
+  supported configuration meeting a supported outage.
+* Under the **chosen** rule a quarter-hourly 1 h series ends at `:45` and that
+  point's window closes at the top of the next hour: `at()` raises `Absence`,
+  `_point_at()` returns None, `_act()` idles with its "no price for this
+  instant" reason, and §11.4 sends the site to the static profile.
+* Under the **rejected** flat one-hour tail the same stale plan would have gone
+  on trading against the `:45` print for **up to 45 minutes after the interval
+  it describes had ended** — pricing an outage with a number for a quarter that
+  is over.
+
+So TARIFF-12 does not weaken the tail decision. It is the first thing that makes
+it reachable on a shipped configuration, and it independently selects the same
+answer. ⚠️ **Note which direction that runs**: the more stale a plan is allowed
+to be, the more the tail rule is doing real work, so it should be re-read if
+`TARIFF_MAX_AGE_S` is ever widened again.
+
+**`TariffPlan.from_feed` cannot produce a series this code has not seen.** It is
+a pure predicate on `origin` (`== "provider"`), and TARIFF-12's decision keeps or
+replaces a **whole plan object**. It never splices two reads into one series, so
+it cannot hand `at()` an unsorted or duplicated point list — the case §3 covers
+defensively and that nothing shipped produces.
+
+**Re-graded on this base.** All 29 files green. `app/price.py` is byte-identical
+to the TARIFF-10 merge (`90d8ca31f7c0109d`, 85953 B) because TARIFF-12 does not
+touch it. **M1** re-driven: +68 B, red on the same **24 named checks** across
+both files. **M3** re-driven: **+0 B**, red on the same 4. This branch
+contributes **zero diff** to `app/main.py` and `app/static_tariff.py`.

goodwe_controller/DECISIONS/TARIFF-15-the-card-is-the-grader.md

@@ -0,0 +1,166 @@
+# TARIFF-15 — the operator's own tariff card, and why the card has to grade it
+
+**Status: DECIDED 2026-09-13 — ship `custom_formula` with FIXED coefficients and
+a REQUIRED `card` block whose printed price the add-on reproduces at startup or
+refuses to run. No expression evaluation, ever. Declare `{ENERGY, MARKUP}`,
+never `ALL_IN`.**
+
+Filed with TARIFF-15. Follows [[TARIFF-07]], which withdrew three per-supplier
+plugins and named a formula provider as the answer it could not give.
+
+---
+
+## 1. Why a formula rather than more plugins
+
+TARIFF-07 established the negative half: a per-supplier plugin has no source
+for its numbers. This card establishes the positive one.
+
+* **There is no machine-readable source of Belgian tariff coefficients
+  anywhere.** CREG's consumer tariff-card pages 404. CREG Scan is a
+  JavaScript-only wizard. The annual report carries the supplier list and no
+  per-product coefficients. VREG was unreachable. Every coefficient found in
+  research came from a supplier's **own PDF**, one of them image-only.
+* So there is nothing to scrape, and fourteen plugins would still have no
+  source for their numbers — they would be fourteen copies of the invention
+  TARIFF-07 deleted three of.
+* **The customer is the only party who can see their own coefficients**, and
+  the card they read them from **is the only artefact that can grade them**.
+  That second clause is the whole design; everything below follows from it.
+
+## 2. The shape is the market's published arithmetic
+
+Both suppliers whose 2026 cards were readable print three things on one line:
+the formula, the reference index it assumes, **and the resulting price**.
+
+| | computed | the card prints |
+|---|---|---|
+| Eneco `(0.102 × 133.9905 + 1) × 1.06` | **15.5471** | **15,55** |
+| ENGIE `(0.1 × 61.96 + 0.9) × 1.06` | **7.5218** | **7,522** |
+
+Two independent suppliers, reproduced to the last printed digit, through the
+shipped code (`test_price.py` 15a runs both, and then runs both again end to
+end through `load_prices()`).
+
+That third column is not a nicety. It is the only externally-published number
+in this whole feature, and it is what makes the design safe.
+
+## 3. The double-counting risk, and which half of it is new
+
+`price.py`'s trap 1 already mechanises that a **plugin** cannot double-count:
+`PluginOptions` refuses the framework keys, `code_leaks()` refuses a plugin
+whose *code* mentions them, `assemble()` adds the complement exactly once.
+
+`custom_formula` introduces a risk none of those can see, **because it is not
+in code**: the **operator** double-counting, by folding their network charges
+into `offset` while `price_taxes_eur_kwh` also carries them. `code_leaks()`
+scans code. This is config, typed by a person reading a PDF.
+
+It is a real reading of a real card, not a hypothetical. A Belgian card's
+`Tariefformule` line is the **energy component alone** — Eneco tabulates
+network tariffs in one table and levies in a second; ENGIE states in so many
+words that the formula excludes network, distribution, transport, grid levies
+and excise. An operator who wants "the price I actually pay" and adds ~12
+c€/kWh to `offset` has done something entirely reasonable and is now billed for
+network charges twice, on every hour, with §11.4 making the whole class of
+price defect invisible.
+
+**Decision: the card grades it.** At startup `validate.py` recomputes the
+card's own printed price from the operator's coefficients and refuses to start
+unless the two agree to within `0.01` — which is the last digit a card prints.
+An inflated `offset` cannot pass, because the printed estimate is by
+construction the energy component: 15.55 becomes 28.27 and the add-on stops and
+says why.
+
+**And the limit, stated in the same sentence as the claim**, exactly as
+`price.py` states trap 1's: *it grades the coefficients against the card, not
+the card against reality.* A consistent-but-wrong pair — both numbers off the
+wrong product, or off a card the contract has since rolled over from — agrees
+with itself perfectly and passes. Nothing here or anywhere else can catch that.
+
+### 3b. The one unit error the card check cannot see
+
+A factor applied to **both** sides — coefficients *and* printed price — cancels
+out of a comparison between them. That is a second quantity, so it is a second
+refusal: the card's own point must land inside 0.02–1.00 EUR/kWh.
+
+⚠️ **Its floor is applied to the ENERGY figure and not to the all-in one, and
+that asymmetry was found by a mutation rather than by reasoning.** The shipped
+`price_taxes_eur_kwh` was 0.06 — three times the floor — so a card read a
+hundred times too small comes out at 0.0016 EUR/kWh of energy, is carried over
+0.02 by the flat tax addend alone, and passes a band applied to the total. The
+hundredfold error is exactly what the band exists for. Graded from both
+directions in `test_price.py` 15e/15i and driven red as M10. *(Annotated
+2026-09-13: TARIFF-18 raised the default to 0.11736, nearly six times the
+floor. The asymmetry is unchanged in kind and larger in degree — the flat
+addend that carries a hundredfold-small card over 0.02 got bigger.)*
+
+## 4. Fixed coefficients. No expression evaluation of any kind
+
+**Decided: never a grammar.** Two arguments, and the second is the one that
+decides it.
+
+* **Security.** The add-on serves `POST config/save` → `POST
+  /addons/self/options` on its own ingress page, so `price_formula` is
+  **settable over HTTP**. `eval` on it is remote code execution in a root
+  container holding `SUPERVISOR_TOKEN`, with `homeassistant_api` and
+  `hassio_api`, driving an inverter over RS485. `eval(s, {"__builtins__": {}})`
+  is not a sandbox and this repository is not going to pretend otherwise.
+* **⚠️ AND THE DECIDING ARGUMENT IS NOT SECURITY: AN EXPRESSION IS
+  UNVERIFIABLE.** Two coefficients can be graded against the card's printed
+  estimate. An arbitrary expression cannot be graded against **anything** — so
+  it makes the invisible-wrong-coefficient problem *strictly worse*, which is
+  the exact failure this provider exists to prevent. An expression would buy
+  the operator freedom to be wrong in a way nothing could report.
+
+All 24 surveyed Belgian products, both injection legs and aWATTar AT fit
+`B × index + A`, so an expression buys nothing the market needs either.
+
+**Future shapes become NAMED FIELDS** — `clamp_lo`, `factor_negative`,
+`offset_bands` — each individually refusable and each individually gradeable
+against a card. `parse_price_formula()` therefore **refuses an unknown key**
+rather than ignoring it: an operator who types `"expr"` is told it does not
+exist, instead of being priced on the fields they also typed with the one they
+believed in dropped in silence.
+
+`test_price.py` 15f walks the module's AST for `eval`, `exec`, `compile`,
+`__import__` and `literal_eval`, and exercises the scanner's **red** direction
+on every run so it cannot become a scanner that scans nothing.
+
+## 5. `{ENERGY, MARKUP}`, not `ALL_IN`
+
+The contract's formula **is** the supplier's markup — that is what `B` and `A`
+are — but it is not the levies. Declaring `ALL_IN` would lie on behalf of every
+operator who typed exactly what their card says and would drop
+`price_taxes_eur_kwh` from every hour: measured at 0.2125 → 0.1555 EUR/kWh.
+`price_markup_eur_kwh` is therefore **ignored** under this provider, and logged
+as ignored, which is the framework's existing rule rather than a new one.
+
+## 6. What was reused rather than rebuilt
+
+The index path is `generic_dayahead`'s: same EPEX BE feed, same
+Brussels-calendar range, same columnar parser, same declared egress hosts. The
+override/range decision moved into one shared `dayahead_feed_url()` that both
+plugins call, because two copies of that rule would be two places for the
+short-horizon defect TARIFF-09 fixed to come back in only one of them.
+
+`resolution: hourly` averages each hour's members. ⚠️ **That is not
+`_Series.at()`'s hourly assumption returning (TARIFF-14):** it decides how many
+points are *emitted*; the window each point covers is still derived from its
+neighbours in `_cover_table()`. A feed that is already hourly averages one
+member per hour — the identity — so the option cannot silently assume the
+granularity it was handed. Graded.
+
+## 7. What this card did NOT do
+
+* **The injection leg.** Eneco uses `0,102` on consumption and `0,100` on
+  injection, and injection is VAT-exempt where consumption is at 6 % — a second
+  per-contract formula, not a second copy of this one. Separate card.
+* **The hour-varying network charge that bites Wallonia.** Separate card.
+* **Raising `price_taxes_eur_kwh` from 0.06 to ~0.12.** Separate card, and an
+  owner's decision. Note §3b: the band's floor is deliberately insensitive to
+  whatever that number becomes. *(Annotated 2026-09-13: that card is
+  **TARIFF-18** and it shipped on this branch at **0.11736** — the Eneco
+  residential card for Flanders, September 2026, incl. 6 % VAT, summed from
+  Fluvius Antwerpen distribution 5,35 + bijzondere accijns 4,876 + bijdrage
+  groene stroom en WKK 1,51 c€/kWh. §3b held: the floor is still on the energy
+  figure and nothing in this module needed a new number.)*

goodwe_controller/DOCS.md

@@ -116,7 +116,7 @@ whole rendered list, in both languages.
 
 | | |
 |---|---|
-| **All 71 options are always shown** | The frontend keeps a field when `name in options \|\| required`, and every key is in `options:`. There is no "advanced" fold |
+| **All 72 options are always shown** | The frontend keeps a field when `name in options \|\| required`, and every key is in `options:`. There is no "advanced" fold |
 | **Order comes from `schema:`** | `App.schema_ui` is `UiOptions(...)(data["schema"])`, so the **schema half** of `config.yaml` decides the order the tab renders in — not the `options:` half |
 | **There are no section headers** | Add-on options are a flat list: no header primitive, no per-option advanced flag, no units on the input, no sliders. Grouping is approximated by **order** plus the `Group · ` prefix in each label, and by nothing else |
 | **Groups, in task order** | Hardware → Meter → Limits → Tariff → Maintenance → Safety → Advanced |
@@ -601,6 +601,94 @@ behind it would trip the firmware watchdog on a system that is working fine.
 | `site_sign_disagree_w` | 300 | **Two or more inverters only.** Threshold for the site-wide check - the sum of the commands against the meter. The same 300 W as `sign_disagree_w`, for the same reason: near zero the sign is noise |
 | `site_sign_disagree_s` | 325 | **Two or more inverters only.** How long the site's total command and the meter must stay opposed before every inverter is parked. Longer than `sign_disagree_s` because the command has to cross zero over a rail that is the sum of the roster, at a `slew_w` that is not - measured at 110 s with one inverter and 215 s with two |
 | `delivery_hold_s` | 185 | **Two or more inverters only.** How long one inverter may stand at a discharge share it is not producing - short by more than `saturation_w`, with no reason this add-on can read - while at least one sibling is **not** in that state, before it is named. **It reports; it does not act.** Nothing is commanded differently and the site goes on running short by that unit's share |
+| `shadow_mode` | `auto` | **Run every decision and command nothing.** `auto` = shadow mode while control is stopped, ordinary control once you press Start; `on` = shadow mode always; `off` = ordinary control. See *Shadow mode* below |
+
+#### Shadow mode (`shadow_mode`, SAFETY-10)
+
+Shadow mode runs the **whole** decision path — the price strategy, the capacity
+guard, the maintenance shaping, the grid-following loop, the arbiter that ranks
+them, SAFETY-28's authorisation gate and SAFETY-03's clamp — and **sends nothing
+to the inverter**. It is how you find out what this add-on *would* do on a site
+before you let it do it.
+
+Every defect in the optimiser that this project has found was invisible from
+outside while it was happening: a price lookup answering for the wrong
+quarter-hour, a trade against a binding capacity cap that ran 28 charge onsets
+in an hour, an SoC ceiling churning 598 Wh to gain 310 Wh. Each one was paid for
+at the meter first and noticed afterwards. Shadow mode is the surface that
+would have shown all three on the day.
+
+**What "commands nothing" means, exactly.** Every inverter is held at **0 W**,
+written by the ordinary single writer and refreshed on the ordinary heartbeat.
+It is not silence. ⚠️ **The inverter holds its last command forever** — it has
+no meter timeout — so a mode that simply stopped writing would leave whatever
+was standing when you switched it on standing for as long as you left it on,
+under a page saying nothing was being commanded. Refreshing 0 W is also what
+the ESP32's 30 s stale-input watchdog requires of us: going quiet would put
+that board into a *tripped watchdog* state for the whole run, which is an alarm
+being used as a mode.
+
+**The three values.**
+
+| value | what happens |
+|---|---|
+| `auto` | **the shipped default.** Shadow mode while control is **stopped**; ordinary control once control is **started**. A new install ships `auto_start: false`, so it comes up in shadow mode and observes before it ever commands anything. An install that is already controlling is started, so nothing about it changes |
+| `on` | shadow mode **always**, whatever the *Start / stop control* button says. This is the one to pick to watch an armed site for a day — the loop runs, arbitrage decides, the peak guard files its claims, and the battery does not move |
+| `off` | ordinary control |
+
+⚠️ **Existing installs are not changed.** The default is `auto` rather than a
+boolean `true` precisely because a boolean would have changed them: the
+Supervisor composes an add-on's options as *its defaults, overlaid with your
+stored options*, so a new key with a new default reaches every install on the
+next update. `shadow_mode: true` would have silently stopped a battery that is
+regulating today, and the only symptom would be a battery that stopped doing
+anything.
+
+⚠️ **Under `auto`, pressing *Start* leaves shadow mode.** That is the point of
+`auto` — the button means "control the battery". Set `on` if you want the
+decisions recorded while the loop runs.
+
+**What you get out of it.** The status page carries a red-amber banner saying
+the battery is not being controlled, a `Shadow mode` row saying which rung
+decided, what it **would have commanded** and why, and the `Why` row with the
+arbiter's own sentence. The action log gets one line each time the decision
+changes — the winner or the watts — rather than one per cycle, so a 40-row log
+still contains the context of what it found. MQTT reports `status: shadow`.
+
+**The failsafes.** The sign watchdogs (SAFETY-02/30) are **inert**: they grade
+what this controller has standing on the wire, and that is 0 W, so they cannot
+arm. That is deliberate and it is the single most important decision in this
+feature — fed the shadow decision instead they would disagree with a meter that
+never saw it, and **latch a trip that survives into live operation and a
+restart**. The clamp (SAFETY-03), the write-authorisation gate (SAFETY-28), the
+frozen-meter alarm (SAFETY-18) and the capacity guard all **observe**: they run
+on the number the decision path produced, so a shadow run can tell you the
+clamp would have engaged. The circulation (SAFETY-31) and delivery (SAFETY-42)
+watchdogs observe and may legitimately latch, because their evidence is
+*measured* power, not a command. The operator stop is enforced at the wire
+instead of as a claim, so that the recorded decision is the real one.
+
+⚠️ **A latch that was already up stays up.** Shadow mode does not clear
+anything. The banner names any standing latch and goes red for it, because a
+latch that is up while the controller is inert is up the moment it stops being
+inert.
+
+⚠️ **Maintenance is unchanged.** The maintenance state machines are ticked on
+every cycle whether control is started or not, so they already run against a
+battery that does not move on a stopped install. Shadow mode inherits that
+exactly; it neither improves it nor makes it worse.
+
+⚠️ **What a shadow run will NOT tell you.** The controller's carried command is
+re-seeded to the 0 W standing on the wire at the end of every shadow cycle —
+that is what makes turning shadow mode off safe, because the loop then resumes
+from where the battery actually is. The consequence is that the
+**grid-following loop's** recorded decision is **one slew step** and stays
+there: a shadow run answers *"what would it command now"*, not *"what
+trajectory would it have followed"*, because the trajectory depends on a
+battery responding and none did. The **strategies** are unaffected — price
+arbitrage, the capacity guard and maintenance all ask for a fixed power from
+inputs that do not depend on what the battery did — so a shadow run does show
+you the trades, the peak-guard engagements and the SoC-limit behaviour.
 
 #### The sign-disagreement failsafe
 
@@ -979,6 +1067,7 @@ What exists today, and what does not:
 |---|---|
 | `max_w` bounds the magnitude | ✅ — but the exposure IS the magnitude |
 | Maintenance charging capped under `peak_cap_w` | ✅ |
+| **Arbitrage charging capped under `peak_cap_w`** | ✅ — SAFETY-45, sized to the guard's own MEASURED headroom rather than to `peak_forecast_entity` |
 | **Loop capped under `peak_cap_w`** | ✅ — SAFETY-07, on every `meter_source` but `off` |
 | Frozen meter detected | ✅ on `homewizard_local` only, **alarm only** |
 | Frozen meter *stopped* | ✅ — SAFETY-07 forbids importing while the meter is frozen |
@@ -1041,6 +1130,19 @@ projected over — raises one notification (`goodwe_peak_saturated`), because th
 is the one state where the money will be spent and shedding load is the only
 thing left that changes the bill.
 
+**And it sizes a price-driven charge, not only a forced discharge (SAFETY-45).**
+The same arithmetic read the other way answers *"how hard may this site charge
+without putting the quarter over"* — `peakguard.charge_headroom_w()` — and
+`arbitrage.decide()` sizes its buy leg to it. Before that, a trade commanded
+`max_w` until the projection rose far enough to engage the guard, at which point
+the interlock cancelled the trade outright, the loop took the actuator, the
+projection collapsed and the trade came back at `max_w`: **28 charge onsets in
+one hour** on TEST-23 stage 3's closed rig, with the grid swinging −456 to
++3200 W and every billed quarter finishing over the cap. It is one onset now,
+the trade runs continuously at the affordable rate, and the billed quarters land
+**on** the cap. ⚠️ The guard is what changed *around* arbitrage; `decide()`
+itself is untouched, so nothing above this line is different.
+
 **No new option for the CEILING.** It is `peak_cap_w`, which already shipped. The
 coverage threshold is `meter_max_age_s`, the freeze predicate is
 `meter_freeze_s`, and the achievable discharge comes from `max_w` and the device
@@ -1346,24 +1448,40 @@ does, and only after you have read why.
 > release ships the five provider plugins, the canonical all-in format they
 > emit, the config that selects one, and — new in OPT-04 — a price-arbitrage
 > strategy that trades on them. With `arbitrage_enabled: false`, which is the
-> shipped default, turning a provider on still fetches, validates and publishes
-> prices and changes no charging decision.
+> shipped default, **selecting a provider is what starts the fetch**: the feed
+> is read every 30 minutes, validated, and the day recorded in
+> `/data/price_history.json`, which the *Price history* status row reports and
+> the add-on log names at every refresh. No charging decision changes.
+>
+> ⚠️ **That has been the documented behaviour since OPT-04 and was not the
+> actual behaviour until TARIFF-10.** The background refresh was started only
+> when `arbitrage_enabled` was on — and it ships `false` — so an install with a
+> provider configured fetched nothing at all, never created the store, and read
+> *Price history: empty* for as long as it ran. If you configured a provider and saw an empty
+> Price history row, that is what you were looking at. Trading is unchanged and
+> is still `arbitrage_enabled` alone.
 >
 > `static_profile` below needs no network at all, so its cheap window is
 > computed on every cycle and reaches the maintenance cycle's grid top-up
-> whether or not arbitrage is armed.
+> whether or not arbitrage is armed. ⚠️ **And it is still the only source of
+> that window.** A provider-backed plan now exists on every configured site,
+> but *Cheap window* and the maintenance cycle's grid top-up read
+> `static_profile` and nothing else — a deliberate limit, recorded with what it
+> would take to change in `DECISIONS/TARIFF-10-fetching-is-not-trading.md`.
 
 | option | meaning |
 |---|---|
-| `price_provider` | `off` (default) or one of the five plugins below |
+| `price_provider` | `off` (default) or one of the three plugins below |
 | `price_markup_eur_kwh` | Your supplier's margin, EUR/kWh. **Added only when the chosen plugin's feed does not already contain it** |
-| `price_taxes_eur_kwh` | Levies and VAT, EUR/kWh. Same rule |
-| `export_price_eur_kwh` | The **injection** price. A separate scalar, not a series — see below |
+| `price_taxes_eur_kwh` | Distribution, levies and VAT, EUR/kWh. Same rule. Defaults to **0.11736** — a real Flemish figure, and **yours is probably different**: see *What `price_taxes_eur_kwh` is made of* below |
+| `export_price_eur_kwh` | The **flat injection** price, EUR/kWh. May be negative — see below |
+| `price_export_formula` | The **injection formula**, if your contract has one. Same shape as `price_formula`, its own coefficients, its own `vat_pct` — see below |
 | `price_csv_path` | Where `manual_csv` reads its file |
-| `price_feed_url` | Override the plugin's default feed. Only a host the plugin itself declares is accepted |
+| `price_feed_url` | Override the plugin's default feed. Used **exactly as written** — the add-on appends nothing to it, including the date range, so an override gets whatever horizon that URL returns. Only a host the plugin itself declares is accepted |
 | `price_horizon_h` | How far ahead to ask for, hours |
 | `price_timeout_s` | Per-request timeout |
 | `static_profile` | A static day/night or fully-fixed tariff. Empty by default — see below |
+| `price_formula` | For `custom_formula` only: your own contract's two coefficients, off your own tariff card. Empty by default — see below |
 
 **Which plugin sources what.** This is the one thing to get right, because
 adding your markup to a price that already contains it makes every future
@@ -1372,11 +1490,86 @@ arbitrage decision wrong by that amount, in a direction nothing reports.
 | plugin | product | the published figure contains | the add-on adds |
 |---|---|---|---|
 | `generic_dayahead` | day-ahead | energy only (wholesale EPEX BE) | markup **and** taxes |
-| `engie_dynamic` | day-ahead | energy + Engie's markup | taxes |
-| `totalenergies_dynamic` | day-ahead | energy + TotalEnergies' markup | taxes |
-| `eneco_eddy` | **real-time / imbalance** | everything, all-in | nothing |
+| `custom_formula` | day-ahead | energy **and** your contract's markup — your card's `Tariefformule` line | taxes |
 | `manual_csv` | day-ahead | everything, all-in | nothing |
 
+⚠️ **Three plugins were withdrawn in TARIFF-07, and if your configuration names
+one of them, read this.** `engie_dynamic`, `totalenergies_dynamic` and
+`eneco_eddy` are gone. They did not stop working — **they never worked.** Each
+pointed at an endpoint that does not exist and never did:
+
+| id | its endpoint | what that endpoint actually answers |
+|---|---|---|
+| `engie_dynamic` | `https://api.engie.be/dynamic/be` | **404**, gateway error `no Route matched with those values` |
+| `totalenergies_dynamic` | `https://api.totalenergies.be/prices/dynamic` | **TLS failure** — that hostname is not in the server's certificate |
+| `eneco_eddy` | `https://api.eneco.be/eddy/prices` | **404**, empty body |
+
+Every fetch any of them ever made failed, and a failed fetch falls back to the
+static tariff **silently** — so a site set to one of these has been running on
+`static_profile`, or on nothing at all, since the day it was configured, with
+nothing on the status page saying so. The add-on now **refuses to start** on one
+of these ids and tells you all of the above by name. That is deliberate: a
+silent fallback is what hid this for as long as it lasted.
+
+There is no automatic migration and there cannot be one. These were *retail*
+tariffs of the form `B x spot + A` with **per-contract** coefficients that live
+behind your supplier's customer login; there is no public index to read them
+from. Any alias would have to invent the numbers your battery is priced against.
+(`eneco_eddy` was doubly wrong: **"Eddy" is not an Eneco product at all** —
+Eneco's dynamic product is *Zon & Wind Dynamisch*, and it is indexed to
+Belpex/EPEX **day-ahead**, not to imbalance.)
+
+#### So what should a Belgian dynamic-tariff customer do today?
+
+**Honestly: `generic_dayahead` gets you close, and you should know exactly how
+close.** It reads the wholesale EPEX BE day-ahead curve and adds your
+`price_markup_eur_kwh` and `price_taxes_eur_kwh` as **flat** scalars. Your real
+Belgian dynamic contract is a **formula**:
+
+```
+consumption:  price = B x spot + A          <- B and A are in YOUR contract
+```
+
+`generic_dayahead` cannot express that. Two gaps, and the second is the
+harder one — **both are closed by `custom_formula`**, which is what the
+rest of this section is about:
+
+* **No multiplier.** `B` is typically slightly above 1 (it scales the wholesale
+  price before anything is added). A flat markup cannot scale anything, so the
+  *shape* of your curve is right but its *amplitude* is not — the peaks and
+  troughs the optimiser trades against are compressed relative to your bill.
+* **No negative offset.** `A` is frequently **negative** on injection and can be
+  on consumption. `price_markup_eur_kwh` is `float(0,1)` in the schema — it
+  **cannot hold a negative number at all**, so that contract shape is currently
+  inexpressible rather than merely approximate.
+
+What that means in practice: arbitrage decisions made on `generic_dayahead` are
+made against a curve that is *correlated* with your bill, not equal to it. For
+deciding **which hours** are cheap that is usually good enough; for deciding
+**whether a cycle pays for itself** — which is what `cycle_cost_threshold_eur`
+compares against — it is an approximation, and one that errs by however far `B`
+is from 1.
+
+**`custom_formula` is the answer to exactly this, and it shipped in TARIFF-15.**
+You type your contract's two coefficients once, off your own tariff card, and
+the add-on evaluates `B x index + A` against the same EPEX BE day-ahead curve
+`generic_dayahead` reads. Both gaps above close: `B` is a real multiplier, and
+`A` may be negative. It is documented in full in **[Your own tariff formula
+(`custom_formula`)](#your-own-tariff-formula-custom_formula)** below.
+
+So there are three honest options rather than two:
+
+1. **`custom_formula`** — your contract's own arithmetic, if you can read the
+   two coefficients off your tariff card. This is the one to use.
+2. **`generic_dayahead`** with your markup and taxes set as well as you can —
+   accepting the approximation above; or
+3. **`manual_csv`**, where you compute the all-in prices yourself from your own
+   contract's formula and hand the add-on the answers. Nothing is approximated,
+   but nothing is automatic either.
+
+If you are on a **fixed** or **day/night** tariff — most Belgian households —
+neither of those applies: use `static_profile` and leave `price_provider: off`.
+
 You cannot get this wrong by editing the markup: each plugin *declares* what its
 feed contains and the add-on adds only the rest. Set a markup under a plugin
 that already carries one and it is **ignored, with a line in the log saying so**
@@ -1390,12 +1583,228 @@ whether a plugin described its supplier's feed truthfully — that is a claim
 about somebody else's tariff, and no code can verify it. If you write a plugin,
 the `sources` declaration is the part a reviewer has to read.
 
-`eneco_eddy` is a real-time/imbalance product rather than a day-ahead one. It is
-flagged as high-volatility, which widens arbitrage thresholds once the
-optimiser lands. That comes from the plugin's own declaration, not from its
-name.
+**Real-time / imbalance products still have a place in the machinery, but no
+plugin declares one.** A plugin that declares `PriceProduct.REALTIME` is flagged
+high-volatility and gets widened arbitrage thresholds; that comes from the
+plugin's own declaration, never from its name. All three shipped plugins are
+day-ahead, so nothing exercises that path on a real install today — it is kept
+on purpose so the first genuine imbalance product does not have to rebuild it.
+See `DECISIONS/TARIFF-07-withdrawing-three-plugins.md`.
 
-**`manual_csv` — the offline fallback.** It needs no internet, no supplier
+**`generic_dayahead` and the shape of the public feed.** It reads Fraunhofer
+ISE's Energy-Charts API (`https://api.energy-charts.info/price?bzn=BE`, no key
+and no registration), which publishes a *columnar* document — parallel
+`unix_seconds` and `price` arrays, in EUR/MWh, with the unit and the licence
+stated in the response. Two things follow that are worth knowing before you
+point `price_feed_url` somewhere else:
+
+* The timestamps are **UTC instants**. They are rendered at the Brussels offset
+  that applies to each one, so the hour that happens twice every October is two
+  points rather than one overwritten one.
+* Belgium moved to a **15-minute market time unit** on 2025-10-01, and the feed
+  followed. A published day is **96 points, not 24**. Nothing in the add-on
+  assumes either spacing, and nothing aggregates the quarters away.
+* The request **names the days it wants**, derived from the horizon on the
+  **Brussels** calendar — `?bzn=BE&start=2026-09-09&end=2026-09-10`, two
+  inclusive local dates. Without that the feed answers a single day, and
+  everything past today would be carried forward from yesterday's profile and
+  flagged provisional — which §8.3 excludes from arbitrage, so tomorrow would
+  never be tradeable at any hour. The calendar is Brussels rather than UTC
+  because 22:30 UTC in summer is already tomorrow in Belgium.
+
+**What you get before the auction publishes.** The day-ahead auction clears at
+about 13:00–14:00 CET. Ask for tomorrow before that and the feed returns fewer
+days than requested — that is normal, not a failure. The add-on keeps the
+series of what exists and fills the remaining hours from yesterday's profile,
+flagged provisional; arbitrage runs on the firm hours and ignores the flagged
+ones. So a dynamic site's plan is part firm and part carried every morning and
+fully firm once tomorrow is published, and neither state is an error.
+
+⚠️ **If you set `price_feed_url`, you keep the short horizon.** The override is
+sent exactly as you wrote it and the add-on adds no `start`/`end` to it, because
+those are this feed's parameter names and an override may point somewhere with
+different ones — rewriting a URL you typed is how a request nobody intended gets
+made. The consequence is a **`WARNING` in the log on every price refresh**,
+naming the range that would otherwise have been requested. If you only wanted a
+different host and not a different horizon, the fix is to clear the option.
+
+If the arrays ever come back different lengths, or the unit stops saying
+EUR/MWh, the fetch is refused outright rather than trusted in part: a price
+series missing its last hours is a series missing the evening peak, and it
+would be traded on as though it were complete. A refused fetch is the §11.4
+row — static profile, provisional plan, no arbitrage — and the reason is in the
+log.
+
+**A refused fetch does not take the plan you already have.** The last plan that
+actually came from the feed keeps standing until it is 90 minutes old (three
+missed refreshes), and only then does the §11.4 row above take over. The
+add-on logs a `WARNING` naming the failure, the fetch it is keeping, its age
+and the moment it retires; the plan's own age is **not** reset by the failed
+refresh, so a kept plan still expires on schedule and is never presented as a
+current one. One failed fetch is a blip, not a lost tariff.
+
+#### Your own tariff formula (`custom_formula`)
+
+**What it is for.** A Belgian dynamic contract prices energy as a formula —
+your supplier's tariff card prints it as `Tariefformule` — and the two
+coefficients in it belong to *your contract*. There is no machine-readable
+source for them anywhere: CREG's consumer tariff-card pages return 404, CREG
+Scan is a JavaScript wizard, the annual report lists suppliers without
+per-product coefficients, and VREG was unreachable. Every coefficient found in
+research came off a supplier's own PDF, one of them image-only. **You are the
+only party who can see your own coefficients**, so you type them, once.
+
+Set `price_provider: custom_formula` and fill in `price_formula` with one line
+of JSON:
+
+```json
+{"index": "epex_be", "resolution": "hourly",
+ "factor": 0.102, "offset": 1.00,
+ "units": "c_eur_per_kwh", "vat_pct": 6,
+ "card": {"month": "2026-09", "index_eur_per_mwh": 133.9905,
+          "expect_incl_vat": 15.55}}
+```
+
+The contract it expresses is:
+
+```
+price = (factor x index_eur_per_mwh + offset) x (1 + vat_pct / 100)
+```
+
+expressed in `units`, and **converted to EUR/kWh by the add-on**. You type what
+your card prints, in the card's own units; every unit conversion and the VAT
+multiplication are the add-on's job, because those are exactly the two steps
+where a human silently loses a factor of 10, 100 or 1.06.
+
+| field | what it is |
+|---|---|
+| `index` | the reference series. `epex_be` — the EPEX BE day-ahead curve in EUR/MWh, the same feed `generic_dayahead` reads |
+| `resolution` | `quarter_hourly` (the 96 points the feed publishes) or `hourly` (each hour's quarters averaged into one point). Your card says which series your contract is written against |
+| `factor` | `B` — the multiplier on the index. Must be a number, and positive |
+| `offset` | `A` — the fixed part, in the same units. **May be negative** |
+| `units` | `c_eur_per_kwh`, `eur_per_kwh` or `eur_per_mwh`. **Required, with no default** |
+| `vat_pct` | the VAT percentage. `6` for Belgian residential electricity — not `0.06` and not `106`. `0` is legitimate |
+| `card` | the month the card is dated, the reference index it assumed, and the price it prints. **Required** — see below |
+
+##### A worked example, from a real card
+
+Eneco's September 2026 card prints the formula, the reference index it assumed
+*and* the resulting price. With `factor: 0.102`, `offset: 1.00`, `vat_pct: 6`
+and the card's own index of `133.9905` EUR/MWh:
+
+```
+(0.102 x 133.9905 + 1.00) x 1.06 = 15.5471 c€/kWh     the card prints 15,55
+```
+
+ENGIE's card, in the same shape with its own numbers:
+
+```
+(0.100 x 61.96 + 0.90) x 1.06 = 7.5218 c€/kWh         the card prints 7,522
+```
+
+Both reproduce to the last digit the card prints, through the shipped code —
+`test_price.py` section 15a runs exactly these two.
+
+##### ⚠️ The `card` block is required, and it is the safety mechanism
+
+Because your card prints the index it assumed **and** the price that comes out,
+the add-on can check your coefficients against your supplier's own worked
+example. At startup it recomputes that printed price from the numbers you
+typed and **refuses to start** unless the two agree to within `0.01` — naming
+the discrepancy, the ratio, and the likely causes.
+
+That catches, in one check: VAT left out, VAT applied twice, a transposed
+digit, and a **unit mismatch** between your coefficients and the price you
+typed beside them (a factor of 10, 100 or 1000).
+
+And it catches the expensive one. **Your card's formula line is the energy
+component only.** Eneco tabulates network tariffs in one table and levies in a
+second; ENGIE states that the formula excludes network, distribution,
+transport, grid levies and excise. The add-on therefore declares that
+`custom_formula` supplies *energy and markup*, and adds `price_taxes_eur_kwh`
+on top — once. If you fold your network charges into `offset`, you are billed
+for them twice, and nothing on the status page would ever show it. It cannot
+happen: ~12 c€/kWh of network charge moves the computed 15.55 to about 27, and
+the add-on refuses to start and says so.
+
+⚠️ **And the limit of that check, in the same breath as the claim: it grades
+your coefficients against your card, not your card against reality.** Two
+numbers copied off the wrong product — or off a card your contract has since
+rolled over from — agree with each other perfectly and pass. Nothing can catch
+that. What is mechanised is that your coefficients and your card's printed
+price *agree*; whether the card is the right card is yours to know. The add-on
+warns (and does not refuse) when `card.month` is more than about six months
+old, because ENGIE freezes coefficients for a contract's duration and an old
+card is often exactly right.
+
+One more check runs beside it: the card's own point must land inside the range
+a Belgian retail tariff can occupy (0.02–1.00 EUR/kWh). That exists because a
+unit error applied to **both** sides at once cancels out of the comparison
+above and cannot cancel out of this one. It bounds the card's own point, **not
+every hour** — a live hour may legitimately fall outside it, and a negative
+day-ahead hour, which is the best charging opportunity of the year, is never
+refused.
+
+##### ⚠️ Fixed coefficients. No expression is evaluated, ever
+
+`price_formula` takes numbers. There is no field that accepts an expression,
+and an unrecognised field is **refused** rather than ignored, so typing
+`"expr": "..."` tells you it does not exist instead of quietly pricing you on
+the other fields.
+
+Two reasons, and the second is the decisive one:
+
+* This string is settable over HTTP — the add-on's own ingress configuration
+  page posts it to the Supervisor — so evaluating it would be remote code
+  execution inside a root container that holds a Supervisor token and drives
+  an inverter. (`eval` with an emptied `__builtins__` is not a sandbox.)
+* **An expression could not be graded against anything.** Two coefficients can
+  be checked against your card's printed price; an arbitrary expression
+  cannot, so it would make the invisible-wrong-coefficient problem strictly
+  worse — which is the exact failure this provider exists to prevent.
+
+All 24 surveyed Belgian products, both injection legs and aWATTar AT fit
+`B x index + A`, so an expression would buy nothing the market needs. If a
+future contract needs a different shape, it gets a **named field**
+(`clamp_lo`, `factor_negative`, `offset_bands`) that can be refused on its
+own. Never a grammar.
+
+##### What you see at startup
+
+The first time the feed answers, the add-on logs a preview of the next 24
+hours as `index EUR/MWh -> all-in EUR/kWh`, followed by the minimum, median,
+maximum and the day's spread. It is there so that a formula off by a factor of
+1000 is visible in one line rather than in a month of bills:
+
+```
+custom_formula preview - the next 24 h of YOUR tariff, index EUR/MWh -> all-in
+EUR/kWh, computed as (0.102 x index + 1) x (1 + 6/100) c_eur_per_kwh, converted
+to EUR/kWh and with price_taxes_eur_kwh added by the framework:
+    2026-09-10T00:00:00+02:00    216.080 ->   0.30423
+    2026-09-10T00:15:00+02:00    216.080 ->   0.30423
+    ... 72 further point(s) not listed; the figures below cover ALL 96
+  min 0.17277 / median 0.28031 / max 0.67499 EUR/kWh, spread 0.50222 EUR/kWh
+  over 96 point(s). ⚠️ If those are a thousand times what your bill says,
+  `units` is wrong; if the spread is 0, `factor` is.
+```
+
+(That transcript is the shipped code run against the committed
+`scenarios/energy-charts-be-price-2026-09-10-quarterhourly.json` capture with
+the default markup and taxes, not an illustration.)
+
+##### What it does not do
+
+The **injection** leg is a separate card, and it has its own option:
+`price_export_formula` (TARIFF-16). Eneco uses `0,102` on consumption and
+`0,100` on injection, and injection is VAT-exempt where consumption is at 6 %,
+so it is a second per-contract formula rather than a second copy of this one —
+the same parser, its own coefficients. `export_price_eur_kwh` remains the flat
+injection price for a site that is paid one, and **no strategy reads either**;
+see *Injection is priced separately* above.
+
+#### `manual_csv` — the offline fallback
+
+It needs no internet, no supplier
 account and no HTTP stack at all, and it is the supported way to run this
 add-on price-aware on a site with no outbound connectivity. Write a file and
 point `price_csv_path` at it:
@@ -1453,20 +1862,59 @@ applies to those hours, and asking the plan for one raises rather than
 answering. An hour with no price is not a free hour, and the fill does not
 invent a neighbour, a mean or a zero for it.
 
-**A quarter-hourly feed keeps all four of its prints.** `eneco_eddy` settles
-per quarter, and the fill decides *which whole hours need carrying* — never what
-a published hour may contain. Every point the provider published inside the
+**A quarter-hourly feed keeps all four of its prints.** Belgian day-ahead
+settles per quarter — the 15-minute MTU took effect on 2025-10-01, so
+`generic_dayahead` reads 96 points a day — and the fill decides *which whole
+hours need carrying*, never what a published hour may contain. Every point the provider published inside the
 horizon is passed through untouched; a carried point is added only for a whole
 hour the feed did not print at all.
 
 **What you can actually see on the status page.** *Price history* (below) says
 what is held. *Arbitrage* carries the strategy's own sentence, which names the
-firm/provisional split whenever that split is what refused a trade. *Tariff*
-does **not** report the fill: it is the static-profile or Home Assistant
-price-entity sentence, regenerated on the 30 s tick. The provider plan's own
-line — `dynamic_dayahead from generic_dayahead, 48 h, provisional` — goes to the
-**add-on log** at every refresh, alongside `§8.3: 33 of 48 hours carried forward
-from yesterday's profile and flagged provisional; 15 published`.
+firm/provisional split whenever that split is what refused a trade. And
+**Tariff** on the status page reads `provisional` through the morning, because
+since TARIFF-11 that row carries the provider plan itself:
+
+```
+Tariff: no static profile (recomputed this tick); provider plan fetched 412 s
+        ago for a 48 h horizon: dynamic_dayahead from generic_dayahead,
+        60 points over 33 h, 36 firm / 24 carried, 900+3600 s spacing,
+        provisional
+```
+
+⚠️ **The two halves of that row are not computed at the same moment, and the
+row says so.** Everything before the semicolon is the static-profile or Home
+Assistant price-entity sentence, regenerated on the **30 s tick** from options
+alone — no network. Everything after it is the **background refresh's**
+resolution, which runs every 1800 s and is served for up to 5400 s before it is
+retired; `fetched N s ago` is the age of the fetch that produced it and is the
+only figure in the row that tells you whether the feed is still answering. On a
+site with a provider configured and no usable plan the row says that too,
+rather than falling silently back to the static half.
+
+Read the plan half as five separate facts: which *product* the feed publishes
+and which *plugin* read it, how many **points** it carries and how many **whole
+hours** those points cover, how many of the points are **firm** (published for
+their own interval) against **carried** (filled from yesterday under §8.3), the
+**spacing** of the points in seconds — `900+3600` is the normal mixed steady
+state, quarter-hourly firm points beside hourly carried ones — and `provisional`
+whenever any point is carried.
+
+⚠️ **Points and hours are two different numbers and this row used to print one
+of them under the other's name.** `words` was `f"… {len(points)} h"`, so a
+33-hour plan of quarter-hourly points logged `dynamic_dayahead from
+generic_dayahead, 132 h`. It is the same conflation the *Price history* row
+carried before FCST-04 and the same one `at()` carried before TARIFF-14, and it
+is **not a constant factor**: measured over a 40-hour soak the overstatement
+ranged **1.79× to 5.33×**, because the carried points are hourly while the firm
+ones are quarter-hourly, so the ratio moves with the mix as the day goes on.
+The same sentence is in the **add-on log** at every refresh, alongside `§8.3:
+33 of 48 hours carried forward from yesterday's profile and flagged
+provisional; the feed published 60 points over the other 15 hours`.
+
+The §8.3 refusal an operator reads when a trade is declined counts in the same
+two units — `§8.3: only 1 of 96 points carry a published price - 1 of 24 hours`
+— where it used to say `only 1 of 96 hours` about a 24-hour day.
 
 The plan is also now cut to the horizon you asked for, which means **hours that
 have already elapsed are no longer in it**. That is a real change to arbitrage:
@@ -1503,18 +1951,335 @@ logged and reported on the status row, never raised. A cache that cannot answer
 is not allowed to be a controller that cannot regulate, and that applies to the
 volume being full exactly as it applies to the volume being absent.
 
-**Injection is priced separately** (`export_price_eur_kwh`). In Belgium it is
-often near zero, which by itself strongly favours self-consumption over export.
-It is a single number rather than a curve because no supported supplier
-publishes a dynamic injection tariff; negative values are accepted.
+### Injection is priced separately
 
-**The old Home Assistant price sensors.** `price_now_entity` and
+There are two ways to say what you are paid for an exported kWh, and which one
+you want depends on your contract:
+
+| your contract | what to set |
+|---|---|
+| a flat injection price | `export_price_eur_kwh` — one number, EUR/kWh. This is the default and what every existing install uses |
+| a price that moves with the market | `price_export_formula` — your card's injection line as `factor × index + offset`, in exactly the shape `price_formula` uses for consumption |
+
+Negative values are accepted on both — you can be charged to export at midday in
+summer, and the add-on says so rather than flooring it.
+
+#### ⚠️ What the add-on does *not* do with an injection price
+
+**No strategy in this add-on reads one.** Not the scalar, not the formula.
+`arbitrage.py` prices the sell side as **displaced import** — both hours it
+compares are all-in *consumption* prices — and its own comment gives the reason:
+§9.3's near-zero Belgian injection price is exactly why the economically sound
+trade on this market is *charge cheap to displace expensive import*, not *charge
+cheap to export dear*. So setting `price_export_formula` changes **no decision
+the add-on takes today**. It changes what you are shown at startup, and it is
+the shape any future export-aware strategy would read.
+
+That is the argument for doing it now rather than later: OPT-06 and any export
+logic would otherwise inherit a scalar that cannot represent the market, and the
+6% VAT asymmetry between the two legs would be invisible in the arithmetic.
+`test_price.py` 17h parses every module under `app/` and goes red the day
+something calls an injection reader, so this paragraph is graded rather than
+attested.
+
+#### Why a scalar was not enough
+
+Belgian suppliers publish the injection leg as a formula, on the same card as
+the consumption one. The reason given here until TARIFF-07 — *"no supported
+supplier publishes a dynamic injection tariff"* — was **false**, and what they
+publish has four properties one number cannot hold:
+
+```
+Eneco Zon & Wind Dynamisch   0,1 x BELPEX-H - 1,188   c/kWh
+    "Het injectietarief is dynamisch en kan per uur wijzigen"
+    - identical on the January and the September 2026 cards
+ENGIE Dynamic                (B x eSpot_15) - A
+Aspiravi (non-dynamic)       0,07 x Belpex - 2
+```
+
+1. **Its own factor.** Eneco uses `0,102` on consumption and `0,100` on
+   injection; Aspiravi `0,07` against about `0,10` on its consumption leg. It is
+   **not** the consumption `B` with a sign flip.
+2. **A negative offset** — `− 1,188`, `− 2`. Note that
+   `price_markup_eur_kwh: float(0,1)` cannot express a negative markup at all,
+   so the offset has no home on the consumption side either.
+3. **VAT-exempt.** *"Injectietarieven zijn vrijgesteld van btw"*, while
+   consumption is at 6%. `vat_pct` is **per leg**, so that six-point asymmetry
+   is expressible; a single scalar carries no VAT field at all.
+4. **It goes negative, with no floor.** Eneco's injection price is below zero
+   for any BELPEX-H under **11,88 EUR/MWh** — and a PV household exports
+   precisely in the hours most likely to be negative. **You can be charged to
+   export.**
+
+#### `price_export_formula`, field by field
+
+Same grammar as `price_formula` — literally the same parser, with its option
+name as an argument, so there is no second unit table and no second card rule to
+diverge from the first. Eneco's published injection line, typed out:
+
+```json
+{"index":"epex_be","resolution":"hourly","factor":0.1,"offset":-1.188,
+ "units":"c_eur_per_kwh","vat_pct":0}
+```
+
+⚠️ **`vat_pct` is 0 here and 6 on the consumption leg.** That is the one field
+people copy across from the other formula and get wrong.
+
+⚠️ **The `card` block is optional on this leg and required on the other**, and
+that is a statement about the cards rather than a relaxed rule. `price_formula`
+can demand one because a Belgian card prints the consumption formula, the
+reference index it assumed *and* the resulting price — so the add-on can
+recompute that price and refuse to start unless your numbers reproduce it.
+**Eneco's injection formula is printed with no price beside it.** There is
+nothing to grade against on that card. Requiring a block would make the market's
+own published line inexpressible; inventing the estimate would grade your
+coefficients against arithmetic done with your coefficients, which is not a
+check. So:
+
+* if **your** card prints an injection estimate, fill the block in and it is
+  graded at the same tolerance as the consumption leg — the add-on refuses to
+  start if your numbers do not reproduce it;
+* if it does not, the add-on **says so at startup** — *"its coefficients are
+  UNGRADED"* — and names what it checked instead.
+
+What it checks instead, always, on both paths:
+
+* **pass-through**: `factor`, converted to a share of the wholesale price, must
+  be between 0.10× and 10×. Eneco's injection leg is `1.00×` and Aspiravi's
+  `0.70×`; a coefficient typed a hundred times out reads `0.01×` or `100×`.
+* **offset magnitude**: `|offset|` must be at most 0.20 EUR/kWh. The published
+  ones are `−0.01188` and `−0.02`.
+
+Both bounds are on the **coefficients**, not on the price, which is why they can
+bound a leg whose price legitimately goes below zero. `price_formula`'s
+plausibility band is deliberately **not** reused here: its floor is `+0.02
+EUR/kWh` of energy, and applying that to injection would refuse the real market
+in exactly the hours where knowing the number matters most.
+
+⚠️ **And the gap those bounds leave, with its size.** They bound the *shape* of
+the coefficients, never their truth. With no printed estimate, a `factor` of
+`0.070` where your contract says `0.100` — 30% of every export payment — passes
+both, because `0.70×` is a pass-through somebody really publishes. Only a
+printed estimate can catch a wrong-contract pair, and on Eneco's card there is
+not one. That is why the startup line says the leg is ungraded instead of
+implying it was checked.
+
+### The old Home Assistant price sensors
+
+`price_now_entity` and
 `price_avg_entity` still work and are unchanged: the add-on compares them and
 uses the result as a cheap-window hint for the maintenance charge. They are
 **not compatible with `price_provider`, and not with `static_profile` either**
 — configure two of them and the add-on refuses to start, naming the conflict,
 because the add-on reads exactly one and the loser is silent. Use one.
 
+### The three buckets — which price components can move a decision (TARIFF-17)
+
+**Read this before adding a price component of any kind.** The optimiser reads
+exactly two quantities off a price series, and nothing else:
+
+- the **spread**, `max − min` over the *firm* points, weighed against
+  `cycle_cost_threshold_eur`; and
+- **which hour is cheapest**, `min(firm, key=…)` — the hour a battery would
+  buy in.
+
+Every component of a Belgian bill reaches those two through one of three
+buckets, and which bucket it is in is a property of its *shape*, not of its
+size:
+
+| bucket | what it looks like | reaches the decision? |
+|---|---|---|
+| **LEVEL** | additive, **identical every hour** | **No — provably.** An additive constant cancels exactly in `max − min`, and adding it to every point leaves the argmin where it was |
+| **SPREAD** | **multiplicative** on the spot index | **Yes.** It scales the spread against a fixed `cycle_cost_threshold_eur` |
+| **ORDER** | **varies** by hour, block or day-type | **Yes, and worst.** It changes *which hour is cheapest* |
+
+Measured on the real arithmetic (`test_price.py` section 16b, printed on every
+run): with a flat taxes figure of 0.00, 0.0739, 0.11736 (the shipped default),
+0.1198, 0.1327 or 1.00 EUR/kWh, the same 24-hour feed is cheapest at **13:00 in
+all six cases** and its spread is **0.1500 EUR/kWh in all six cases**. That is
+the LEVEL bucket doing nothing, and it is not a rounding artefact — it is
+arithmetic.
+
+Three consequences worth having in mind:
+
+1. **`price_taxes_eur_kwh` is not a wrong number and never was.** It sits in
+   the LEVEL bucket and *cannot* distort either quantity. What it also cannot
+   do is express a component that varies by hour — which is why
+   `price_taxes_profile` exists. The defect TARIFF-17 closed was a **missing
+   capability**, not a bad constant.
+2. **`custom_formula`'s `factor` is a SPREAD component, and its `offset` is
+   LEVEL.** The contract price is `(factor × index + offset) × (1 + VAT)`, so
+   the spread over a feed is `factor × (1 + VAT) × (max index − min index)` —
+   the offset drops out entirely, and the spread is *proportional* to `factor`.
+   Moving `factor` from 0.100 to 0.10812 therefore moves the spread by exactly
+   **+8.1 %** on any feed whatever. A coefficient typed one digit wrong is not
+   a small pricing error; it is a different trading threshold. The VAT rate is
+   multiplicative on the whole expression, so it is SPREAD too.
+3. **A check that grades the spread is grading the wrong bucket.** An
+   implementation that reads an hour-varying table *once* and adds the same
+   number to every point produces a series of the right magnitude and the wrong
+   shape — the LEVEL bucket wearing a period table. The spread would look
+   plausible; the buy hour would be wrong. So the regression check for an
+   ORDER-bucket component asserts **which hour is cheapest**, not how big the
+   spread is (`test_price.py` 16c and 16d).
+
+⚠️ **Where the buckets are today.** `price_markup_eur_kwh`,
+`price_taxes_eur_kwh` and `custom_formula`'s `offset` are LEVEL.
+`custom_formula`'s `factor` and its VAT rate are SPREAD. `price_taxes_profile`
+is the only ORDER component the add-on has. Anything added next belongs in one
+of the three, and saying which is part of adding it.
+
+### What `price_taxes_eur_kwh` is made of, and why yours is different (TARIFF-18)
+
+**It ships at `0.11736` EUR/kWh.** That is the all-in non-energy part of a
+Flemish residential bill — everything on your invoice that is *not* the energy
+itself — read off the Eneco residential card for Flanders, **September 2026**,
+**including 6 % VAT**:
+
+| component | c€/kWh |
+|---|---|
+| Fluvius distribution (**Antwerpen**) | 5,35 |
+| Bijzondere accijns, *"Alle verbruik"* — no volume bands | 4,876 |
+| Bijdrage groene stroom en WKK Vlaanderen | 1,51 |
+| Energiebijdrage | **0** |
+| **total** | **11,736 c€/kWh = 0.11736 €/kWh** |
+
+The rows are in the code, in `app/price.py`'s
+`FLEMISH_TAXES_COMPONENTS_EUR_KWH`, and `test_price.py` section 1b re-adds them
+and refuses a default that is not their sum. It replaces a shipped `0.06`,
+which was roughly **half** the true figure and had no recorded provenance at
+all.
+
+⚠️ **`energiebijdrage` is zero and that is not a mistake.** *"Vanaf 1 augustus
+2026 bedraagt de energiebijdrage 0 EUR/MWh"* — it was merged into the
+bijzondere accijns. If you are re-deriving this total from a guide written
+before that date you will find a separate energiebijdrage line; adding it would
+count it twice. It is carried as a **zero row** rather than left out for
+exactly that reason.
+
+⚠️ **THIS IS A PER-DSO FIGURE AND YOURS IS PROBABLY NOT 0.11736.** Only the
+distribution row moves. Across the eight Fluvius DSOs it runs **5,28 c€/kWh**
+(Midden-Vlaanderen) to **6,70** (West), so the Flemish all-in total runs about
+**0.117 to 0.131 €/kWh** — a 1,42 c€/kWh spread, which on 4 000 kWh a year is
+about €57. The other two rows are Flanders-wide and do not move. **Look up your
+own distribution row, add the same accijns and groenestroombijdrage, and type
+the total.**
+
+⚠️ **A WALLOON OR BRUSSELS SITE SHOULD NOT USE THIS SCALAR AT ALL.** Their
+distribution tariff has a **day and a night band** — `Enkelvoudig | Dag |
+Nacht | Uitsl. nacht` on the same card, where Fluvius prints a single rate —
+and a flat figure flattens exactly the component that is anti-correlated with
+what the battery wants to do. Use **`price_taxes_profile`** (the next section);
+it is the only ORDER-bucket component the add-on has.
+
+⚠️ **THIS IS A DISPLAY AND GUARD FIX. IT DOES NOT IMPROVE ARBITRAGE, AND IT
+CANNOT.** `price_taxes_eur_kwh` is a **LEVEL** component — added identically to
+every hour — so it **cancels exactly** in `max − min` and leaves the argmin
+where it was. It does not change which hour is cheapest, it does not change the
+spread, and it does not make any trade happen that did not happen before. See
+*The three buckets* above, where six flat scalars spanning and exceeding the
+whole per-DSO range give the identical cheapest hour and the identical spread
+to the last digit. What raising it **does** change is exactly two things:
+
+* **every figure an operator reads** — the all-in prices on the status page,
+  `custom_formula`'s startup preview and the recorded price history. At half
+  the true non-energy component they made the add-on look considerably better
+  than it is.
+* **§17's negative-price guard** (`arbitrage.py`), which is the one rung that
+  tests an **absolute** all-in price rather than a difference. The guard fires
+  when `spot < −(markup + taxes)`, so its boundary moved from **−0.09000** to
+  **−0.14736 €/kWh** of spot. A spot hour at −0.11868 €/kWh used to read
+  **−0.02868 €/kWh** all-in and the discharge was refused as paid-for disposal;
+  at the real tax level it reads **+0.02868** and the discharge is allowed,
+  because the operator really does pay those levies and that hour really was
+  profitable (`test_arbitrage.py` section 2c drives both, and pins the boundary
+  from below as well).
+
+⚠️ **Which is why the default sits near the LOW end of the per-DSO band rather
+than in the middle of it.** The two error directions are not symmetric. Set too
+**high**, the figure carries a genuinely negative hour up above zero and the
+add-on exports into paid-for disposal — §17's own regression case. Set too
+**low**, it only declines a discharge that would have paid. Where one default
+has to stand in for eight DSOs, it belongs at the bottom.
+
+**If you set this yourself, nothing above affects you.** A site with its own
+`price_taxes_eur_kwh` keeps it; the default only answers where the option is
+absent from the stored options blob.
+
+### Levies and VAT by time of day (`price_taxes_profile`)
+
+**Leave this empty unless your network tariff really does have a day and a
+night rate**, which in Flanders it does not. Fluvius distribution is a single
+rate: its row on the tariff card reads `Normaal | Uitsl. nacht`, and
+*exclusive night* is a **separate physical circuit** (a night-storage heater on
+its own meter), not the night register of a dual-rate meter. For a Flemish site
+the flat `price_taxes_eur_kwh` is correct, and this option changes nothing.
+
+**Wallonia and Brussels are different, and the same card proves it.** The
+Walloon DSOs and Sibelga get four columns — `Enkelvoudig | Dag | Nacht |
+Uitsl. nacht` — and the day/night gap is real money (c€/kWh):
+
+| DSO | enkelvoudig | dag | nacht | gap |
+|---|---|---|---|---|
+| ORES | 11,98 | 13,27 | 7,39 | **5,88** |
+| AIESH | 13,64 | 15,17 | 8,21 | **6,96** |
+| Tecteo RESA | 11,06 | 12,20 | 7,01 | 5,19 |
+| Sibelga (Brussels) | 9,39 | 9,39 | 7,10 | 2,29 |
+| ORES IMPACT (2026) | — | 16,578 | 5,090 | **11,49** |
+
+⚠️ **The bands are anti-correlated with what the battery wants to do.** The
+cheap network hours are the cheap spot hours. So flattening them does not
+merely shift the curve — it **systematically understates the true spread**, and
+the add-on declines cycles that are genuinely profitable. On ORES's bands over
+one ordinary winter weekday the measured effect is: cheapest hour **13:00 →
+03:00**, spread **0.1500 → 0.1788 EUR/kWh**.
+
+It is written in **exactly the same grammar as `static_profile`** — the same
+periods, the same day selectors, the same rule that every day type is covered
+once with no gap and no overlap, the same DST handling. It is literally the
+same parser; there is no second tiling rule, because a second one would be a
+second set of 23- and 25-hour-day bugs.
+
+```json
+{"periods": [
+  {"name":"dag",  "from":"07:00","to":"22:00","days":"mon-fri","eur_per_kwh":0.1327},
+  {"name":"nacht","from":"22:00","to":"07:00","days":"mon-fri","eur_per_kwh":0.0739},
+  {"name":"nacht","from":"00:00","to":"24:00","days":"sat,sun", "eur_per_kwh":0.0739}]}
+```
+
+- ⚠️ **`eur_per_kwh` here is the LEVIES ALONE, not an all-in price.** It is the
+  non-energy part of the bill for that band, and the add-on adds it to whatever
+  your price source publishes — exactly as it adds the flat figure. This is the
+  one place the two options differ in meaning while sharing a grammar, and the
+  refusal you get for leaving the number out says which one is wanted.
+- ⚠️ **The card prints cents. This option takes EUR.** ORES prints `13,27`;
+  type `0.1327`. A whole card typed in cents is refused at startup, naming both
+  bands and the factor — including the cards (Sibelga's 9,39 / 7,10) whose
+  figures are small enough to slip past the ±10 EUR/kWh bound the parser holds
+  every price to.
+- ⚠️ **Set this *or* `price_taxes_eur_kwh`, not both.** The table wins when it
+  is set, so a scalar left at a non-default value beside it would be a number
+  you typed that decides nothing. That is refused at startup rather than
+  silently resolved; leave `price_taxes_eur_kwh` at its shipped `0.11736` when
+  you fill this in. ⚠️ **A scalar still sitting on the superseded `0.06` is
+  also accepted**, and deliberately so — TARIFF-18 moved that default, and your
+  stored options blob carries the old number whether you typed it or not, so
+  refusing it would have stopped working Walloon and Brussels sites on an
+  upgrade over a figure the table overrides anyway.
+- A **malformed table is refused at startup**, not at the next fetch. It is
+  read on the ~30 s planning path, and a table that first fails at 03:00 is a
+  site that stops pricing at 03:00 — which §11.4 turns into a quiet fallback
+  that looks exactly like a healthy fixed-tariff day.
+- It applies to the components the framework **adds**: `generic_dayahead`
+  (which declares `{ENERGY}`) and `custom_formula` (which declares
+  `{ENERGY, MARKUP}`) both get it. `manual_csv` publishes an all-in figure and
+  is untouched — the table is routed through the same `capabilities().adds`
+  rule as the scalar, not bolted on.
+- It does **not** apply to `static_profile`, whose prices are already all-in,
+  nor to `export_price_eur_kwh` or `price_export_formula`. Those are the
+  injection leg, and nothing is added to what you are *paid* for export:
+  `price_taxes_eur_kwh` is a consumption component.
+
 ### Static day/night and fully-fixed tariffs (`static_profile`)
 
 Most Belgian households are **not** on a dynamic contract, and an EMS that only
@@ -1626,6 +2391,41 @@ towards the firmware's 30 s failsafe. The plan refreshes every 30 minutes and
 retires itself if the refresh stops answering, at which point arbitrage stops
 with it.
 
+⚠️ **That refresh is not gated on this switch** (TARIFF-10). It runs when a
+`price_provider` is configured *or* when arbitrage is armed, so turning
+arbitrage off does not turn the price feed off — and a site with no provider
+that arms arbitrage on a `static_profile` keeps the plan it has always had. The
+only thing that decides whether a request leaves the machine is
+`price_provider`: with it `off`, the refresh resolves the static profile in
+memory and opens no connection.
+
+**The *Arbitrage* status row says which of three things is true** — trading is
+off, trading is on and this cycle reached no decision, or a decision was
+reached — and it stamps every decision with its age. Until TARIFF-11 it said
+one of two, because the first two rendered identically. They have three
+different remedies:
+
+| the row opens with | what is true | what to do |
+|---|---|---|
+| **off** — *"arbitrage_enabled is false, so nothing trades"* | Trading is not armed. Nothing will happen, and nothing is wrong | Arm it, if you meant to |
+| **ON (arbitrage_enabled), but NO DECISION has been reached yet** | Trading **is** armed, and no cycle has run as far as the arbitrage step. The row then names the control loop's own reason, usually *inputs missing* | Fix the input the loop names |
+| **decided N s ago:** … | The strategy answered this cycle, and `N` is how old that answer is | Read the sentence that follows — it is the strategy's own |
+| **no decision this cycle (reason); the last one was taken N s ago:** … | Trading is armed, a decision stands from an earlier cycle, and **this** cycle stopped before reaching the step | As row 2 — the standing decision is history, not a verdict on now |
+
+A fifth rendering — *"…no decision this cycle …, and none stands from an
+earlier one"* — covers the case where trading was armed after a cycle had
+already run without it.
+
+⚠️ **The second row used to render exactly like the first one**, naming
+`arbitrage_enabled` on a site where `arbitrage_enabled` is `true`. A cycle with
+a missing input returns after roughly `stale_input_s` (15 s by default) without
+reaching the arbitrage step at all, so on an armed site the row reported *off*
+at startup and, once one decision had been taken, went on showing that decision
+for up to 15 s after the site stopped deciding anything. The age on the third
+row is printed **always**, including when it is zero: a row that reports
+staleness only once it is stale cannot be told from one that never reports
+it.
+
 ### Site
 
 | option | meaning |

goodwe_controller/MUTATION.md

@@ -695,6 +695,84 @@ Cheap habits fall out of it, and all of them are now used in this repository:
       that two of it cannot silently overwrite each other's work. A fixed path
       in a tool that edits source is a shared mutable global with a filename.
 
+19. ⚠️ **A FIXTURE IN A SHAPE NOBODY PUBLISHES GRADES THE PARSER AGAINST THE
+    PARSER — FOURTEENTH INSTANCE OF HABIT 4, AND THE FIRST WHERE THE FIXTURE
+    AND THE CODE UNDER TEST SHARED A *SHAPE* RATHER THAN A NUMBER.** TARIFF-08.
+    `price.py`'s `_points_from_json()` read `doc["data"]` as a list of
+    `{start, price_eur_mwh}` objects. `api.energy-charts.info` publishes
+    parallel `unix_seconds` / `price` arrays and has no `data` key at all, so
+    `generic_dayahead` raised `SourceUnavailable` on **every live fetch it ever
+    made** — and the suite was green, because all three price suites built
+    their bodies with `json.dumps({"data": [...]})`. The fixture was derived
+    from the parser's guess, so no mutation of the parser and no amount of
+    coverage inside that loop could ever have reached the failure. §11.4 then
+    turned it into a *correct* silent degradation: parse error -> `no_data` ->
+    static profile -> arbitrage off, with nothing naming the cause.
+
+    Habit 2 with a network on the end of it: **the reference has to be data the
+    code under test did not shape.** For a parser that means BYTES, captured
+    from the source and committed unmodified, with the URL, the retrieval time
+    and a checksum beside them - `scenarios/energy-charts-be-price-*.json` and
+    its `-captures.json` provenance, re-derived by the replay so an edited
+    fixture stops being a capture. Two granularities, because the same endpoint
+    answers hourly before 2025-10-01 and quarter-hourly after it and a fixture
+    at one spacing cannot grade an assumption about the other.
+
+    ⚠️ **AND THE SURVIVING SYNTHETIC FIXTURES ARE NAMED FOR WHAT THEY ARE.**
+    Three shipped plugins point at endpoints nobody has verified (TARIFF-07),
+    so no capture exists for them; their fixture builder is called
+    `synthetic_row_feed` at every call site, because the next reader's default
+    assumption will otherwise be that a green check means the feed parses.
+
+    ⚠️ **ONE OF THIS CARD'S OWN NEW LINES WAS DECORATION AND THE BATTERY SAID
+    SO.** The columnar parser first rendered its instants with `brussels()`
+    before returning them. `assemble()` already renders every plugin's points,
+    so removing the parser's call changed nothing observable - **M4 came back a
+    survivor on a `:ro`, purged tree**, which is not the direction stale
+    bytecode fabricates. The line was removed rather than fenced with a check:
+    a second copy of a rule that already has an owner is indistinguishable from
+    a no-op, and the mutation that proves the rendering is real belongs on
+    `assemble()`, where it is now aimed.
+
+20. ⚠️ **A FIXTURE GRADES THE RESPONSE. NOTHING ABOUT THE REQUEST IS REACHABLE
+    FROM ONE, AND THE TRANSPORT HAD BEEN RECORDING IT ALL ALONG.** TARIFF-09,
+    and it is habit 19's closed loop with the other half still shut.
+    `generic_dayahead.fetch()` took `since` and `until` and asked for the bare
+    `?bzn=BE`, which answers ONE Brussels day - so §8.3 dropped every hour past
+    today from the trade set as provisional and the optimiser never saw
+    tomorrow as firm, at any hour of any day. Measured at 09:00: **15 firm
+    hours and 33 carried of 48**, both ends of the permitted cycle inside one
+    calendar day; at 23:00, **1 and 47**, with the firm spread no longer
+    clearing the round-trip cost.
+
+    TARIFF-08 had just fixed the RESPONSE side of this same plugin by
+    committing real bytes. It could not have caught this: a captured body is
+    the answer to a URL, and **no property of any body says which URL was
+    asked for**. `canned()` in `test_price.py` had recorded `(url, timeout_s)`
+    on every call since TARIFF-02 and not one check had ever asserted on the
+    first element - so the harness *knew* the plugin was ignoring its arguments
+    and nothing asked it. The fix is one line of habit: **where a plugin takes
+    arguments that shape a request, assert on the REQUEST off the injected
+    transport, not only on what comes back.** Section 2c does, and the
+    shipped-defect mutation (restore the bare URL, `-173 B`) is red on six
+    named checks in `test_price.py` and two in `test_price_history.py`.
+
+    ⚠️ **AND A MUTATION THAT TURNS A READ INTO `no_data` CRASHES A SUITE
+    INSTEAD OF NAMING A CHECK, UNLESS THE CHECK EXPECTS IT.** `_NoData.points`
+    raises `Absence` by design, so `derived(...) < derived(...)` over two
+    absent reads is a `TypeError` and `[p for p in plan.read.points]` is a
+    traceback - habit 5's shape with an exception in place of a hang. The
+    mutation that matters here is the "defensive" one somebody writes after
+    reading this card: *refuse when the feed returned fewer days than we asked
+    for*. It is exactly what a healthy feed does every morning before the
+    ~13:00-14:00 CET auction, and switching arbitrage off for it would be a
+    worse defect than the one being fixed. It is red BY NAME in
+    `test_price.py` (33 checks, the AC's own line among them) and takes
+    `test_price_history.py` down at **FCST-04's section 1**, whose `_before`
+    read is unguarded - a red, but an unnamed one. That is recorded rather than
+    retrofitted: guarding another card's section is a change to what its
+    checks report, and it belongs to whoever next touches it.
+
 And the mutation-table consequence: **a variant is not covered because a
 near-miss of it is.** DEV-02's table listed the *actuator* variant of the
 per-unit claim defect (`device`/`supervised` filed without `inv`), which the
@@ -702,6 +780,92 @@ static routing pin catches. The *bound* variant — right actuator, wrong
 numbers — is a different defect with a different fix, and it was absent. Both
 are in the table now.
 
+## TARIFF-15 — the card-graded formula, mutation by mutation
+
+Twenty-two mutations, one per check the card added, **run** rather than
+reasoned about. Harness: `/home/homelab/.cache/t15-mut/run.py`, backups beside
+it rather than in a shared scratchpad — two agents' harnesses collided in one
+this week. Each run restores from backup, purges `__pycache__` **on the host**
+first, and grades through the CI image with the tree bind-mounted `:ro`, so the
+interpreter cannot write a cache into the tree under test at all (TEST-15's
+structural immunity, borrowed).
+
+**No survivors.** Two entries are `+0 B` and are called out as such, per the
+reporting rule.
+
+| | mutation | file | Δ | red |
+|---|---|---|---|---|
+| M1 | `CARD_TOLERANCE` widened to 100 — the self-check stops checking | `custom_formula.py` | +1 B | **8** |
+| M2 | `CARD_TOLERANCE` tightened to 0 — the other direction, so the tolerance is a number and not a shape | `custom_formula.py` | −1 B | **16** |
+| M3 | `units` becomes optional | `custom_formula.py` | +10 B | 1 |
+| M4 | the `factor == 0` rung removed | `custom_formula.py` | −8 B | 1 |
+| M5 | the `factor < 0` rung removed | `custom_formula.py` | −7 B | 1 |
+| M6 | the `vat_pct` band widened to ±1000 | `custom_formula.py` | +6 B | 2 |
+| M7 | the non-finite rung removed from `_finite()` | `custom_formula.py` | −26 B | 2 |
+| M8 | the non-numeric rung removed from `_finite()` | `custom_formula.py` | −16 B | 4 |
+| M9 | an unknown top-level field ignored instead of refused | `custom_formula.py` | −2 B | 1 |
+| M10 | the plausibility **floor** applied to the all-in figure instead of the energy one | `custom_formula.py` | **+0 B** | 2 |
+| M11 | `hourly` stops averaging and emits the feed's own points | `custom_formula.py` | +12 B | 3 |
+| M12 | the hourly bucket takes the FIRST quarter instead of the mean | `custom_formula.py` | −11 B | 1 |
+| M13 | the preview drops the index column from each row | `custom_formula.py` | −13 B | 1 |
+| M14 | the preview is emitted on every refresh rather than once | `price.py` | −8 B | 1 |
+| M15 | `custom_formula` declares `ALL_IN` — the double-counting lie | `price.py` | −41 B | **10** |
+| M16 | a stale card never warns | `custom_formula.py` | −8 B | 1 |
+| M17 | a stale card REFUSES instead of warning | `validate.py` | −3 B | 1 |
+| M18 | the empty-formula refusal removed from the startup gate | `validate.py` | −38 B | 1 |
+| M19 | the index scaled to EUR/kWh before the formula — the factor-1000 | `price.py` | +2 B | **7** |
+| M20 | an `eval` call planted in `app/custom_formula.py` | `custom_formula.py` | +14 B | 1 |
+| M21 | `custom_formula` stops passing the caller's range to the feed | `price.py` | **+0 B** | 1 |
+| M22 | **PAIRED**: M1 *and* the plausibility band removed, together | `custom_formula.py` | −60 B | **12** |
+
+### The four that are worth reading rather than counting
+
+**M13 was a SURVIVOR of the whole suite on the first attempt, at −13 B.** The
+check read `"index EUR/MWh -> all-in EUR/kWh" in log` — which is the preview's
+**heading**. Deleting the index column from every **row** left the heading
+saying it prints something it no longer printed, and nothing went red. That is
+this file's third failure mode arriving in the check written to close it: the
+assertion ran, the sentence was true, and the data could not reach the failure
+it named. It is graded on a rendered ROW now, built here from the captured
+document (`'  216.080 ->   0.30123'`), and M13 is red.
+
+**M10 is `+0 B` and it is a real defect, not a synthetic one.** It came out of
+writing the mutation rather than out of review: `implausible_all_in()`'s floor
+was applied to the all-in figure, and `price_taxes_eur_kwh` shipped at 0.06 —
+**three times the 0.02 floor** — so a card read a hundred times too small
+(0.0016 EUR/kWh of energy) is carried over the floor by the flat tax addend
+alone and passes. The hundredfold error is exactly what that band exists for.
+The floor is applied to the **energy** figure now and the ceiling to the all-in
+one, both directions are graded, and the trap is stated as a check in its own
+right so the asymmetry cannot be "tidied up" later. *(Annotated 2026-09-13:
+TARIFF-18 raised that default to 0.11736, **nearly six times** the floor. The
+addend that does the carrying got BIGGER, so the trap is wider than when M10
+was measured and the asymmetry is more load-bearing rather than less.)*
+
+**M15 is the one the framework CANNOT catch, and the reds say which half does.**
+Declaring `ALL_IN` makes `assemble()` add nothing, and section 3's all-in check
+is *derived from the declaration* — so it passes on the lie, exactly as
+`price.py`'s trap 1 says no code can catch a misdeclaration. What goes red is
+the **docstring/declaration agreement** check, the card reproductions, and the
+`sources` pin: ten reds, none of them from the arithmetic. That is the
+guarantee at its true size — the two claims are held to agree, and whether
+either is true about somebody else's tariff remains human.
+
+**M22 is the paired run (TEST-16).** The card self-check and the plausibility
+band both answer a unit error, so each could be masking the other. Weakened
+**together** they produce twelve reds rather than the eight M1 alone produces,
+and the band's own checks stay red — so neither rung is doing the other's work.
+
+### What this battery does NOT establish
+
+It does not establish that a card is the right card. Every mutation above moves
+the relationship between the coefficients and the printed price; **none of them
+can move the relationship between the printed price and the operator's actual
+contract**, because nothing in this repository observes that. A
+consistent-but-wrong pair passes every one of these checks, by construction,
+and `DECISIONS/TARIFF-15-the-card-is-the-grader.md` §3 says so in the same
+sentence as the claim.
+
 ## Where each surface stands
 
 * **Local and dev-harness runs — the exposed one.** This is where FCST-03 hit
@@ -752,6 +916,7 @@ commit and PR bodies.
 | **SAFETY-03** reviewer survivor: `abs()` dropped from `clamp_to_rating`'s limit (6aabb83) | **re-verified — still a survivor** | re-run the same way, all 15 green. Also as recorded: unreachable under the `int(100, 5000)` schema. |
 | **MAINT-05 round 3**, `migrate_maint_keys()` marker gate `if rep.ok:` → `if rep.ok or rep.kept:` (`+12 B`) | **was a survivor — now CLOSED** | measured against head `65cddf3` under the purge, tree mounted `:ro`, `19/19 PASS`. It stamps the schema marker on a migration that LOST state, defeating the older `lost` guard as well as the new `misdirected` one, because every check that reached the marker did so on a store whose `kept` list was empty. Closed by `test_maintenance.py` **9d**; the mutation is now red on three named checks. |
 | **MAINT-05 round 3**, `migrate_unit_keys()` marker gate `if rep.ok:` → `if rep.ok or rep.kept:` (`+12 B`) | **found here — SAFETY-02's half, now CLOSED** | the SAME mutation one function up, on the LATCH migration rather than the history one. Measured a survivor against this branch under the purge, `:ro`, `19/19 PASS`, then closed by `test_inverter.py` part 10's new fixture — a store with `unit/inverter-a/sign_reason` already present (so `kept` is non-empty) whose `sign_tripped: true` write is dropped. Shipped: marker withheld. Mutant: marker stamped on a **disarmed latch**, and the next start skips the migration that would have re-armed it. |
+| **TARIFF-09** 11 mutations over `app/price.py` and the two-day capture, all red, no survivors | **not at risk** | direction, and method: every mutation was applied to a FRESH `cp -a` of the clean worktree rather than reverted, so there is no revert to verify (habit 18) and no shared scratch path two runs could collide on. Each ran through `tools/mutation_run.sh`, which purges and fingerprints. Byte deltas recorded on the PR; one is **+0 B** - a single price digit edited inside the committed capture, the risky delta - and the re-derived sha256 catches it. |
 | **TARIFF-01**'s other three survivors, **SAFETY-03**'s `describe()` survivor, **TARIFF-02**'s M3/M5/M7, **SAFETY-18**'s three | **still unverified** | recorded before the purge discipline, with no byte delta on the record, so a `+0 B` same-second revert cannot be excluded. All are survivors, which is the direction this defect fabricates. TARIFF-02's and SAFETY-18's were **closed by later commits whose claims are reds**, so what is unverified is the *diagnosis*, not the current state of the code. |
 
 **Nothing here says a past result is wrong.** The two survivors re-run above

goodwe_controller/app/arbitrage.py

@@ -184,6 +184,17 @@ IDLE_OFF_PEAK_HOUR = "this hour is neither the buy hour nor the sell hour"
 IDLE_NO_SIZE = (
     "no pack's state of charge permits this side of the trade, so it is sized "
     "at 0 W - and a 0 W arbitrage claim is a park order, not a trade")
+# SAFETY-45. THE BUY LEG'S SIZE, AND ONLY THE BUY LEG'S - §9.1: "Discharge and
+# export are never capped by the peak guard; only charging and import are."
+IDLE_NO_HEADROOM = (
+    "the capacity-tariff guard has measured this billed quarter and it can "
+    "afford no charging at all, so a trade of any size would push it over the "
+    "ceiling - and a 0 W arbitrage claim is a park order, not a trade")
+IDLE_HEADROOM_UNMEASURED = (
+    "the capacity-tariff guard did not size this quarter's charging headroom "
+    "this cycle, and an UNMEASURED headroom is not an unlimited one - charging "
+    "creates the billed quantity (§9.1) and nothing is measuring the quarter "
+    "this one would land in")
 NEGATIVE_PRICE = (
     "§17: the sell hour is priced BELOW ZERO, so discharging into it would give "
     "energy away and pay for the privilege. Arbitrage must not export at a "
@@ -303,7 +314,7 @@ def _point_at(plan, when: datetime):
         return None
 
 
-def decide(plan, now: datetime, *, peak_guard_active, soc,
+def decide(plan, now: datetime, *, peak_guard_active, charge_headroom_w, soc,
            min_spread_eur_kwh, uncertainty, charge_w, discharge_w,
            soc_floor_pct, soc_ceiling_pct) -> ArbitrageDecision:
     """Should the battery trade this cycle, and how hard.
@@ -314,6 +325,18 @@ def decide(plan, now: datetime, *, peak_guard_active, soc,
     None refuses, because the alternative is a strategy that creates the billed
     quantity while the thing that would have limited it is switched off.
 
+    ⚠️ `charge_headroom_w` IS SAFETY-45's SECOND, CONTINUOUS ANSWER FROM THE
+    SAME GUARD, AND IT IS NOT A DUPLICATE OF THE FIRST. `peak_guard_active` is a
+    SWITCH - it says whether the guard is holding - and a switch keyed on a
+    continuous quantity is what made the loop oscillate: the guard engaged at a
+    5 W floor, this module refused the whole trade, the loop took the actuator,
+    the meter fell, the guard released and the trade re-armed AT FULL POWER
+    130 s later. 28 times an hour, measured. `peakguard.charge_headroom_w()` is
+    the watts the billed quarter can still afford; sizing the buy leg to it means
+    the trade is CLAMPED rather than switched, which is the same shape
+    `control.maintenance_charge_floor()` has always given a maintenance charge.
+    ⚠️ None IS NOT UNLIMITED here either - see IDLE_HEADROOM_UNMEASURED.
+
     ⚠️ EVERY OTHER ARGUMENT IS KEYWORD-ONLY AND HAS NO DEFAULT, for
     `TariffPlan.arbitrage()`'s reason. A defaulted `soc_floor_pct` is a reserve
     floor this module asserted rather than one the operator configured, and the
@@ -330,10 +353,12 @@ def decide(plan, now: datetime, *, peak_guard_active, soc,
     return verdict.match(
         refused=lambda v: _idle(v.reason),
         allowed=lambda v: _act(plan, now, v, soc, charge_w, discharge_w,
-                               soc_floor_pct, soc_ceiling_pct))
+                               soc_floor_pct, soc_ceiling_pct,
+                               charge_headroom_w))
 
 
-def _act(plan, now, v, soc, charge_w, discharge_w, floor_pct, ceiling_pct):
+def _act(plan, now, v, soc, charge_w, discharge_w, floor_pct, ceiling_pct,
+         headroom_w):
     """The permitted case: which hour is this, and may the pack do it."""
     here = _point_at(plan, now)
     if here is None:
@@ -403,13 +428,44 @@ def _act(plan, now, v, soc, charge_w, discharge_w, floor_pct, ceiling_pct):
             f"nowhere to put the cheap energy", **common)
     if not abs(float(charge_w)) > 0.0:
         return _idle(IDLE_NO_SIZE, **common)
+    # SAFETY-45. THE BILLED QUARTER IS ASKED LAST, AND THE PLACEMENT IS
+    # DELIBERATE: every refusal that existed before this card keeps the
+    # precedence it had, so no sentence an operator already reads changes when
+    # it fires, and the two added here are placed where they cannot displace
+    # one. The pack's reasons come first because they are properties of the
+    # hardware in the cupboard; this one is a property of the fifteen minutes
+    # the trade would land in.
+    if headroom_w is None:
+        # ⚠️ NOT "the guard is clear". This is `guard_state()`'s None argument
+        # one layer down: a headroom nothing measured is not an unlimited one,
+        # and charging at max_w creates the billed quantity (§9.1).
+        return _idle(IDLE_HEADROOM_UNMEASURED, **common)
+    asked_w = abs(float(charge_w))
+    size_w = min(asked_w, max(0.0, float(headroom_w)))
+    if not size_w > 0.0:
+        # ⚠️ NOT IDLE_NO_SIZE, WHICH IS THE LINE ABOVE AND BLAMES THE PACKS.
+        # `asked_w > 0` is already established here, so the pack may be empty
+        # and willing and it is the billed quarter that has run out. A refusal
+        # naming the wrong subsystem sends an operator to the wrong page
+        # (§10.2), and these two are a whole quarter-hour apart in what they
+        # ask a human to do about them.
+        return _idle(IDLE_NO_HEADROOM, **common)
+    # ⚠️ THE SENTENCE CARRIES BOTH NUMBERS IN THEIR OWN SLOTS, not one figure
+    # twice. MUTATION.md habit 14: two values in one sentence can be transposed
+    # by a ZERO-BYTE edit that no byte delta and no shape pin can see, so the
+    # trade's own size and the guard's headroom are each named by the literal
+    # text around them.
+    capped = size_w < asked_w
     return ArbitrageDecision(
-        action=CHARGE, power_w=-abs(float(charge_w)),
+        action=CHARGE, power_w=-size_w,
         reason=(f"{CHARGE}: this is the cheapest firm hour at "
                 f"{price:.4f} EUR/kWh, {v.spread_eur_kwh:.4f} below the dearest "
                 f"and clear of the {v.required_spread_eur_kwh:.4f} this cycle "
-                f"had to cover; charging {abs(float(charge_w)):.0f} W from "
-                f"{soc:g} %"),
+                f"had to cover; charging {size_w:.0f} W from {soc:g} %"
+                + (f" - SIZED BY THE CAPACITY-TARIFF GUARD: the trade asked for "
+                   f"{asked_w:.0f} W and this billed quarter can afford "
+                   f"{float(headroom_w):.0f} W (§9.1, §10.1 priority 2)"
+                   if capped else "")),
         spread_eur_kwh=v.spread_eur_kwh,
         required_eur_kwh=v.required_spread_eur_kwh,
         price_now_eur_kwh=price)

goodwe_controller/app/config_page.py

@@ -24,7 +24,7 @@ since the status page shipped; this file has five more chances to get it wrong.
 
 ⚠️ AND IT IS BUILT FOR A PHONE FIRST. This is the screen someone stands in
 front of the inverter with: one column, big touch targets, sections that start
-collapsed so 71 options do not arrive as one wall, and the refusal block pinned
+collapsed so 72 options do not arrive as one wall, and the refusal block pinned
 where it cannot be scrolled past.
 """
 

goodwe_controller/app/main.py

@@ -66,8 +66,9 @@ from .mqtt import (MqttPublisher, announced_units, unit_slugs,
                    unit_state_key)
 from . import peakguard
 from . import packshare
+from . import shadow
 from .p1 import P1Ingest, build_source, is_enabled
-from .price import Uncertainty, price_option
+from .price import Uncertainty, price_option, provider_configured
 from .price_history import PriceHistory
 from .static_tariff import resolve_tariff, static_status
 from .tariff import PeakStore, PeakTracker
@@ -138,6 +139,60 @@ TARIFF_REFRESH_S = 1800.0
 TARIFF_MAX_AGE_S = 3 * TARIFF_REFRESH_S
 
 
+def tariff_refresh_wanted(opts: dict) -> bool:
+    """TARIFF-10. Does this install need the background tariff refresh at all?
+
+    THE DEFECT THIS PREVENTS, and it shipped: the gate below used to be
+    `arbitrage.enabled(opts)` alone. That option defaults to `false`, and
+    `run_tariff_refresh` is the only caller of `resolve_tariff()`, which is the
+    only caller of `price_history.carry()` - so on a shipped install with a
+    provider configured NOTHING was ever fetched, no plan was ever resolved,
+    `/data/price_history.json` was never created, the *Price history* row read
+    `empty` forever, and TARIFF-09's short-horizon warning could not fire
+    because there was no fetch to warn about. Measured over a 40 h soak of two
+    instances side by side: zero feed requests and `present: false` across all
+    802 samples on the shipped default, against a resolved plan from the same
+    feed on the instance with arbitrage armed. ⚠️ AND `DOCS.md` HAS
+    DESCRIBED THE BEHAVIOUR BELOW SINCE THE COMMIT THAT WROTE THE GATE:
+    OPT-04 (bdd7f18) added the refresh task, the `arbitrage.enabled()` guard on
+    it, and the sentence saying a configured provider still fetches, all in one
+    change. config.yaml has said it since TARIFF-02 (852fc7c).
+
+    Two terms, and they answer two different questions:
+
+      provider_configured(opts) -> "the operator asked for a price feed", so
+                                   fetch it, validate it and record the day
+                                   (§8.3). This is the term TARIFF-10 ADDS.
+      arbitrage.enabled(opts)   -> "the operator armed trading". This term is
+                                   what the gate USED to be, kept verbatim.
+
+    ⚠️ IT IS AN `or`, SO THE GATE IS A STRICT WIDENING. Every configuration
+    that started this task before still starts it; none that did not start it
+    stops anything. That matters because the second term is not redundant:
+    `price_provider: off` + a `static_profile` + `arbitrage_enabled: true` is a
+    configuration validate.py explicitly ACCEPTS, and it trades - measured, at
+    `cycle_cost_threshold_eur: 0.05` on a 0.20/0.284 day/night profile,
+    `ARBITRAGE_CHARGE -5000 W`. Dropping that term to make the gate read
+    `provider_configured(opts)` alone would leave `self.tariff_plan` at None on
+    that site forever and `decide()` would answer "no tariff plan has been
+    resolved yet" on every cycle - silently disarming a strategy the UI says is
+    running, which is the exact failure validate.py's OPT-04 rules exist to
+    refuse.
+
+    ⚠️ AND NO CONFIGURATION ACQUIRES A PERIODIC HTTPS CALL FROM THIS TICKET.
+    With `price_provider` off, `resolve_tariff()` returns `static_plan()` - pure
+    arithmetic, no socket - so the second term starts a task that fetches
+    nothing. The true shipped default (no provider, no arbitrage) starts no
+    task at all. What is fetched is decided by the FIRST term only.
+
+    ⚠️ THIS IS NOT A TRADING SWITCH. It decides whether prices are LOOKED UP.
+    Whether they move energy is `arbitrage.enabled()` at the one call site in
+    `cycle()`, and TARIFF-10 did not touch it: `arbitrage_enabled: false` still
+    means no trade, ever, on any configuration.
+    """
+    return provider_configured(opts) or arbitrage.enabled(opts)
+
+
 def load_options() -> dict:
     try:
         with open(OPTIONS_PATH, "r", encoding="utf-8") as fh:
@@ -164,6 +219,106 @@ def pack_energy_of(inv):
                                 inv.capacity_kwh, inv.max_w)
 
 
+def tariff_plan_row(plan, tick_words: str, *, age_s, horizon_h: float,
+                    provider: bool, max_age_s: float) -> str:
+    """The *Tariff* status row: the 30 s tick's sentence AND the provider plan.
+
+    THE DEFECT THIS PREVENTS (TARIFF-11). `origin`, `product`, the horizon,
+    the firm/carried split and the spacing appeared in NO status row. The row
+    was `static_status()`'s sentence alone, computed on the 30 s I/O-free tick
+    from its own static plan, and it NEVER SAW the provider plan - it read
+    `'no static profile'` at all 802 samples of a 40-hour soak on a site whose
+    feed was answering. The only external evidence a plan existed at all was
+    one `_LOG.info` line, and that line carried the point<->hour mislabel
+    `TariffPlan.words` is fixed for.
+
+    ⚠️ TWO SOURCES, TWO CLOCKS, AND THE ROW SAYS SO IN WORDS. These sentences
+    are NOT computed at the same moment and presenting them as though they
+    were would be a new version of the defect being fixed:
+
+        `tick_words`  static_status() / the Home Assistant price entities,
+                      regenerated on THIS tick, every 30 s, I/O-free;
+        `plan`        the background refresh's resolution, up to
+                      TARIFF_REFRESH_S old before it is retried and up to
+                      TARIFF_MAX_AGE_S (5400 s since TARIFF-12) old before
+                      `fresh_tariff_plan()` retires it.
+
+    So the plan half is stamped with its OWN age in seconds, measured from
+    `tariff_at` - the moment of the fetch that produced it, which TARIFF-12
+    deliberately does not move on a kept plan.
+
+    ⚠️ AND `age_s` IS THE CALLER'S MEASUREMENT, NOT THIS FUNCTION'S. A clock
+    read in here would be a second clock disagreeing with the one that decided
+    the plan was fresh enough to pass at all.
+
+    ⚠️ "NO PLAN" IS SAID OUT LOUD ON A SITE THAT CONFIGURED A PROVIDER. A
+    dynamic site whose refresh has never completed, or whose plan has aged
+    past `max_age_s`, is the exact state the soak measured; rendering it as
+    the bare static sentence is how it stayed invisible for 802 samples.
+    """
+    if plan is None:
+        if not provider:
+            return tick_words
+        return (f"{tick_words} (recomputed this tick); NO provider plan - "
+                f"none has been resolved yet, or the last one is older than "
+                f"{max_age_s:.0f} s")
+    return (f"{tick_words} (recomputed this tick); provider plan fetched "
+            f"{age_s:.0f} s ago for a {horizon_h:.0f} h horizon: {plan.words}")
+
+
+def arbitrage_row(*, on: bool, decision, decided_at, cycle_at, now,
+                  why: str) -> str:
+    """The *Arbitrage* status row: THREE states, which used to render as two.
+
+    THE DEFECT THIS PREVENTS (TARIFF-11). The row was
+    `"off (arbitrage_enabled)" if self.arb is None else self.arb.explain()`,
+    under a comment asserting that `self.arb is None` if and only if
+    `arbitrage.enabled(self.o)` was False. IT IS NOT: `cycle()` returns at the
+    input hold - inputs missing, `bad_for < stale_input_s`, default 15 s -
+    BEFORE it reaches `self.arb = None`. Driven: `arbitrage_enabled: true`
+    plus a sensor answering `None` gives `arbitrage.enabled(opts) = True`,
+    `self.arb = None` (its `__init__` value, untouched) and a row reading
+    `off (arbitrage_enabled)` - NAMING AN OPTION THAT IS ON. Past the first
+    completed cycle the same early return leaves the PREVIOUS decision
+    standing instead, which the row then rendered as a current one.
+
+    THE THREE FACTS, and they are three because they have three remedies:
+
+        trading is off          the operator has not armed it. Nothing is
+                                wrong and nothing will happen.
+        no decision this cycle  it is armed, and the cycle did not get as far
+                                as the arbitrage step. `why` is the control
+                                loop's own reason - usually "inputs missing".
+        a decision              the strategy's own sentence, with the age of
+                                the cycle that produced it.
+
+    ⚠️ `on` IS READ FROM THE OPTIONS, NOT INFERRED FROM `decision is None`.
+    Inferring it is the whole defect: the option is the only thing that
+    answers "is trading armed", and it is available on every render.
+
+    ⚠️ THE AGE IS ALWAYS PRINTED, INCLUDING WHEN IT IS ZERO. A row that
+    reports staleness only once it is stale cannot be told, on any single
+    render, from one that never reports it - and the bound TARIFF-10's
+    comment claimed did not exist is ~15 s of it.
+    """
+    if not on:
+        return "off - `arbitrage_enabled` is false, so nothing trades"
+    if decided_at is None:
+        return (f"ON (`arbitrage_enabled`), but NO DECISION has been reached "
+                f"yet - no cycle has run as far as the arbitrage step. The "
+                f"loop's own reason: {why or 'none recorded'}")
+    age = (now - decided_at).total_seconds()
+    stale = cycle_at is not None and decided_at < cycle_at
+    head = (f"no decision this cycle ({why or 'no reason recorded'}); the "
+            f"last one was taken {age:.0f} s ago: " if stale else
+            f"decided {age:.0f} s ago: ")
+    if decision is None:
+        return (f"ON (`arbitrage_enabled`), no decision this cycle "
+                f"({why or 'no reason recorded'}), and none stands from an "
+                f"earlier one")
+    return head + decision.explain()
+
+
 class Controller:
     def __init__(self, opts: dict, hass: HomeAssistant, store, mqtt_pub, *, stop,
                  peak_db_path: str = "/data/tariff.db",
@@ -676,6 +831,24 @@ class Controller:
 
         # live state
         self.auto = bool(store.data.get("auto", opts.get("auto_start", False)))
+        # --- SAFETY-10 -------------------------------------------------------
+        # What the decision path reached on the last shadow cycle, in W, or
+        # None before the first one. ⚠️ IT IS KEPT SEPARATELY FROM
+        # `self.target` BECAUSE THEY ARE DIFFERENT FACTS: `self.target` is what
+        # is STANDING ON THE WIRE - held at `shadow.WIRE_W` for the whole of a
+        # shadow run, and re-seeded to it at the end of every shadow cycle so
+        # the loop and the sign watchdogs track reality - and this is what a
+        # live controller WOULD have put there. Folding them into one field is
+        # how a shadow run starts telling an operator a number nothing is
+        # doing.
+        self.shadow_would_w = None
+        # Edge state for the action log, both of them. `_shadow_was` is None
+        # until the first cycle, so an install that comes up IN shadow mode
+        # says so in the log it will be read from rather than leaving the
+        # operator to infer it from a page nobody is looking at yet. Coming up
+        # LIVE is silent - see `_shadow_settle()`, which says why.
+        self._shadow_was = None
+        self._shadow_winner = None
         self.target = 0.0
         self.sat_count = 0
         self.i_w = 0.0        # the loop's integrator, carried between cycles
@@ -742,6 +915,19 @@ class Controller:
         self.tariff_plan = None
         self.tariff_at = None
         self.arb = None
+        # TARIFF-11. WHEN the standing arbitrage decision was taken, or None if
+        # this controller has never reached the arbitrage step. ⚠️ `self.arb is
+        # None` DOES NOT MEAN "TRADING IS OFF" AND NEVER DID - see
+        # `arbitrage_row()`. It also means "cycle() returned before the step
+        # ran", and at that point `self.arb` is either this attribute's initial
+        # None (startup) or the PREVIOUS cycle's decision (an input hold), and
+        # the status row rendered all three identically.
+        self.arb_at = None
+        # TARIFF-11. When the most recent cycle() STARTED. `arb_at < cycle_at`
+        # is the exact, derived statement of "the latest cycle did not get as
+        # far as the arbitrage step", which is the fact the *Arbitrage* row
+        # used to render identically to "trading is switched off".
+        self.cycle_at = None
         self._arb_action = None
         self.inputs_bad_since = None
         # SAFETY-03. What the loop's OWN bounds did last cycle - a
@@ -1511,6 +1697,24 @@ class Controller:
             self.cheap, self.tariff_words = static_status(
                 o, datetime.now(timezone.utc))
 
+        # ⚠️ TARIFF-11. THE PROVIDER PLAN REACHES THE *Tariff* ROW HERE, AND
+        # THIS IS THE ONLY PLACE THE TWO SOURCES MEET. Everything above is the
+        # 30 s I/O-free tick; `fresh_tariff_plan()` is an attribute read and an
+        # age comparison against TARIFF_MAX_AGE_S - still no fetch on this path,
+        # which is the rule the whole branch above exists to keep. What the row
+        # gains is the plan's SHAPE (origin, product, horizon, the firm/carried
+        # split, the spacing) and what it must never gain is the suggestion
+        # that the two halves were computed at the same instant, so the plan
+        # half carries its own age in seconds. See `tariff_plan_row()`.
+        _tick = datetime.now(timezone.utc)
+        _standing = self.fresh_tariff_plan(_tick)
+        self.tariff_words = tariff_plan_row(
+            _standing, self.tariff_words,
+            age_s=(None if _standing is None
+                   else (_tick - self.tariff_at).total_seconds()),
+            horizon_h=float(price_option(o, "price_horizon_h")),
+            provider=provider_configured(o), max_age_s=TARIFF_MAX_AGE_S)
+
         if self.inputs_ok:
             if self.inputs_bad_since is not None:
                 self.log_event("inputs recovered")
@@ -1554,6 +1758,42 @@ class Controller:
                        "reports a different value.",
                        inv.name, inv.batt_fresh.reason)
 
+    @property
+    def shadow(self) -> bool:
+        """SAFETY-10. Is the battery being left alone right now?
+
+        ⚠️ A PROPERTY, NOT A FIELD, AND FOR THE REASON `self.units` IS ONE.
+        Three surfaces ask this question at three different moments - the
+        cycle, the write, and the status page rendered between two cycles - and
+        a cached flag is a fourth answer that can disagree with the option and
+        the button it is derived from. Derived, they cannot.
+
+        ⚠️ AND THE WRITE GATE ASKS THIS, NOT A PARAMETER PASSED DOWN TO IT. A
+        suppression that had to be threaded through `write_setpoint()` would be
+        absent from every call site that forgot it - the heartbeat, the stop
+        button, `shutdown()` - which is exactly the shape of hole this add-on's
+        single choke point exists to close.
+        """
+        return shadow.engaged(self.o, control_started=self.auto)
+
+    def shadow_latches(self) -> tuple:
+        """The failsafe latches that are UP, named, for the shadow banner.
+
+        A latch that is standing while the controller is inert is standing when
+        it stops being inert. `shadow.banner()` carries them so an operator who
+        turns shadow mode off is not handed a battery that will not move and a
+        page that never mentioned why.
+        """
+        out = []
+        if self.circ_wd.tripped:
+            out.append("circulating power")
+        if self.site_sign_wd.tripped and len(self.inverters) > 1:
+            out.append("site sign watchdog")
+        for inv in self.inverters:
+            if inv.sign_wd.tripped:
+                out.append(f"{inv.name} sign watchdog")
+        return tuple(out)
+
     def write_refusal(self, value: float, inv=None) -> str | None:
         """Why `value` may NOT be written to `inv` right now, or None if it may.
 
@@ -1745,6 +1985,40 @@ class Controller:
             self.log_event(f"{inv.name}: {result.describe()}")
         value = result.applied_w
 
+        # --- SAFETY-10: AND THIS IS THE LAST THING BEFORE THE WIRE -----------
+        # Shadow mode runs the whole decision path and commands nothing. The
+        # suppression is HERE, in the one method every write in this add-on
+        # reaches - the cycle, the heartbeat, the stop button, shutdown() and
+        # maint_abort() alike - so there is no call site that can route round
+        # it. app/shadow.py carries the whole argument; three things about the
+        # placement belong here:
+        #
+        # ⚠️ IT IS A SUBSTITUTION, NOT A RETURN, exactly like the two refusals
+        # above it. Returning would leave the inverter LATCHED ON ITS LAST
+        # COMMAND with the ESP32's heartbeat still being fed - a battery held
+        # at whatever it was doing when shadow mode was switched on, under a
+        # status page saying nothing is being commanded. That is the failure
+        # this add-on keeps finding, and shadow mode must not be a new way to
+        # reach it. `shadow.WIRE_W` is 0.0 W and it is REFRESHED on the
+        # ordinary heartbeat, which is also what firmware/goodwe-master.yaml's
+        # 30 s stale-input watchdog requires of us.
+        #
+        # ⚠️ IT IS BELOW SAFETY-28's GATE AND BELOW SAFETY-03's CLAMP, so both
+        # still grade the number the decision path actually produced. A shadow
+        # run that could not say "it would have hit the rating here" would be
+        # answering a different question from the one it is for.
+        #
+        # ⚠️ IT IS NOT A SECOND WRITER. No claim is filed, no transport is
+        # opened and no arithmetic of its own reaches the wire: one actuator,
+        # one writer, and this is that writer emitting the value it emits for
+        # every other refusal.
+        if self.shadow and value != shadow.WIRE_W:
+            _LOG.info("SHADOW MODE: not commanding %+.0f W to %s - holding "
+                      "%+.0f W. The decision was reached and recorded; "
+                      "nothing was sent to the inverter.",
+                      value, inv.name, shadow.WIRE_W)
+            value = shadow.WIRE_W
+
         changed = (inv.last_write is None or value != inv.last_write)
         if not (changed or force):
             return
@@ -1864,6 +2138,11 @@ class Controller:
         method's only job is to state honestly what each strategy wants.
         """
         now = datetime.now(timezone.utc)
+        # ⚠️ BEFORE THE FIRST `return` OF THIS METHOD, ON PURPOSE (TARIFF-11).
+        # It stamps that a cycle RAN, which is a different fact from any of the
+        # decisions the cycle may or may not reach, and the status row needs
+        # the two separately.
+        self.cycle_at = now
 
         # ⚠️ EACH PACK ON ITS OWN READING, NOT "the SoC". §12's recalibration
         # drains and refills ONE pack and grades ONE coulomb counter, so each
@@ -2359,7 +2638,16 @@ class Controller:
         # operator switching control off for the whole site; "inputs missing" is
         # the SITE's own telemetry gone - the meter this controller regulates
         # against. Neither is about a pack, and both must stop every inverter.
-        if not self.auto:
+        # ⚠️ SAFETY-10: `and not self.shadow`, AND IT IS THE ONE FAILSAFE THIS
+        # CARD CHANGES. `P_SAFETY` out-ranks every other claim, so leaving the
+        # stop claim in while shadow mode is engaged would make the recorded
+        # decision "stopped" on every cycle - a shadow run that answers the
+        # wrong question, which is the same as no shadow run. The actuator ends
+        # at the same number either way, and the substitution in `_write_unit()`
+        # that replaces it is STRICTLY STRONGER than this claim: a claim can be
+        # out-ranked by a higher priority, and the wire gate cannot be
+        # out-ranked by anything.
+        if not self.auto and not self.shadow:
             claims.append(Claim.set("safety", P_SAFETY, 0.0, "stopped",
                                     actuator=self.actuator_of("safety")))
         elif not self.inputs_ok:
@@ -2523,13 +2811,35 @@ class Controller:
         # `frozenset()` would be main.py asserting a forecast is healthy when
         # there is not one, which is exactly what static_tariff's `uncertainty`
         # argument has no default in order to prevent.
-        self.arb = None
+        # ⚠️ TARIFF-11: BOTH ATTRIBUTES, AND `arb_at` IS WHAT MAKES THE ROW
+        # HONEST. Reaching this line is the only proof that this cycle got as
+        # far as the arbitrage step; the early return at the input hold above
+        # leaves BOTH standing at whatever the last completed cycle left, and
+        # `arb_at` is then the age the status row reports rather than a
+        # decision presented as current.
+        self.arb, self.arb_at = None, now
         if arbitrage.enabled(self.o):
             floor_pct, ceiling_pct = arbitrage.soc_bounds(self.o)
             charge_w, discharge_w = self.trade_power_w(floor_pct, ceiling_pct)
             self.arb = arbitrage.decide(
                 self.fresh_tariff_plan(now), now,
                 peak_guard_active=arbitrage.guard_state(self.peak_guard),
+                # SAFETY-45. THE SAME GUARD'S SECOND ANSWER, AND THE CONTINUOUS
+                # ONE. `guard_state()` is a switch and it was the whole loop:
+                # the guard engaged on a 5 W floor, the trade was refused
+                # outright, the loop took the actuator, the meter fell, the
+                # guard released and the trade came back AT max_w. Measured on
+                # TEST-23 stage 3 at the shipped peak_cap_w/max_w: 28 charge
+                # onsets an hour, grid -456 <-> +3200 W. This is the watts the
+                # billed quarter can still afford, so the buy leg is CLAMPED
+                # instead - the shape control.maintenance_charge_floor() has
+                # always given a maintenance charge, off the MEASURED guard
+                # rather than off the optional peak_forecast_entity.
+                # ⚠️ SAME ORDERING ARGUMENT AS THE LINE ABOVE: this reads the
+                # peak block's conclusion, ~50 lines up, so it must stay after
+                # it. Evaluated earlier it would size this quarter's trade from
+                # the previous cycle's quarter.
+                charge_headroom_w=peakguard.charge_headroom_w(self.peak_guard),
                 # The emptiest pack again, and for the sell side that is the
                 # right reduction. ⚠️ THE BUY SIDE WANTS THE FULLEST, and there
                 # is one `soc` argument - `pack_floor_soc` names that residual
@@ -2681,7 +2991,14 @@ class Controller:
                                                                         inv)))
 
         # --- the grid-following loop -----------------------------------------
-        if self.auto and self.inputs_ok:
+        # ⚠️ SAFETY-10: `or self.shadow`. The loop is the leg a shadow run most
+        # needs and the one that is switched off by `auto_start: false`, so
+        # without this an install in `auto` shadow mode would record every
+        # strategy's decision and a permanent silence where the grid-following
+        # loop should be. It is safe because the loop's `prev_w` is
+        # `self.target`, which the end of this method re-seeds to what is
+        # actually standing on the wire.
+        if (self.auto or self.shadow) and self.inputs_ok:
             # ⚠️ prev is the ARBITER's last output, not the loop's own last
             # wish. If something outranked the loop, that is what the hardware
             # actually did, and the controller must track reality or it jumps
@@ -3015,6 +3332,116 @@ class Controller:
         # reads only `self.p1`, which no line in this method writes.
         self.peak.sync(self.p1)
 
+        # --- SAFETY-10, AND IT IS LAST FOR A REASON THAT IS NOT TIDINESS -----
+        # Every guard above has now read `self.target` - the resolved intent -
+        # and SAFETY-18 in particular grades exactly that. Re-seeding before
+        # them would hand each one a 0 W that no decision produced. Re-seeding
+        # AFTER them hands the NEXT cycle, and the sign watchdogs, what is
+        # actually standing on the wire. See `_shadow_settle()`.
+        self._shadow_settle(resolution)
+
+    def _shadow_settle(self, resolution) -> None:
+        """SAFETY-10. Record the decision, then re-seed the carried command.
+
+        TWO JOBS, AND THEY ARE IN THIS ORDER BECAUSE THE SECOND DESTROYS THE
+        FIRST'S EVIDENCE.
+
+        1. THE RECORD. A shadow run is only worth running if it answers "what
+           would it have done, and why". `self.shadow_would_w` and
+           `Resolution.explain()` are that answer, and the action log gets one
+           line per CHANGE OF DECISION rather than one per cycle - the log
+           holds 40 rows, and a level-logged shadow run would flush the context
+           of its own findings inside four minutes at a 15 s cycle floor. The
+           same edge rule the peak guard and the arbitrage strategy already
+           use, for the same reason.
+
+        2. THE RE-SEED. `self.target` and each `inv.target` are set back to
+           `shadow.WIRE_W` - what the write gate actually put on the wire.
+
+        ⚠️ WHY THE RE-SEED IS A SAFETY PROPERTY AND NOT BOOKKEEPING. Three
+        machines read the carried command as a statement about the HARDWARE:
+
+          * `compute(prev_w=self.target, ...)` - the loop's slew limiter and
+            its integrator. Left holding a shadow decision, the first cycle
+            after shadow mode is turned off would slew from a base that never
+            existed: up to a full `slew_w` step onto a battery sitting at 0 W.
+            Re-seeded, the exit is safe BY CONSTRUCTION and needs no separate
+            transition code - the carried command already equals the standing
+            one.
+          * `Inverter.standing_w()`, which is what SAFETY-02/30's sign
+            watchdogs grade. Fed a shadow decision they would compare a number
+            against a meter that never saw it, disagree for as long as the
+            decision asked for power, and LATCH A TRIP THAT SURVIVES INTO LIVE
+            OPERATION AND A RESTART. Shadow mode would manufacture the failsafe
+            it exists to help debug. ⚠️ THIS ONE IS ALREADY HELD BY THE WIRE
+            GATE - `standing_w()` prefers `last_write`, and that is the 0.0 W
+            the gate accepted - so the re-seed is the SECOND rung, covering
+            the fallback before any write has been accepted. Two rungs
+            answering one question is MUTATION.md's masking shape, and the
+            mutation that reproduces the hazard has to defeat BOTH: driven
+            singly, dropping this line leaves the detector inert and names
+            nothing about the latch. Measured.
+          * SAFETY-42's delivery watchdog compares `inv.target` against what
+            the pack is producing. A share nothing was told to produce is a
+            delinquency report on every cycle of every shadow run.
+
+        ⚠️ AND EVERY CYCLE'S DECISION IS THEREFORE COMPUTED FROM WHERE THE
+        PLANT REALLY IS, not from a counterfactual plant that drifts further
+        from reality every tick. "What would this controller command NOW,
+        given this meter and a battery at 0 W" is a true statement about the
+        present; "what would the eleventh cycle of a run that never happened
+        have commanded" is not a statement about anything.
+        """
+        engaged = self.shadow
+        if engaged != self._shadow_was:
+            # ⚠️ `first` EXISTS SO A LIVE INSTALL'S FIRST CYCLE IS SILENT. The
+            # edge is against `None` on cycle one, and an install that comes up
+            # CONTROLLING has nothing to report - a "shadow mode off" line at
+            # every start is one more row of boilerplate in a 40-row log, and
+            # it was measured pushing a real clamp episode's context out of
+            # test_clamp.py part 2's ring. Coming up IN shadow mode is the
+            # other direction and it is always worth a line: it is the log an
+            # operator reads to find out why nothing is being commanded.
+            first = self._shadow_was is None
+            self._shadow_was = engaged
+            if engaged:
+                self.log_event(
+                    "SHADOW MODE ON - " + shadow.why(
+                        self.o, control_started=self.auto)
+                    + f"; inverter held at {shadow.WIRE_W:.0f} W")
+                _LOG.warning(
+                    "SAFETY-10 SHADOW MODE IS ON. The full decision path runs "
+                    "and NOTHING is commanded: every inverter is held at "
+                    "%+.0f W on the ordinary heartbeat. %s", shadow.WIRE_W,
+                    shadow.why(self.o, control_started=self.auto))
+            elif not first:
+                self.log_event(
+                    "SHADOW MODE OFF - the battery is being controlled again, "
+                    f"resuming from {shadow.WIRE_W:.0f} W")
+                _LOG.warning(
+                    "SAFETY-10 shadow mode is OFF. This controller is "
+                    "commanding the battery again, starting from the "
+                    "%+.0f W that was standing on the wire.", shadow.WIRE_W)
+        if not engaged:
+            self.shadow_would_w = None
+            self._shadow_winner = None
+            return
+        self.shadow_would_w = float(resolution.target_w)
+        # ⚠️ THE WINNER AND THE ROUNDED WATTS, NOT THE WATTS ALONE. A decision
+        # that moves from the loop to the peak guard at the same number is a
+        # different decision and the operator needs the line; a loop target
+        # that wanders by a watt is not, and 15 s of those would be the whole
+        # log.
+        edge = (resolution.winner, round(float(resolution.target_w)))
+        if edge != self._shadow_winner:
+            self._shadow_winner = edge
+            self.log_event(
+                f"SHADOW: would have commanded {resolution.target_w:+.0f} W - "
+                + resolution.explain())
+        self.target = shadow.WIRE_W
+        for inv in self.inverters:
+            inv.target = shadow.WIRE_W
+
     async def check_output_clamp(self) -> None:
         """SAFETY-03. Alarm whenever a clamp actually engaged this cycle.
 
@@ -3480,13 +3907,64 @@ class Controller:
         raise out of here and take the task down, because then the plan freezes
         at its last value and looks current forever. That is what
         `fresh_tariff_plan()`'s age bound is the backstop for, and this is the
-        half that keeps the task alive so the bound rarely matters.
+        half that keeps the task alive. ⚠️ THE BOUND IS NO LONGER A BACKSTOP
+        ONLY: since TARIFF-12 it is also the serve-stale window an outage runs
+        on, and it is consulted below on every refresh.
 
-        ⚠️ AND A FAILURE DOES NOT CLEAR THE PLAN. `resolve_tariff()` already has
-        a §11.4 answer for a dead feed - degrade to the static profile, mark it
-        provisional, arbitrage refuses - and that answer is better than the
-        absence of one. Zeroing the plan here would replace a coarse tariff with
-        no tariff, which is the opposite of what §11.4 asks for.
+        ⚠️ AND A FAILURE DOES NOT CLEAR THE PLAN - WHICH IS A CLAIM ABOUT WHAT
+        `resolve_tariff()` RETURNS, NOT ABOUT WHAT IT RAISES (TARIFF-12). This
+        paragraph was enforced by the `except` below alone, and the `except`
+        below is the one path a supplier outage never takes. `load_prices()`
+        says so in its own words - it "RETURNS, NEVER RAISES, for every failure
+        a site can actually have" - because a degradation arriving as a
+        traceback into the planning tick would stop the controller regulating
+        over an expired certificate. So a dead feed is a RETURN: the `try`
+        succeeds, `_degrade()` hands back a §11.4 plan, and the assignment used
+        to overwrite the good one unconditionally. Measured in a 40 h soak with
+        `static_profile` unset (the shipped default, and the normal state of a
+        dynamic-tariff site): the FIRST failed fetch replaced a complete 48 h
+        plan with `TariffPlan(no_data, None, "none")` - 0 points - 27 minutes
+        after the last good one, and `TARIFF_MAX_AGE_S` governed nothing. A
+        transient blip cost the same as a 90-minute outage.
+
+        ⚠️ SO THE QUESTION IS ASKED ONCE, AFTER THE ATTEMPT, FROM THE EVIDENCE
+        THAT EXISTS - FCST-06's answer, in this file. The evidence is
+        `plan.from_feed` (did this attempt observe the feed) and
+        `fresh_tariff_plan(now)` (is an observation still current). A
+        degradation replaces a standing observation only once that observation
+        has aged out, so `TARIFF_MAX_AGE_S` is now the serve-stale window it
+        reads like rather than a bound nothing could reach.
+
+        ⚠️ AND A §11.4 STATIC FALLBACK DOES NOT REPLACE A FRESH PROVIDER PLAN
+        EITHER, although it carries real prices. Every point `_degrade()`
+        builds is `provisional=True`, so `firm_points()` is empty,
+        `arbitrage()` refuses and `cheap_now()` is False - everything a
+        consumer may act on is already off. A day-ahead price for a given hour
+        does not change once published, so a plan fetched half an hour ago is
+        exactly as true about that hour as one fetched now. The fallback is
+        less actionable and no more current; it takes over when the observation
+        retires, which is what §11.4 is for. The reverse is not symmetrical: a
+        standing plan that is ITSELF a degradation is replaced by a fresh one,
+        or an outage would freeze the operator's static profile at the window
+        it was generated for.
+
+        ⚠️ AND NOTHING HERE READS `arbitrage_enabled`, WHICH TARIFF-10 MAKES
+        WORTH SAYING. Since that card this task also runs on a site with a
+        provider configured and trading DISARMED, so "keep the plan" is a
+        decision about what the add-on has LOOKED UP, not about what it may
+        trade on. It is also strictly downstream of `resolve_tariff()`: the
+        §8.3 carry into `price_history` happens on the `series` branch inside
+        that call, before this decision exists, so which of two plans is kept
+        cannot add or lose a recorded day.
+
+        ⚠️ AND `tariff_at` DOES NOT MOVE ON A KEPT PLAN. It is the moment the
+        fetch that produced the standing plan happened, and
+        `fresh_tariff_plan()` judges the age from it - re-stamping it here
+        would be this task asserting the feed answered when it did not, and the
+        plan would "freeze at its last value and look current forever", which
+        is the hazard the paragraph above this one names. An unmoved
+        `tariff_at` is also the only thing that tells a kept plan from a
+        freshly fetched one, so it is what the check asserts.
         """
         horizon = float(price_option(self.o, "price_horizon_h"))
         while not self.stopping:
@@ -3495,11 +3973,33 @@ class Controller:
                 plan = await resolve_tariff(
                     self.o, now, now + timedelta(hours=horizon), now=now,
                     history=self.price_history)
-                self.tariff_plan, self.tariff_at = plan, now
-                _LOG.info("tariff refreshed: %s", plan.words)
+                standing = self.fresh_tariff_plan(now)
+                # Three terms, and each of them is the only false one in some
+                # check: the feed answered (replace), nothing current stands
+                # (take the degradation - this is what makes the age bound
+                # govern), or what stands is itself a degradation (replace).
+                keep = (not plan.from_feed
+                        and standing is not None and standing.from_feed)
+                if keep:
+                    _LOG.warning(
+                        "tariff refresh degraded (%s); KEEPING the plan "
+                        "resolved at %s, %.0f s ago. tariff_at is NOT moved, "
+                        "so it retires %.0f s after that fetch; arbitrage, "
+                        "where it is armed, stops with it. A kept plan is "
+                        "never presented as a current one.", plan.words,
+                        self.tariff_at,
+                        (now - self.tariff_at).total_seconds(),
+                        TARIFF_MAX_AGE_S)
+                else:
+                    self.tariff_plan, self.tariff_at = plan, now
+                    _LOG.info("tariff refreshed: %s", plan.words)
             except Exception as err:                          # noqa: BLE001
+                # ⚠️ NOT THE OUTAGE PATH - see the docstring. `load_prices()`
+                # returns on every failure a site can have, so what reaches
+                # here is something nobody expected, and the plan is kept for
+                # the same reason and on the same terms.
                 _LOG.warning(
-                    "tariff refresh failed (%s); keeping the plan resolved at "
+                    "tariff refresh raised (%s); keeping the plan resolved at "
                     "%s. It retires on its own after %.0f s and arbitrage "
                     "stops with it.", err, self.tariff_at, TARIFF_MAX_AGE_S)
             with contextlib.suppress(asyncio.TimeoutError):
@@ -3731,6 +4231,14 @@ class Controller:
                        or (self.site_sign_wd.tripped
                            and len(self.inverters) > 1)
                        or self.circ_wd.tripped
+                       # SAFETY-10: "shadow" is its own value and not a
+                       # flavour of "stopped". A fleet dashboard reporting a
+                       # shadow install as `running` would be calling a
+                       # battery nobody is controlling healthy; one reporting
+                       # it as `stopped` would lose the fact that the decision
+                       # path is live and being recorded. ⚠️ BELOW `failsafe`:
+                       # a latch that is up is up, and shadow does not clear it.
+                       else "shadow" if self.shadow
                        else "running" if self.auto else "stopped"),
             # SAFETY-31. ⚠️ MEASURED, not the allocation record - see
             # `site_circulating_w`. `publish()` drops None values, so a cycle
@@ -4231,7 +4739,24 @@ class Controller:
     def status_payload(self) -> dict:
         checks = self.checks()
         bad = [c for c in checks if not c["ok"] and not c["warn"]]
-        if self.circ_wd.tripped:
+        # --- SAFETY-10, AND IT IS FIRST IN THE CASCADE -----------------------
+        # "The battery is NOT being controlled" is the one sentence on this
+        # page that may never be displaced by another condition. A banner that
+        # can be out-ranked does not STATE a thing plainly; it states it
+        # whenever nothing else is happening, which is the half of the time
+        # nobody needs telling.
+        #
+        # ⚠️ AND IT CARRIES A STANDING LATCH RATHER THAN HIDING ONE. The three
+        # `bad` branches below all say some version of "held at 0 W", which is
+        # still true in shadow mode - but an operator who turns shadow mode off
+        # with a latch up gets a battery that will not move and a page that
+        # never mentioned it. `shadow.banner()` names the latch and goes red
+        # for it, so nothing this cascade would have said is lost.
+        _shadow = shadow.banner(self.o, control_started=self.auto,
+                                latched=self.shadow_latches())
+        if _shadow is not None:
+            level, banner = _shadow
+        elif self.circ_wd.tripped:
             # ⚠️ ABOVE THE SIGN FAILSAFE, and the order is a decision. Both are
             # latched P_SAFETY stops, so the site is at 0 W either way and the
             # banner can only carry one sentence. This one goes first because it
@@ -4331,6 +4856,16 @@ class Controller:
             ("State of charge", "—" if self.pack_floor_soc is None
              else f"{self.pack_floor_soc:g} %"),
             ("Commanded", w(self.target)),
+            # SAFETY-10, and it sits BETWEEN the two rows it reconciles.
+            # "Commanded 0 W" above and a "Why" below that explains a trade is
+            # the exact pair an operator would otherwise have to guess at; this
+            # row is what makes the two of them consistent, and it is rendered
+            # in EVERY state - including `off`, where it says the battery IS
+            # being controlled - because a surface whose ABSENCE is how you
+            # learn something is a surface you have to already know about.
+            ("Shadow mode", shadow.words(
+                self.o, control_started=self.auto,
+                would_w=self.shadow_would_w, reason=self.reason)),
             ("Why", self.reason),
             ("Maintenance phase", self.maint.phase if len(self.inverters) <= 1
              else f"{self.maint.phase} ({self.maint_unit.name})"),
@@ -4353,8 +4888,24 @@ class Controller:
             # OPT-04. The strategy's own sentence, not a re-derivation of it -
             # every refusal it can make already carries a reason a human can
             # act on, and "Arbitrage: no" would throw all of them away.
-            ("Arbitrage", "off (arbitrage_enabled)" if self.arb is None
-             else self.arb.explain()),
+            #
+            # ⚠️ TARIFF-10 RE-READ THIS STRING AND LEFT IT ALONE UNDER A
+            # COMMENT THAT WAS FALSE, AND TARIFF-11 IS THAT CORRECTION. The
+            # claim was that `self.arb is None` **if and only if**
+            # `arbitrage.enabled(self.o)` was False. Only the forward direction
+            # holds: `cycle()` returns at the input hold (`bad_for <
+            # stale_input_s`, default 15 s) BEFORE it reaches `self.arb = None`
+            # at all, so on an armed site `self.arb` is `__init__`'s None at
+            # startup and the PREVIOUS cycle's decision during a later hold -
+            # and the row rendered `off (arbitrage_enabled)` on a site whose
+            # `arbitrage_enabled` is `true`. `arbitrage_row()` reads the option
+            # instead of inferring it, and separates "trading is off" from "no
+            # decision was reached this cycle"; `cycle_at` and `arb_at` are what
+            # make the second one an observation rather than a guess.
+            ("Arbitrage", arbitrage_row(
+                on=arbitrage.enabled(self.o), decision=self.arb,
+                decided_at=self.arb_at, cycle_at=self.cycle_at,
+                now=datetime.now(timezone.utc), why=self.reason)),
         ]
         return {
             "banner": banner, "level": level, "rows": rows, "checks": checks,
@@ -4605,11 +5156,16 @@ async def amain() -> None:
         # ESP32 heartbeat. A fetch on that path is a supplier's TLS timeout able
         # to push this add-on towards layer 1's 30 s veto. See TARIFF_REFRESH_S.
         #
-        # ⚠️ STARTED ONLY WHEN ARBITRAGE IS ARMED. Nothing else in the add-on
-        # reads the resolved plan - `cheap` still comes from static_status() on
-        # the tick, which is pure - so on a default install this task would be
-        # network traffic in aid of an attribute nobody reads.
-        if arbitrage.enabled(opts):
+        # ⚠️ STARTED WHEN A PROVIDER IS CONFIGURED, *OR* WHEN TRADING IS ARMED
+        # - TARIFF-10, and it used to be the second term alone. `arbitrage_
+        # enabled` ships `false`, so a site that had selected a price feed
+        # fetched nothing at all; the whole argument, the measurement and what
+        # the `or` is protecting are in `tariff_refresh_wanted()` above.
+        #
+        # ⚠️ IT DOES NOT ARM ANYTHING. Fetching a price and trading on one are
+        # two decisions; this is the first, and `cycle()`'s
+        # `if arbitrage.enabled(self.o):` is still the only gate on the second.
+        if tariff_refresh_wanted(opts):
             tasks.append(asyncio.create_task(controller.run_tariff_refresh()))
 
         # P1 ingestion runs as its own long-lived task. ⚠️ It must not be driven

goodwe_controller/app/peakguard.py

@@ -822,6 +822,145 @@ def decide(projection, *, batt_w, cap_w, reading, achievable_w, soc, soc_floor,
                f"only give {ceil_top:.0f} W" if saturated else "")))
 
 
+def charge_headroom_w(decision) -> float | None:
+    """SAFETY-45. The hardest this SITE may charge without putting the billed
+    quarter over the ceiling, in W, positive - or None when nothing measured it.
+
+    THE ONE PLACE THIS QUESTION IS ANSWERED, and it is public for the reason
+    `discharge_permitted()`, `shaping_suspended()`, `guard_state()` and
+    `looks_frozen()` are: the check that grades it has to assert on THE SHIPPED
+    EXPRESSION, and a predicate transcribed into its own test is one copy plus a
+    future disagreement about what the check means.
+
+    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
+    THE DEFECT IT PREVENTS, AND IT IS NOT A NEW IDEA IN THIS REPOSITORY
+
+    `control.maintenance_charge_floor()` already caps MAINTENANCE charging at
+    "the headroom left under the site's cap", and its docstring says why in
+    words this card only has to widen:
+
+        "A maintenance charge is the only thing this system does that is big
+        enough and long enough to set that peak, so it is capped by the
+        headroom left under the site's cap."
+
+    ⚠️ THAT SENTENCE STOPPED BEING TRUE WHEN OPT-04 LANDED. Price arbitrage is a
+    SECOND thing that is big enough and long enough - it commands `max_w` for a
+    whole tariff interval, deliberately, against the meter - and it was given no
+    such cap. Measured on TEST-23 stage 3's closed rig at the shipped
+    `peak_cap_w: 3500` / `max_w: 2000`: 28 charge onsets in one hour, mean period
+    131 s, grid swinging -456 <-> +3200 W, on any house drawing over 1500 W in
+    the cheapest quarter. §10.2: "an EMS that oscillates is worse than no EMS,
+    both for hardware wear and - per §9.1 - for the peak it is trying to avoid."
+
+    ⚠️ AND IT IS THE **MEASURED** GUARD, NOT `peak_forecast_entity`.
+    `maintenance_charge_floor()` sizes itself from the forecast sensor, which is
+    OPTIONAL and empty on a default install - the exact hole SAFETY-25 had to
+    close in `shaping_suspended()`, where a suspension gated on the forecast
+    alone could not fire on the very site that needed it. This number comes off
+    `decide()`, which runs wherever P1 does.
+
+    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
+    WHERE THE NUMBER COMES FROM: IT IS `wanted_w`, READ IN THE OTHER DIRECTION
+
+    `decide()` already computes
+
+        wanted = batt_w + excess = (the offtake there would be with the battery
+                 at zero) - (the level this quarter can still afford)
+
+    as the battery DISCHARGE that would land the quarter exactly on the ceiling.
+    A negative `wanted` is not "nothing to say" - it is a permitted CHARGE of
+    `-wanted` watts, and throwing it away is SAFETY-45's whole defect. So this
+    function invents no arithmetic; it reads the sign the guard already had.
+
+    ⚠️ AND THE QUANTITY IS INVARIANT IN THE BATTERY, WHICH IS WHY SIZING A TRADE
+    TO IT CANNOT OSCILLATE. Raise the charge by dW and the meter rises by dW, so
+    `excess` rises by exactly dW while `batt_w` falls by dW: `wanted` does not
+    move. It is a FEED-FORWARD number - a function of the house, the ceiling and
+    the seconds already banked - so consuming it adds no feedback path around the
+    plant. The fixed point is `charge = ceiling - load`, with the meter sitting
+    ON the ceiling and `wanted` parked at `load - ceiling`, a whole `ceiling -
+    load` clear of the engagement boundary rather than chattering across it.
+
+    ⚠️ AND A QUARTER BOUNDARY DOES NOT HAND IT BACK AT FULL POWER, WHICH IS THE
+    OTHER HALF OF SAFETY-45 AND IS NOT THE SAME CLAIM AS "IT DOES NOT CHANGE".
+    It DOES change - it is `(900 / remaining) * (ceiling - projected)`, so it is
+    largest in the last seconds of a block and collapses at the boundary. What
+    matters is WHAT IT COLLAPSES TO: at `elapsed = 0` the projection IS the held
+    level, so the answer is `ceiling - (load - pv)` - the house and the cap, and
+    nothing else. A trade refused at 14:59 therefore resumes at 15:00 at the rate
+    the new quarter can afford, not at `max_w`, and §10.1's answer survives the
+    boundary because the arithmetic does: no timer, no backoff constant, no state
+    carried between calls.
+
+    ⚠️ AND THE AMPLIFICATION IS BOUNDED IN ITS EFFECT, NOT MERELY LARGE. Hold a
+    charge of exactly this size for the rest of the block and the block's average
+    lands on `ceiling` EXACTLY, wherever in the block it started:
+
+        (acc + (held + headroom) * remaining) / 900
+            = projected + (900/remaining) * (ceiling - projected) * remaining/900
+            = ceiling
+
+    so 162 kW of headroom with 5 s left and 900 W of it with the whole quarter to
+    go are the same statement about the bill. `test_peakguard.py` part 13 sweeps
+    that identity across the block rather than arguing it here.
+
+    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
+    THE THREE ANSWERS
+
+    `None`  nothing measured it: the guard never ran (`meter_source: off`), or
+            it ran with no battery reading to size a floor from, or the block
+            had no seconds left to influence. ⚠️ None IS NOT UNLIMITED. A caller
+            that treats it as "charge away" is `arbitrage.guard_state()`'s
+            collapse of None into False, one layer down - a strategy creating
+            the billed quantity while nothing measures the quarter it lands in.
+    `0.0`   measured, and the answer is no charging: the guard is BLIND (its
+            claim already says so at `floor 0 W` and this agrees with it rather
+            than restating it), or it is holding and `wanted >= 0`.
+    `> 0`   the watts a charge may pull this cycle.
+
+    ⚠️ HOLDING IMPLIES ZERO, BY CONSTRUCTION AND NOT BY COINCIDENCE. Every state
+    that files a claim with `engaged=True` has `wanted > 0`, `wanted is None` or
+    `blind`, so this answers 0.0 or None there and can never hand a strategy
+    permission the guard's own `lo` is at that instant refusing.
+
+    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
+    ⚠️ WHY THIS IS A SIZING AND NOT A CLAIM, AND DO NOT "SIMPLIFY" IT INTO ONE
+
+    The obvious tidier answer is to delete `decide()`'s `wanted <= 0` gate and
+    let it file `lo = wanted` unconditionally - a NEGATIVE floor, meaning "you
+    may charge, but no harder than this". The arithmetic is identical, it is
+    continuous, and it would bind every claimant rather than only arbitrage. It
+    was measured, considered and REJECTED, and the reason is not style:
+
+      * `main.py`'s cheap-window maintenance charge files
+        `Claim.limit("maintenance", P_MAINT_SHAPE, hi=-floor)` - a NEGATIVE `hi`.
+        arbiter.py clause 2 applies EVERY limit at or above the winner's priority
+        and takes the most restrictive, with no notion of one limit out-ranking
+        another. A peak `lo = -300 W` against a shaping `hi = -1000 W` is
+        `lo > hi`: a CONTRADICTION, which resolves to 0 W - the battery PARKED,
+        in the one quarter of the month that sets the bill. That is the exact
+        failure `shaping_suspended()` exists to prevent, and the only way to
+        close it would be to key that suppression on "a claim exists", which on
+        every site this card is about suspends the maintenance charge-only
+        shaping PERMANENTLY.
+      * and it would change what `engaged` MEANS at five call sites outside this
+        module - `arbitrage.guard_state()`, `shaping_suspended()`, `claim()`,
+        main.py's edge-logged action line and main.py's status row - each of
+        which today reads it as "the guard is HOLDING".
+
+    `control.maintenance_charge_floor()` is a sizing and not a limit for the same
+    reason, which is why this is the shape that already fits.
+    DECISIONS/SAFETY-45-sizing-the-trade.md §2b carries the full argument.
+    """
+    if decision is None:
+        return None
+    if decision.blind:
+        return 0.0
+    if decision.wanted_w is None:
+        return None
+    return max(0.0, -float(decision.wanted_w))
+
+
 def shaping_suspended(decision, peak_forecast_w, cap_w) -> bool:
     """Must the maintenance charge-only shaping stand down this cycle?
 

goodwe_controller/app/price_forecast.py

@@ -71,12 +71,19 @@ So the flag is not passed through anywhere in this file:
     the pass-through idiom cannot come back in a later edit and pass review by
     looking ordinary.
 
-⚠️ "PUBLISHED" DOES NOT MEAN "FIRM". `eneco_eddy` is an imbalance product whose
-current-quarter print is genuinely provisional and says so per point (§9.2,
-TARIFF-02). Such a point is published AND provisional, and the audit's rule for
-a published point is "the flag is whatever the feed said", never "False". A
-provenance check that forced published points to False would be a bug that
-looks like a guarantee.
+⚠️ "PUBLISHED" DOES NOT MEAN "FIRM". §9.3's canonical format carries
+`provisional` PER POINT, not per series, precisely because a real-time /
+imbalance product's current-interval print is settled after the fact and is
+genuinely provisional while it is published. Such a point is published AND
+provisional, and the audit's rule for a published point is "the flag is
+whatever the feed said", never "False". A provenance check that forced
+published points to False would be a bug that looks like a guarantee.
+
+⚠️ NO SHIPPED PLUGIN EMITS ONE TODAY (TARIFF-07 withdrew the only declarer of
+`PriceProduct.REALTIME`), and that is exactly why this paragraph stays. The
+rule is a property of the FORMAT, not of any supplier; weakening it to
+"published implies False" while nothing exercises it is how the first real
+imbalance feed would arrive mispriced and flagged firm.
 
 
 THE FILL, AND WHY IT KEYS ON THE WALL CLOCK
@@ -104,8 +111,9 @@ because an empty series is not constructible on purpose (price.py trap 3).
 
 ⚠️ A SUB-HOURLY FEED IS NOT DECIMATED TO ONE POINT AN HOUR, and the hourly walk
 below is about WHICH HOURS NEED FILLING - never about what a published hour is
-allowed to contain. `eneco_eddy` is the Belgian imbalance product and settles
-per QUARTER, `_validate_raw()` accepts any strictly-increasing spacing, and a
+allowed to contain. BELGIAN DAY-AHEAD ITSELF SETTLES PER QUARTER since the
+15-minute MTU took effect on 2025-10-01 - `generic_dayahead` reads 96 points a
+day, not 24 - `_validate_raw()` accepts any strictly-increasing spacing, and a
 published hour may therefore hold four points. So EVERY published point inside
 the window is passed through, in order, and a carried point is added only for a
 whole hour with NO published coverage at all.
@@ -171,7 +179,7 @@ class Provenance(Enum):
     flag" and "the others".
     """
     PUBLISHED = "published"    # the provider printed this hour. Flag: the
-                               # feed's own - an imbalance print may be
+                               # feed's own - a real-time print may be
                                # published AND provisional (§9.2).
     CARRIED = "carried"        # yesterday's same-wall-clock hour (§8.3).
                                # Flag: ALWAYS True, by construction.
@@ -414,9 +422,19 @@ def fill_from_yesterday(read: PriceRead, *, yesterday: PriceRead,
     _audit(out, published)
     carried = sum(1 for p in out if _utc_hour(p.start) not in published)
     if carried:
+        # ⚠️ THREE QUANTITIES, THREE NAMES (TARIFF-11). This line read
+        # "%d of %d hours ... ; %d published" with `carried` (a count of
+        # carried HOURS - the fill emits exactly one point per unpublished
+        # hour) over `len(out)` (a count of POINTS, four per hour wherever the
+        # feed printed) and `len(out) - carried` (POINTS again) under the same
+        # noun. On the Belgian quarter-hourly feed that reads "33 of 141
+        # hours" about a 48-hour horizon. The fill's unit is the HOUR and the
+        # feed's is the POINT; nothing derived from one answers for the other.
+        total_h = len({_utc_hour(p.start) for p in out})
         _LOG.info("§8.3: %d of %d hours carried forward from yesterday's "
-                  "profile and flagged provisional; %d published",
-                  carried, len(out), len(out) - carried)
+                  "profile and flagged provisional; the feed published %d "
+                  "points over the other %d hours",
+                  carried, total_h, len(out) - carried, total_h - carried)
 
     product = read.match(series=lambda r: r.product,
                          no_data=lambda _r: yesterday.product)

goodwe_controller/app/price_history.py

@@ -107,7 +107,8 @@ THE FOUR RULES THIS FILE IS SHAPED BY
 
    ⚠️ NO VALUE-LEVEL CHECK CAN CATCH THAT, and saying so is more useful than a
    guarantee that would not hold. A carried point and a published-provisional
-   point (`eneco_eddy`'s current quarter, §9.2) are the same three fields with
+   point (a real-time product's current interval, §9.2) are the same three
+   fields with
    the same flag; the difference is provenance, and provenance is not in the
    value. So the mechanism is ORDERING, not validation: `carry()` is the only
    public entry point, it remembers the argument and returns the fill, and the

goodwe_controller/app/shadow.py

@@ -0,0 +1,361 @@
+"""SAFETY-10 - shadow mode: the whole decision path, and no command.
+
+WHAT DEFECT THIS PREVENTS
+=========================
+Not one defect - the CLASS of them. Every optimiser fault this repository has
+found was invisible from outside while it was happening, and each one was paid
+for at the meter before anybody could see it:
+
+  * SAFETY-45  arbitrage against a binding `peak_cap_w` ran 28 charge onsets an
+               hour, the grid swinging -455 .. +3200 W, and put a billed
+               quarter 59 W over the cap;
+  * TARIFF-14  the price lookup answered for the wrong quarter-hour 45 minutes
+               in every 60, and traded on it;
+  * SAFETY-46  the SoC ceiling churns 598 Wh to gain 310 Wh, no hysteresis.
+
+There was no way to WATCH what the optimiser would do without letting it do it.
+A commissioning engineer could arm arbitrage and find out, or not arm it and
+learn nothing. Shadow mode is the third option: strategies, arbiter, clamps and
+guards all run, the decision is recorded with its reason, and NOTHING THE
+CONTROLLER DECIDES REACHES THE INVERTER.
+
+⚠️ "REACHES NOTHING" IS NOT "WRITES NOTHING", AND THE DIFFERENCE IS THE WHOLE
+   SAFETY ARGUMENT
+=======================================================================
+The inverter holds its last command FOREVER - it has no meter timeout
+(HANDOVER.md §6), and firmware/goodwe-master.yaml's header records what that
+cost when a controller stopped refreshing: Illusmart went silent mid-command
+and the inverter held +5000 W for 113 s. main.py's own header carries the same
+measurement. So a shadow mode that
+simply stopped writing would leave whatever was standing when it was switched
+on standing for as long as it was left on. That is the exact failure this
+repository keeps finding - LOOKS HEALTHY BUT IS INERT - with the status page
+calmly reporting that nothing is being commanded.
+
+So shadow mode does write, and it writes ONE number:
+
+    the actuator is held at WIRE_W (0.0 W), refreshed on the ordinary
+    heartbeat, by the ordinary single writer.
+
+That is a DEFINED, SAFE actuator state, it is the same state the operator's
+stop button reaches, and it honours the contract firmware/goodwe-master.yaml
+§"CONTRACT CHANGE" imposes on us - HA must rewrite the setpoint every ~10 s or
+the ESP32's 30 s stale-input watchdog cannot tell "steady" from "dead". Going
+silent would put that board into a tripped-watchdog state for the whole shadow
+run, which is an ALARM being used as a MODE: the operator who learns that
+`wd_tripped` is normal during shadow runs is the operator who ignores it when
+the add-on has actually died.
+
+⚠️ AND IT IS NOT A SECOND WRITE PATH. SAFETY-28's rule is one actuator, one
+writer. Shadow mode files no claim, owns no transport and calls nothing in
+hass.py. It is a SUBSTITUTION inside `Controller._write_unit()` - the single
+choke point every write in this add-on already goes through - in exactly the
+form the three substitutions above it take (non-finite -> 0 W, unauthorised ->
+0 W, clamped -> the rating). It is the LAST of them, so SAFETY-28's
+authorisation gate and SAFETY-03's clamp still grade the number the decision
+path actually produced, and a shadow run therefore records that the clamp WOULD
+have engaged.
+
+THE DEFAULT, AND WHY IT IS NOT A PLAIN `true`  (§ the ticket's own warning)
+==========================================================================
+The card is titled "default-on". Taken literally - `shadow_mode: true` in
+`config.yaml`'s `options:` block - it is the worst change in this repository's
+history. Home Assistant's Supervisor composes an add-on's effective options as
+`{**config.yaml defaults, **the stored user options}`, so a NEW key with a new
+default reaches EVERY install on the next update, including the one regulating
+a real battery in the author's house today. Literal default-on silently stops
+an existing install from controlling, and the only symptom is a battery that
+has stopped doing anything.
+
+There is no mechanism in the add-on options system that lets one key default
+differently for a new install and an existing one: `options:` IS the default,
+and there is exactly one of it. So "default-on for new" has to be expressed as
+a value the add-on RESOLVES, not as a constant the Supervisor merges.
+
+Hence three values rather than two, defaulting to `auto`:
+
+    off    never shadow. The controller commands the battery.
+    on     always shadow, whatever the start/stop button says.
+    auto   shadow WHILE CONTROL IS STOPPED; live once it is started.
+
+`auto` is default-on for a new install and a no-op for an existing one, and it
+is that without any persisted marker, any migration, and any guess:
+
+  * a FRESH install ships `auto_start: false` and has no stored `auto` key, so
+    it comes up stopped -> shadow. It observes a day of decisions before it is
+    ever allowed to command anything. That is the card's intent, delivered.
+  * an install that is CONTROLLING - `auto_start: true`, or the operator has
+    pressed *Start / stop control* and the store carries `auto: true` - is
+    started, so `auto` resolves to LIVE and its behaviour does not change by
+    one watt.
+  * an install that is STOPPED keeps its actuator at 0 W exactly as before -
+    the same number, from the same writer, on the same heartbeat - and gains
+    the recording. The only thing that changes for it is what the status page
+    and the action log SAY.
+
+⚠️ AND `auto` MEANS THE START BUTTON LEAVES SHADOW MODE. That is deliberate:
+under `auto` the button reads "Start / stop control" and pressing Start is the
+operator saying "control the battery". An operator who wants the decisions
+recorded WHILE the loop runs sets `shadow_mode: on` explicitly - that is the
+configuration this card exists to make possible, and it is the one that cannot
+be reached by accident.
+
+⚠️ AN UNRECOGNISED VALUE RESOLVES TO SHADOW, NOT TO LIVE. `validate.py` refuses
+it at startup so this is not meant to be reachable, but the fail-safe direction
+for "the operator's intent is unreadable" is the one that does not move energy.
+
+THE FAILSAFES, ONE BY ONE (the card asks for each to be decided and recorded)
+============================================================================
+| failsafe                       | in shadow mode                            |
+|--------------------------------|-------------------------------------------|
+| SAFETY-02/30 sign watchdogs    | INERT, and by construction rather than by |
+| (per-unit and site)            | a special case. They grade                |
+|                                | `Inverter.standing_w()` - what this       |
+|                                | controller has standing on the wire - and |
+|                                | shadow mode holds that at 0 W. A 0 W      |
+|                                | command cannot oppose a meter, so the     |
+|                                | detector never arms. ⚠️ THIS IS THE ONE   |
+|                                | THAT HAD TO BE GOT RIGHT: fed the SHADOW  |
+|                                | decision instead, every shadow run would  |
+|                                | latch a trip within `sign_disagree_s` -   |
+|                                | the decision opposes a meter that never   |
+|                                | saw it - and that latch SURVIVES INTO     |
+|                                | LIVE OPERATION and a restart. Shadow mode |
+|                                | would manufacture the failsafe it is      |
+|                                | meant to help debug.                      |
+| SAFETY-03 clamp                | OBSERVES. It runs on the number the       |
+|                                | decision path produced, `clamp_last` is   |
+|                                | set and every engagement goes to the      |
+|                                | action log, because "it would have hit    |
+|                                | the rating" is part of what a shadow run  |
+|                                | is for. It changes no command: the value  |
+|                                | it narrows is replaced by 0 W below it.   |
+| SAFETY-28 write authorisation  | OBSERVES, for the same reason and in the  |
+|                                | same place - above the substitution, so   |
+|                                | it still asks who chose the number.       |
+| SAFETY-18 meter freeze         | OBSERVES, unchanged. It takes no action   |
+|                                | in live operation either; it grades the   |
+|                                | resolved intent against a meter that has  |
+|                                | stopped moving, and both halves are as    |
+|                                | true in shadow as out of it.              |
+| SAFETY-07/24/25 peak guard     | OBSERVES. Level-triggered, unlatched, and |
+|                                | it files its claim as usual so the        |
+|                                | recorded decision is the real one.        |
+|                                | SAFETY-45's limit cycle is visible from a |
+|                                | shadow run; that is the point.            |
+| SAFETY-31 circulation          | OBSERVES AND MAY LATCH, legitimately. Its |
+| SAFETY-42 delivery             | evidence is MEASURED power, not a         |
+|                                | command: packs pushing against each other |
+|                                | while every one of them is told 0 W is a  |
+|                                | real fault and a latch is the right       |
+|                                | answer to it.                             |
+| operator stop (`auto` False)   | SUPPRESSED AS A CLAIM, ENFORCED AT THE    |
+|                                | WIRE. It is the one deliberate change.    |
+|                                | Its `P_SAFETY` 0 W claim out-ranks        |
+|                                | everything, so leaving it in would make   |
+|                                | the recorded decision "stopped" on every  |
+|                                | cycle - the shadow run would answer the   |
+|                                | wrong question. The actuator state is     |
+|                                | identical either way, and the wire        |
+|                                | substitution is STRICTLY STRONGER than    |
+|                                | the claim: a claim can be out-ranked, and |
+|                                | this cannot.                              |
+| inputs missing, non-finite,    | UNCHANGED. All of them resolve to 0 W,    |
+| allocator refusal, arbiter     | which is what the wire gets in shadow     |
+| contradiction                  | mode anyway, so they act redundantly and  |
+|                                | are recorded as they always were.         |
+
+⚠️ MAINTENANCE IS NOT IN THAT TABLE BECAUSE SHADOW MODE DOES NOT TOUCH IT. The
+state machines are ticked on every cycle today whether control is started or
+not, so a stopped install already runs them against a battery that does not
+move. Shadow mode inherits that, unchanged and unimproved; it is a pre-existing
+property of `auto_start: false` and it is recorded here rather than quietly
+fixed under another card's name.
+
+LEAVING SHADOW MODE
+===================
+`Controller.cycle()` re-seeds its carried command (`self.target` and each
+`inv.target`) to WIRE_W at the END of every shadow cycle, AFTER every in-cycle
+guard has read the decision. Two things follow, and both are safety properties:
+
+  * the loop's `prev_w` and its integrator track WHAT IS ACTUALLY STANDING ON
+    THE WIRE, so every shadow cycle answers "from where the plant really is,
+    what would this controller do NOW" - a true statement about the present,
+    rather than a simulation of a counterfactual plant that drifts further from
+    reality every tick;
+  * the exit is safe BY CONSTRUCTION. The carried command already equals the
+    standing command, so the first live cycle slews from 0 W like any other
+    cycle. Carrying the shadow decision instead would let the slew limiter
+    depart from a base that never existed - up to a full `slew_w` step onto a
+    battery sitting at zero.
+
+The entry is safe for the ordinary reason: the substitution happens on the very
+first write of the very first shadow cycle, and `last_write` was not 0 W, so
+that write is issued rather than skipped as unchanged.
+"""
+from __future__ import annotations
+
+# ⚠️ CFG-03's mirror. `test_defaults_pin.py` part 2 discovers every
+# module-level name ending in OPTION_DEFAULTS and asserts each value
+# reproduces config.yaml EXACTLY, so this table cannot drift from the shipped
+# default. Nothing in the add-on may carry a literal fallback for a key a
+# mirror answers for - part 3 scans for that - which is why `main.py` asks the
+# functions below and never reads `shadow_mode` itself.
+SHADOW_OPTION_DEFAULTS = {
+    "shadow_mode": "auto",
+}
+
+#: The three values `shadow_mode` may take, in the order config.yaml's schema
+#: lists them. `validate.py` refuses anything else by name.
+MODES = ("auto", "on", "off")
+
+#: What stands on the wire while shadow mode is engaged. ⚠️ A NUMBER, NOT A
+#: SILENCE - see this module's header. It is 0.0 W for the same reason every
+#: other refusal in this add-on is 0.0 W: fail toward inaction, and keep
+#: commanding it so the inverter cannot be left latched on anything else.
+WIRE_W = 0.0
+
+
+def mode(opts: dict) -> str:
+    """The configured `shadow_mode`, normalised to one of `MODES`.
+
+    ⚠️ AN UNRECOGNISED VALUE ANSWERS `"on"`, NOT `"auto"` AND NOT `"off"`.
+    `validate.py` refuses such a value at startup, so this branch is not meant
+    to be reachable at all; it exists because the fail-safe direction for "the
+    operator's intent cannot be read" is the one that does not move energy. A
+    typo that silently resolved to `off` would put a battery under a controller
+    whose configuration nobody could parse.
+    """
+    raw = opts.get("shadow_mode", SHADOW_OPTION_DEFAULTS["shadow_mode"])
+    text = str("" if raw is None else raw).strip().lower()
+    if text in MODES:
+        return text
+    return "on"
+
+
+def engaged(opts: dict, *, control_started: bool) -> bool:
+    """Is the battery being left alone right now?
+
+    `control_started` is `Controller.auto` - the persisted start/stop state,
+    which a fresh install gets from `auto_start` and an operator moves with the
+    *Start / stop control* button. See the header on why `auto` reads it.
+    """
+    m = mode(opts)
+    if m == "off":
+        return False
+    if m == "on":
+        return True
+    return not control_started
+
+
+def why(opts: dict, *, control_started: bool) -> str:
+    """Which rung decided, in the words an operator can act on.
+
+    ⚠️ THE REASON, NOT ONLY THE VERDICT - MUTATION.md's masking rule. `on` and
+    `auto`-while-stopped produce the same boolean and want different operator
+    actions: one is turned off by editing an option, the other by pressing a
+    button. A surface that showed only "shadow" would make a mutation that
+    swapped the two rungs invisible.
+    """
+    # ⚠️ THE LIVE SENTENCES SAY "NOT IN SHADOW MODE", NOT "THE BATTERY IS
+    # BEING CONTROLLED". The second is FALSE on a stopped install with
+    # `shadow_mode: off` - nothing is regulating there either - and a row that
+    # is false in one of the four live states is a row an operator learns to
+    # discount. What is true in every live state is that what this add-on
+    # decides reaches the inverter; whether control is RUNNING is the
+    # `Stopped` banner's question and it is answered there.
+    m = mode(opts)
+    if m == "off":
+        return ("off (shadow_mode: off) - NOT in shadow mode: what this "
+                "add-on decides DOES reach the inverter")
+    if m == "on":
+        return ("on (shadow_mode: on) - decisions are recorded and nothing "
+                "is commanded")
+    if control_started:
+        return ("off (shadow_mode: auto, control is started) - NOT in shadow "
+                "mode: what this add-on decides DOES reach the inverter")
+    return ("on (shadow_mode: auto, control is stopped) - decisions are "
+            "recorded and nothing is commanded")
+
+
+def words(opts: dict, *, control_started: bool, would_w: float | None,
+          reason: str = "") -> str:
+    """The status page's `Shadow mode` row.
+
+    ⚠️ THE ROW IS RENDERED IN EVERY STATE, INCLUDING `off`. A surface whose
+    ABSENCE is how you learn which mode you are in is a surface an operator
+    has to already know about; TARIFF-11's rule is that the rendered text is
+    what gets graded, so there has to be text in both states.
+
+    `would_w` is the decision the path reached this cycle - what a live
+    controller would have put on the wire - and `reason` is
+    `Resolution.explain()`, the same sentence the `Why` row carries. Together
+    they are the whole of "what would it have done, and why"; without them the
+    row would say a shadow run happened and nothing about what it found.
+    """
+    head = why(opts, control_started=control_started)
+    if not engaged(opts, control_started=control_started):
+        return head
+    if would_w is None:
+        return (f"{head}; no decision has been reached yet - the inverter is "
+                f"held at {WIRE_W:.0f} W")
+    # ⚠️ THE THOUSANDS SEPARATOR IS SWAPPED ON THE NUMBER ALONE. Applied to
+    # the whole sentence it ate the comma out of `head` - and `head` is the
+    # half that says WHICH RUNG decided, which is the claim MUTATION.md's
+    # masking rule says must survive.
+    num = f"{float(would_w):+,.0f}".replace(",", " ")
+    out = (f"{head}; WOULD HAVE COMMANDED {num} W, inverter held at "
+           f"{WIRE_W:.0f} W")
+    if reason:
+        out += f" - {reason}"
+    return out
+
+
+def banner(opts: dict, *, control_started: bool, latched: tuple = ()) -> tuple:
+    """`(level, text)` for the top of the status page, or `None` when live.
+
+    ⚠️ IT NAMES A STANDING LATCH AND GOES RED FOR ONE. The shadow banner sits
+    ABOVE every other branch of the cascade, because "the battery is not being
+    controlled" is the one sentence that may never be displaced - but a
+    failsafe latch that is up while the controller is inert is up when it
+    stops being inert, and an operator who turns shadow mode off without
+    clearing it gets a battery that will not move and a green page that
+    never mentioned why. So the latch is carried INTO the shadow banner
+    rather than losing its own.
+    """
+    if not engaged(opts, control_started=control_started):
+        return None
+    text = ("SHADOW MODE - the battery is NOT being controlled. Every "
+            f"inverter is held at {WIRE_W:.0f} W and nothing this add-on "
+            "decides reaches the inverter.")
+    if latched:
+        return ("bad", text + " ⚠️ A FAILSAFE LATCH IS STILL UP ("
+                + ", ".join(latched) + ") and it will still be up when shadow "
+                "mode is turned off.")
+    return ("warn", text)
+
+
+def problems(opts: dict) -> list:
+    """`validate.py`'s rule: `shadow_mode` must be one of the three values.
+
+    ⚠️ THE SENTENCE SPELLS `shadow_mode`. `configui.problems_by_field()` files
+    a refusal under the field whose key its text contains; a rule that never
+    names a key lands in the page's top-level block instead, where the operator
+    cannot see which control is wrong. UX-02's whole point is that the shipped
+    validator is the only rule surface, so the rule has to be readable there.
+
+    ⚠️ AND IT IS A REFUSAL RATHER THAN A COERCION. `mode()` resolves an
+    unreadable value to shadow, which is the safe direction but is also a
+    SILENT reinterpretation of what the operator wrote - and an install left in
+    shadow mode by a typo commands nothing at all, indefinitely.
+    """
+    raw = opts.get("shadow_mode", SHADOW_OPTION_DEFAULTS["shadow_mode"])
+    text = str("" if raw is None else raw).strip().lower()
+    if text in MODES:
+        return []
+    return [f"shadow_mode is {raw!r}, which is not one of "
+            + ", ".join(f"'{m}'" for m in MODES)
+            + ". 'auto' leaves the battery alone while control is stopped and "
+              "commands it once control is started; 'on' records every "
+              "decision and commands nothing at all; 'off' is ordinary "
+              "control."]

goodwe_controller/app/static_tariff.py

@@ -13,7 +13,7 @@ is an EMS for a minority." The §9.2 product table maps four products onto four
 EMS behaviours, and TARIFF-02 shipped the machinery for the top two only:
 
     Dynamic day-ahead    hourly EPEX BE + markup     full arbitrage
-    Real-time/imbalance  e.g. Eneco Eddy Flex        arbitrage, wider thresholds
+    Real-time/imbalance  no shipped plugin (TARIFF-07) arbitrage, wider thresh.
     Static day/night     two-period tariff           TIME-WINDOW SHIFTING   <- here
     Fully fixed          single price                SELF-CONSUMPTION ONLY  <- here
 
@@ -207,7 +207,7 @@ from datetime import datetime, timedelta, timezone
 from .price import (
     MAX_PLAUSIBLE_EUR_KWH, Absence, PricePoint, PriceProduct, PriceRead,
     Uncertainty, _Outcome, brussels, load_prices, price_option,
-    required_spread, uncertainty_of, widen_factor,
+    provider_configured, required_spread, uncertainty_of, widen_factor,
 )
 
 _LOG = logging.getLogger("goodwe.tariff.static")
@@ -222,6 +222,12 @@ _DAY_ALIASES = {
 
 MINUTES_PER_DAY = 1440
 
+# TARIFF-17. The option key whose value is a period table of the TAXES
+# component. One spelling, here, because price.py, validate.py and config.yaml
+# all name it and `provider_id()`'s note says what three spellings of one
+# decision cost.
+TAXES_PROFILE_OPTION = "price_taxes_profile"
+
 # The mean that `cheap_now()` grades against is taken over this many local days.
 # Seven, so each weekday appears exactly once - see the module docstring. It is
 # a MODULE CONSTANT and not an option on purpose: CFG-03 already tracks three
@@ -320,13 +326,37 @@ def _days(value, field: str) -> frozenset:
     return frozenset(out)
 
 
-def _price(value, field: str) -> float:
-    """The all-in EUR/kWh for a period, bounded exactly as price.py bounds a feed."""
+# What a period's `eur_per_kwh` MEANS, per option. The grammar is one grammar
+# (TARIFF-17); the quantity it carries is not, so the "you left this out"
+# sentence is the one thing the two tables do not share.
+_PERIOD_MEANS = {
+    "static_profile":
+        "an all-in eur_per_kwh (energy + supplier markup + taxes, §9.3) - the "
+        "same basis the dynamic providers are assembled onto, so the two are "
+        "comparable",
+}
+_TAXES_MEANS = (
+    "the TAXES component alone in eur_per_kwh - the non-energy part of the "
+    "bill for that band (distribution, levies, VAT), NOT an all-in price. The "
+    "framework adds it to what the feed publishes, exactly as the scalar "
+    "price_taxes_eur_kwh is added"
+)
+_PERIOD_MEANS[TAXES_PROFILE_OPTION] = _TAXES_MEANS
+
+
+def _price(value, field: str, means: str = None) -> float:
+    """One period's EUR/kWh, bounded exactly as price.py bounds a feed.
+
+    `means` names the quantity for the error sentence only. TARIFF-17: the same
+    grammar carries an ALL-IN price under `static_profile` and a TAXES-ONLY
+    component under `price_taxes_profile`, and an operator who confuses the two
+    is out by an energy price - so the refusal says which one is wanted.
+    """
+    if means is None:
+        means = _PERIOD_MEANS["static_profile"]
     if value is None:
         raise ProfileInvalid(
-            f"{field} is missing. Every period needs an all-in eur_per_kwh "
-            f"(energy + supplier markup + taxes, §9.3) - the same basis the "
-            f"dynamic providers are assembled onto, so the two are comparable.")
+            f"{field} is missing. Every period needs {means}.")
     if isinstance(value, bool) or not isinstance(value, (int, float, str)):
         raise ProfileInvalid(f"{field} is {value!r}, which is not a number")
     try:
@@ -383,14 +413,19 @@ class Period:
 class StaticProfile:
     """A validated two-or-more-period tariff. Immutable, pure, I/O-free."""
 
-    def __init__(self, periods):
+    def __init__(self, periods, *, option: str = "static_profile"):
         self.periods = tuple(periods)
+        # ⚠️ TARIFF-17: the OPTION NAME travels with the profile so that every
+        # refusal names the key the operator actually typed. It is a default
+        # argument on purpose - every pre-existing call site and every
+        # pre-existing sentence is byte-identical without it.
+        self.option = option
         if not self.periods:
             raise ProfileInvalid(
-                "static_profile has no periods. A profile with no periods is "
-                "not a fixed tariff, it is an absent one - leave the option "
-                "empty to say that on purpose (§11.4 then applies).")
-        _check_tiling(self.periods)
+                f"{option} has no periods. A profile with no periods is "
+                f"not a fixed tariff, it is an absent one - leave the option "
+                f"empty to say that on purpose (§11.4 then applies).")
+        _check_tiling(self.periods, option=option)
 
     # -- what kind of tariff this is, DERIVED --------------------------------
     @property
@@ -477,7 +512,7 @@ class StaticProfile:
             u += timedelta(hours=1)
         if not out:
             raise ProfileInvalid(
-                f"static_profile.series({since.isoformat()}, "
+                f"{self.option}.series({since.isoformat()}, "
                 f"{until.isoformat()}) spans no whole hour. An empty series is "
                 f"not constructible downstream on purpose (price.py trap 3).")
         return out
@@ -489,7 +524,7 @@ class StaticProfile:
         return f"{kind}: " + "; ".join(p.words for p in self.periods)
 
 
-def _check_tiling(periods) -> None:
+def _check_tiling(periods, *, option: str = "static_profile") -> None:
     """Every day type must be covered by EXACTLY ONE period, every minute.
 
     ⚠️ REFUSES BOTH DIRECTIONS. A gap means an hour with no price, and the only
@@ -506,22 +541,22 @@ def _check_tiling(periods) -> None:
             if n > 1 and over_from is None:
                 over_from = (minute, n)
             if n != 0 and gap_from is not None:
-                _raise_gap(weekday, gap_from, minute)
+                _raise_gap(weekday, gap_from, minute, option)
             if n <= 1 and over_from is not None:
-                _raise_overlap(weekday, over_from, minute, periods)
+                _raise_overlap(weekday, over_from, minute, periods, option)
         if gap_from is not None:
-            _raise_gap(weekday, gap_from, MINUTES_PER_DAY)
+            _raise_gap(weekday, gap_from, MINUTES_PER_DAY, option)
         if over_from is not None:
-            _raise_overlap(weekday, over_from, MINUTES_PER_DAY, periods)
+            _raise_overlap(weekday, over_from, MINUTES_PER_DAY, periods, option)
 
 
 def _hhmm(m):
     return f"{m // 60:02d}:{m % 60:02d}"
 
 
-def _raise_gap(weekday, start, end):
+def _raise_gap(weekday, start, end, option="static_profile"):
     raise ProfileInvalid(
-        f"static_profile leaves {DAY_NAMES[weekday]} "
+        f"{option} leaves {DAY_NAMES[weekday]} "
         f"{_hhmm(start)}-{_hhmm(end)} with no period, so those hours have no "
         f"price. Refused rather than defaulted: an invented price is one an "
         f"optimiser would trade on, and §11.4 already says what a missing price "
@@ -529,19 +564,28 @@ def _raise_gap(weekday, start, end):
         f"\"22:00-07:00 mon-fri\" does NOT cover Saturday morning.")
 
 
-def _raise_overlap(weekday, over, end, periods):
+def _raise_overlap(weekday, over, end, periods, option="static_profile"):
     start, n = over
     names = [p.name for p in periods if p.covers(weekday, start)]
     raise ProfileInvalid(
-        f"static_profile gives {DAY_NAMES[weekday]} {_hhmm(start)}-"
+        f"{option} gives {DAY_NAMES[weekday]} {_hhmm(start)}-"
         f"{_hhmm(end)} {n} prices at once ({', '.join(names)}). Two prices for "
         f"one hour means one of them silently wins on list order. Narrow one of "
         f"the windows or split the day selector.")
 
 
-def parse_static_profile(value):
+def parse_static_profile(value, *, option: str = "static_profile",
+                         means: str = None):
     """`static_profile` -> a `StaticProfile`, or None when unset.
 
+    ⚠️ TARIFF-17 MADE `option`/`means` PARAMETERS RATHER THAN FORKING THIS
+    FUNCTION, and that is the whole of the reuse. A second period parser would
+    be a second tiling rule, a second day-type rule and a second set of DST
+    bugs, diverging first on the 23- and 25-hour days where nobody looks. The
+    two arguments move only the OPTION NAME and the "what this number is"
+    clause through the refusals; the grammar, the tiling check and the wrapping
+    rule are one implementation with one set of checks over it.
+
     Accepts what the option can actually arrive as:
       * `None` / `""` / `"null"`      - unset. §14 ships `static_profile: null`.
       * a JSON string                 - what config.yaml's flat `str?` option
@@ -555,6 +599,8 @@ def parse_static_profile(value):
     """
     if value is None:
         return None
+    if means is None:
+        means = _PERIOD_MEANS.get(option, _PERIOD_MEANS["static_profile"])
     if isinstance(value, str):
         text = value.strip()
         if not text or text.lower() in ("null", "none", "off"):
@@ -563,7 +609,7 @@ def parse_static_profile(value):
             value = json.loads(text)
         except ValueError as e:
             raise ProfileInvalid(
-                f"static_profile is not valid JSON ({e}). It is a JSON object "
+                f"{option} is not valid JSON ({e}). It is a JSON object "
                 f"with a \"periods\" list, on one line, e.g.\n"
                 f'  {{"periods": [{{"name":"day","from":"07:00","to":"22:00",'
                 f'"days":"mon-fri","eur_per_kwh":0.34}}, ...]}}\n'
@@ -573,7 +619,7 @@ def parse_static_profile(value):
         tz = str(value.get("timezone", "") or "").strip().lower()
         if tz not in SUPPORTED_TZ:
             raise ProfileInvalid(
-                f"static_profile.timezone is {value.get('timezone')!r}. Only "
+                f"{option}.timezone is {value.get('timezone')!r}. Only "
                 f"Europe/Brussels is supported: the shipped image carries no tz "
                 f"database (see app/price.py), so any other zone could not be "
                 f"honoured and would be silently treated as Brussels - which is "
@@ -581,24 +627,24 @@ def parse_static_profile(value):
         rows = value.get("periods")
         if rows is None:
             raise ProfileInvalid(
-                "static_profile has no \"periods\" list. Even a fully-fixed "
-                "tariff is written as one period covering 00:00-24:00 all days "
-                "- one shape for both products, so nothing downstream branches "
-                "on which kind of site this is.")
+                f"{option} has no \"periods\" list. Even a fully-fixed "
+                f"tariff is written as one period covering 00:00-24:00 all days "
+                f"- one shape for both products, so nothing downstream branches "
+                f"on which kind of site this is.")
     else:
         rows = value
 
     if not isinstance(rows, (list, tuple)):
         raise ProfileInvalid(
-            f"static_profile.periods is {type(rows).__name__}, not a list")
+            f"{option}.periods is {type(rows).__name__}, not a list")
 
     periods = []
     for i, row in enumerate(rows, start=1):
         if not isinstance(row, dict):
             raise ProfileInvalid(
-                f"static_profile.periods[{i}] is {type(row).__name__}, not an "
+                f"{option}.periods[{i}] is {type(row).__name__}, not an "
                 f"object with from/to/days/eur_per_kwh")
-        where = f"static_profile.periods[{i}]"
+        where = f"{option}.periods[{i}]"
         name = str(row.get("name", "") or f"period{i}").strip() or f"period{i}"
         start = _minutes(row.get("from", row.get("start")), f"{where}.from")
         end = _minutes(row.get("to", row.get("end")), f"{where}.to")
@@ -617,8 +663,47 @@ def parse_static_profile(value):
                               end_min=end,
                               days=_days(row.get("days"), f"{where}.days"),
                               eur_per_kwh=_price(row.get("eur_per_kwh"),
-                                                 f"{where}.eur_per_kwh")))
-    return StaticProfile(periods)
+                                                 f"{where}.eur_per_kwh",
+                                                 means)))
+    return StaticProfile(periods, option=option)
+
+
+def parse_taxes_profile(value):
+    """`price_taxes_profile` -> a `StaticProfile` of TAX values, or None.
+
+    TARIFF-17. THE DEFECT THIS EXISTS TO CLOSE: `price.py` modelled the whole
+    non-energy part of a Belgian bill as ONE scalar. In Flanders that is
+    correct - Fluvius distribution is a single rate and its tariff card offers
+    only `Normaal | Uitsl. nacht`, where *exclusive night* is a separate
+    physical circuit rather than a night register. The Walloon and Brussels
+    DSOs are on the same card with four columns - `Enkelvoudig | Dag | Nacht |
+    Uitsl. nacht` - and the day/night gap is real money:
+
+        ORES          dag 13,27  nacht  7,39  ->  5,88 c EUR/kWh
+        AIESH         dag 15,17  nacht  8,21  ->  6,96
+        Tecteo RESA   dag 12,20  nacht  7,01  ->  5,19
+        Sibelga (BXL) dag  9,39  nacht  7,10  ->  2,29
+        ORES IMPACT   dag 16,578 nacht  5,090 -> 11,49   (2026)
+
+    ⚠️ AND THE BANDS ARE ANTI-CORRELATED WITH WHAT THE BATTERY WANTS TO DO.
+    The cheap network hours are the cheap spot hours, so flattening them does
+    not merely shift the curve - it SYSTEMATICALLY UNDERSTATES the true spread
+    and makes the add-on decline cycles that are genuinely profitable. See
+    DOCS.md "The three buckets" for why the flat scalar could never have done
+    this: an additive constant, identical every hour, cancels exactly in
+    `max - min` and cannot move `min(firm, key=...)` either.
+
+    ⚠️ THE VALUE IS THE TAXES COMPONENT, NOT AN ALL-IN PRICE. `static_profile`
+    uses the same grammar for an all-in figure; the two are one parser and two
+    meanings, and `_price()`'s refusal names which one it wanted.
+
+    ⚠️ NOT PARSED ON THE FETCH PATH. validate.py refuses a malformed table at
+    STARTUP, by the rule `price.py` trap 3 states for `static_profile`: a table
+    that cannot be parsed at 03:00 is a site that stops pricing at 03:00, and
+    §11.4 makes that quiet.
+    """
+    return parse_static_profile(value, option=TAXES_PROFILE_OPTION,
+                                means=_TAXES_MEANS)
 
 
 # --------------------------------------------------------------------------- #
@@ -728,6 +813,33 @@ class TariffPlan:
         self.origin = origin
 
     # -- derived facts -------------------------------------------------------
+    @property
+    def from_feed(self) -> bool:
+        """Is this series an OBSERVATION of the configured provider's feed?
+
+        TARIFF-12. `origin` names four ways a plan is obtained; this collapses
+        them to the one question a caller holding a PREVIOUS plan has to ask
+        about a new one - did this resolution see the feed, or is it standing
+        in for one that did not? Only `"provider"` saw it. `"fallback"` and
+        `"none"` are the two §11.4 rows, and `"static"` is a site with no
+        feed to observe at all, where the question does not arise.
+
+        ⚠️ IT IS NOT `has_prices`, AND THE DIFFERENCE IS THE WHOLE POINT. A
+        §11.4 fallback HAS prices - the operator's own static profile - but
+        every point `_degrade()` builds carries `provisional=True`, so
+        `firm_points()` is empty, `arbitrage()` refuses and `cheap_now()` is
+        False. It is a real tariff and it is not an observation, and a caller
+        deciding whether to REPLACE an observation with it needs the second
+        fact, not the first.
+
+        ⚠️ AND IT IS A PROPERTY HERE RATHER THAN AN `origin == "provider"` AT
+        THE CALL SITE, for `main.fresh_tariff_plan()`'s stated reason: a check
+        has to be able to assert on the shipped expression rather than on a
+        transcription that drifts, and `origin`'s vocabulary belongs to this
+        module.
+        """
+        return self.origin == "provider"
+
     @property
     def has_prices(self) -> bool:
         return self.read.match(series=lambda _r: True, no_data=lambda _r: False)
@@ -744,6 +856,63 @@ class TariffPlan:
             series=lambda r: any(p.provisional for p in r.points),
             no_data=lambda _r: True)
 
+    # -- the plan's SHAPE, in the two units it actually has (TARIFF-11) ------
+    # ⚠️ POINTS AND HOURS ARE TWO NUMBERS AND THIS PLAN HAD ONLY EVER
+    # REPORTED ONE OF THEM, UNDER THE OTHER'S NAME. `words` read
+    # `f"... {len(self.read.points)} h"`, which counts POINTS: on the
+    # quarter-hourly Belgian feed (15-minute MTU, 2025-10-01) a 33-hour plan
+    # logged `dynamic_dayahead from generic_dayahead, 132 h`. It is the same
+    # conflation TARIFF-14 removed from `at()` and FCST-04 removed from the
+    # *Price history* row, left standing in the prose. ⚠️ AND THE ERROR IS
+    # NOT A FLAT 4x: a 40 h soak measured 1.79x .. 5.33x, because §8.3's
+    # carried points are HOURLY while the firm ones are quarter-hourly, so
+    # the ratio moves with the firm/carried mix as the day goes on. Nothing
+    # derived from ONE of these numbers can answer for the other.
+
+    @property
+    def n_points(self) -> int:
+        """How many points the series carries. A `no_data` read carries none."""
+        return self.read.match(series=lambda r: len(r.points),
+                               no_data=lambda _r: 0)
+
+    @property
+    def hours(self) -> int:
+        """How many distinct WHOLE CLOCK HOURS those points touch.
+
+        Same rule as `price_history._held()`, deliberately - the *Tariff* and
+        *Price history* rows describe the same feed and an operator reading
+        `132 points over 33 h` beside `96 points over 24 h` must be able to
+        compare them. A point is attributed to the UTC hour its own start
+        falls in; hours the feed never printed are simply not in the set, so
+        this counts what is PRICED rather than what was asked for.
+        """
+        return self.read.match(series=lambda r: _whole_hours(r.points),
+                               no_data=lambda _r: 0)
+
+    @property
+    def n_firm(self) -> int:
+        """Points carrying a published price for their own interval (§8.3)."""
+        return len(self.firm_points())
+
+    @property
+    def n_carried(self) -> int:
+        """Points filled from yesterday's profile, or from §11.4's fallback."""
+        return self.n_points - self.n_firm
+
+    @property
+    def spacings_s(self) -> tuple:
+        """The distinct gaps between consecutive points, ascending, in seconds.
+
+        ⚠️ MIXED IS THE NORMAL STEADY STATE, NOT AN EDGE CASE. FCST-04's
+        carry-forward emits HOURLY carried points beside QUARTER-HOURLY firm
+        ones and the soak measured `[900, 3600]` in 70 % of samples - so a
+        surface reporting one global spacing would be wrong about the usual
+        case. `price._cover_table()` is where that rule is enforced; this
+        only reports it.
+        """
+        return self.read.match(
+            series=lambda r: _spacings(r.points), no_data=lambda _r: ())
+
     def price_at(self, instant: datetime) -> float:
         """EUR/kWh now. Raises `Absence` when there is no price - never 0.0."""
         return self.read.match(
@@ -899,20 +1068,30 @@ class TariffPlan:
         pts = self.read.points
         firm = tuple(p for p in pts if not p.provisional)
         if len(firm) < 2:
+            # ⚠️ POINTS, AND THE HOUR FIGURE BESIDE IT RATHER THAN INSTEAD OF
+            # IT (TARIFF-11). This sentence read "only 1 of 96 hours carry a
+            # published price" about 96 quarter-hourly points, which are 24
+            # hours - the point<->hour conflation TARIFF-14 removed from
+            # `at()`, still standing here, and this one reaches an OPERATOR
+            # through main.py's *Arbitrage* row and not only the log.
             return Arbitrage.refuse(
-                f"§8.3: only {len(firm)} of {len(pts)} hours carry a published "
-                f"price - the rest are provisional (origin {self.origin!r}), "
-                f"and no irreversible action may be taken on a provisional "
-                f"price. A buy hour and a sell hour must BOTH be firm before a "
-                f"cycle can be committed. Load shifting, self-consumption and "
-                f"peak shaving continue")
+                f"§8.3: only {len(firm)} of {len(pts)} points carry a "
+                f"published price - {_whole_hours(firm)} of "
+                f"{_whole_hours(pts)} hours - and the rest are provisional "
+                f"(origin {self.origin!r}), so no irreversible action may be "
+                f"taken on them. A buy interval and a sell interval must BOTH "
+                f"be firm before a cycle can be committed. Load shifting, "
+                f"self-consumption and peak shaving continue")
 
         spread = round(max(p.eur_per_kwh for p in firm)
                        - min(p.eur_per_kwh for p in firm), 6)
         if spread == 0.0:
+            # ⚠️ POINTS AND HOURS, SEPARATELY, for the §8.3 rung's reason -
+            # this sentence counted points and called them "firm hours" too.
             return Arbitrage.refuse(
-                f"the tariff is flat - every one of the {len(firm)} firm hours "
-                f"costs {firm[0].eur_per_kwh:.4f} EUR/kWh, so buying low and "
+                f"the tariff is flat - every one of the {len(firm)} firm "
+                f"points, spanning {_whole_hours(firm)} hours, costs "
+                f"{firm[0].eur_per_kwh:.4f} EUR/kWh, so buying low and "
                 f"selling high is arithmetically impossible. §9.2: a fully "
                 f"fixed product is self-consumption only")
 
@@ -942,15 +1121,77 @@ class TariffPlan:
 
     @property
     def words(self) -> str:
+        """The plan's whole shape in one sentence - LOG *AND* STATUS PAGE.
+
+        ⚠️ THIS STRING IS OPERATOR-FACING SINCE TARIFF-11, which is a reason
+        for its wording to matter MORE rather than less. It used to reach only
+        `_LOG.info("tariff refreshed: %s")`; main.py's *Tariff* row now carries
+        it, age-stamped, so every number in it is read by somebody who cannot
+        see the object.
+
+        ⚠️ EVERY QUANTITY IS NAMED IN ITS OWN UNIT. `{n} points over {h} h` is
+        FCST-04's *Price history* wording on purpose - the two rows describe
+        the same feed and have to be comparable - and the firm/carried split
+        and the spacing are here because they were the two facts the soak
+        found an operator could not learn at all: the plan was `provisional`
+        for 76 % of a 40-hour soak and mixed 900/3600 s for 70 %, and no HTTP
+        surface said either.
+        """
         if not self.has_prices:
             return f"no tariff - {self.read.reason}"
         tag = {"provider": self.read.provider, "static": "static_profile",
                "fallback": "static_profile (feed down)"}.get(self.origin,
                                                              self.origin)
-        return (f"{self.product.value} from {tag}, {len(self.read.points)} h"
+        gaps = self.spacings_s
+        return (f"{self.product.value} from {tag}, "
+                f"{self.n_points} points over {self.hours} h, "
+                f"{self.n_firm} firm / {self.n_carried} carried"
+                + (f", {'+'.join(str(g) for g in gaps)} s spacing"
+                   if gaps else "")
                 + (", provisional" if self.provisional else ""))
 
 
+def _whole_hours(points) -> int:
+    """How many distinct whole CLOCK HOURS a point list touches. Never raises.
+
+    THE DEFECT THIS PREVENTS (TARIFF-11). Three sentences in this module
+    reported `len(points)` under the name "hours": `TariffPlan.words`, §8.3's
+    firm-pair refusal and the flat-tariff refusal. On the hourly series that
+    was the only resolution any fixture carried before TARIFF-08 the two
+    numbers are identical, which is why it shipped; on the Belgian
+    quarter-hourly feed (15-minute MTU, 2025-10-01) `words` read
+    `dynamic_dayahead from generic_dayahead, 132 h` for 33 hours and the
+    refusal read `only 1 of 96 hours` for 24.
+
+    ⚠️ IT IS NOT `n / 4`, AND A CONSTANT FACTOR IS THE WRONG FIX. §8.3's
+    carry-forward emits ONE HOURLY point per unpublished hour beside the
+    feed's four-per-hour firm ones, so the measured overstatement over a
+    40-hour soak ranged 1.79x .. 5.33x as the mix moved. The hour count has
+    to be COUNTED.
+
+    ⚠️ IT COUNTS PRICED HOURS, NOT THE HORIZON. FCST-04 leaves an hour out
+    of the series when neither the feed nor yesterday can price it, so this
+    is at most the horizon and is smaller whenever the plan has holes - which
+    is the honest direction for a figure an operator reads as "how far ahead
+    do I have prices".
+    """
+    return len({p.start.astimezone(timezone.utc)
+                .replace(minute=0, second=0, microsecond=0) for p in points})
+
+
+def _spacings(points) -> tuple:
+    """Distinct gaps between consecutive points, ascending, in whole seconds.
+
+    Sorted by START, not by list order: `price._cover_table()` establishes
+    that order for `at()` rather than assuming it, and a surface that reported
+    the gaps of an unsorted list would print negative spacings about a series
+    that answers correctly.
+    """
+    starts = sorted(p.start.astimezone(timezone.utc) for p in points)
+    return tuple(sorted({int((b - a).total_seconds())
+                         for a, b in zip(starts, starts[1:])}))
+
+
 def _absent(reason):
     raise Absence(
         f"this plan observed no prices ({reason}). A number invented here is "
@@ -1055,7 +1296,8 @@ async def resolve_tariff(opts: dict, since: datetime, until: datetime,
 
     ⚠️ THE FILL IS PER WHOLE HOUR AND ITS COVERAGE IS CONDITIONAL. Every point
     the provider published inside the window passes through BY IDENTITY - four
-    of them in one hour on a quarter-hourly product like `eneco_eddy` - and a
+    of them in one hour on the quarter-hourly day-ahead feed `generic_dayahead`
+    reads (Belgium's 15-minute MTU, 2025-10-01) - and a
     carried point is added only for a whole hour the feed did not print at all
     AND yesterday did. An hour neither source can price is left out, which is
     §11.4 for that hour: `plan.price_at()` raises rather than answering, and an
@@ -1071,8 +1313,7 @@ async def resolve_tariff(opts: dict, since: datetime, until: datetime,
     missing and loses the elapsed ones it should never have had.
     """
     stamp = now or datetime.now(timezone.utc)
-    pid = str(price_option(opts, "price_provider") or "off").strip()
-    if pid in ("", "off"):
+    if not provider_configured(opts):
         return static_plan(opts, since, until, provisional=False, now=stamp)
 
     read = await load_prices(opts, since, until, transport)

goodwe_controller/app/tariff.py

@@ -132,6 +132,18 @@ OBSERVED = "observed"          # the store answered and there is a peak
 NO_RECORD = "no_record"        # the store answered and this month has none yet
 NOT_OBSERVED = "not_observed"  # the store did not answer. NOT a zero peak.
 
+# TARIFF-13. What the COVERAGE figure reads when the store cannot count.
+#
+# ⚠️ NOT 0, AND NOT `None`. This is the reading-state argument of TARIFF-01
+# applied to the number printed BESIDE the peak rather than to the peak. A
+# coverage figure of 0 says "this month has been measured over no quarters at
+# all", which is the strongest possible claim that the peak next to it means
+# nothing - and `f"{None} quarter(s) banked"` renders "None quarter(s) banked",
+# which an operator reads as that same zero. The one honest answer to "how many
+# quarters have I banked" when the table will not answer is that it is not
+# known, and it has to SAY so in the sentence the operator reads.
+COUNT_UNREADABLE = "an unreadable number of"
+
 
 # --------------------------------------------------------------------------- #
 # local time, without a hard dependency on the tz database
@@ -388,6 +400,23 @@ class PeakStore:
                     "   per_phase_json=excluded.per_phase_json"
                     " WHERE excluded.offtake_avg_w > quarter_blocks.offtake_avg_w",
                     (start, month, w, pp_json))
+                # TARIFF-13. THE TIE RULE, DECIDED RATHER THAN EMERGENT:
+                # at EQUAL wattage the EARLIEST quarter keeps the attribution.
+                # See DECISIONS/TARIFF-13-the-coverage-of-a-peak.md §2.
+                #
+                # `peak_w` itself is still only ever RAISED - the `>` term is
+                # untouched and no tie can move the billed number - so SAFETY-07
+                # reads exactly the watt figure it read before. The second term
+                # moves only the TIMESTAMP the status page attributes it to.
+                #
+                # ⚠️ WITHOUT THE SECOND TERM THE TWO READERS DISAGREE, measured:
+                # `>` alone keeps whichever tied block was WRITTEN FIRST, while
+                # `recompute_month()`'s `ORDER BY offtake_avg_w DESC,
+                # quarter_start ASC` keeps the EARLIEST. Those coincide only
+                # while blocks arrive in time order. Fed four equal 365 W blocks
+                # newest-first, `monthly_peak` answered 09:45 and the recompute
+                # answered 09:00 - a divergence in the derived record part 8 of
+                # test_tariff.py exists to prove cannot happen.
                 self._db.execute(
                     "INSERT INTO monthly_peak(month, peak_w, quarter_start, per_phase_json)"
                     " VALUES(?,?,?,?)"
@@ -395,7 +424,9 @@ class PeakStore:
                     "   peak_w=excluded.peak_w,"
                     "   quarter_start=excluded.quarter_start,"
                     "   per_phase_json=excluded.per_phase_json"
-                    " WHERE excluded.peak_w > monthly_peak.peak_w",
+                    " WHERE excluded.peak_w > monthly_peak.peak_w"
+                    "    OR (excluded.peak_w = monthly_peak.peak_w"
+                    "        AND excluded.quarter_start < monthly_peak.quarter_start)",
                     (month, w, start, pp_json))
             return True
         except sqlite3.Error as err:
@@ -449,6 +480,49 @@ class PeakStore:
                            quarter_start=datetime.fromisoformat(row[1]),
                            per_phase_w=pp)
 
+    def banked_count(self, month: str) -> int | None:
+        """How many quarters this month has banked. `None` when unknowable.
+
+        TARIFF-13. THE DEFECT THIS PREVENTS: the status page printed a coverage
+        figure held in PROCESS MEMORY - `PeakTracker.recorded`, incremented once
+        per block banked by THIS process - beside a peak read from SQLite. The
+        peak outlives a restart and the counter does not, so a driven restart
+        mid-month took a real reading of
+
+            2026-09: peak 365 W ... ; 120 quarter(s) banked
+
+        to the same peak, the same attributed quarter and `0 quarter(s) banked`,
+        on both instances independently. The count is what tells an operator how
+        much of the billing month the number beside it actually covers: 365 W
+        over 120 quarters and 365 W over 0 quarters are different claims about
+        the same watt figure, and after a restart the page made the weaker claim
+        while displaying the stronger one's value. Reading the count from the
+        same durable tier the peak comes from is what makes the two agree.
+
+        ⚠️ `None`, NOT 0, and NOT `len(blocks_in(month))`. `blocks_in()` returns
+        `[]` on a read error - safe there only because no caller reads its
+        emptiness as a peak (§ its own docstring) - so counting its length would
+        rebuild the disarming zero one call further out. This asks the database
+        for a COUNT and refuses to answer when the database refuses.
+
+        ⚠️ Counts `quarter_blocks`, the tier with one row per closed block, and
+        NOT `monthly_peak`, which has one row per MONTH and would answer 1 for
+        every month that has ever been measured. The two tables are proven equal
+        on the PEAK by `recompute_month()`; they were never equal on the COUNT
+        and are not meant to be.
+        """
+        if self._db is None:
+            return None
+        try:
+            row = self._db.execute(
+                "SELECT COUNT(*) FROM quarter_blocks WHERE month=?",
+                (month,)).fetchone()
+        except sqlite3.Error as err:
+            self.last_error = str(err)
+            _LOG.error("could not count quarters for %s (%s)", month, err)
+            return None
+        return int(row[0])
+
     def blocks_in(self, month: str) -> list:
         """(quarter_start, offtake_avg_w) for a month, oldest first. [] on error
         is safe here ONLY because no caller reads emptiness as a peak - AC 3's
@@ -539,11 +613,59 @@ class PeakTracker:
         self.cap_w = float(cap_w)
         self.policy = policy
         self.checkpoint_s = float(checkpoint_s)
-        self.recorded = 0
         self.restore_state = "not attempted"
         self._seen: set = set()
         self._last_ckpt = 0.0
 
+    # -- coverage -----------------------------------------------------------
+    #
+    # TARIFF-13. `recorded` USED TO BE AN `int` ATTRIBUTE ON THIS OBJECT,
+    # starting at 0 and incremented in `sync()`. It is a property over the store
+    # now, and the three things that changes are all defects it was carrying:
+    #
+    #   * it RESET TO 0 ON EVERY RESTART, beside a peak that did not - see
+    #     `PeakStore.banked_count()` for the driven reading;
+    #   * it was NOT SCOPED TO A MONTH. It counted every block this process had
+    #     banked, so on 1 October the row still read September's tally beside
+    #     October's "no completed quarter recorded yet";
+    #   * it MISSED the block `restore()` banks. A stale block closed from the
+    #     checkpoint goes into `quarter_blocks` and never went through `sync()`,
+    #     so the counter never saw it. Counting the table cannot miss it.
+    #
+    # ⚠️ REMOVING THE COUNTER DOES NOT REMOVE THE DEDUPE. `_seen` is still what
+    # stops `cycle()`'s once-a-second `sync()` re-banking a closed quarter that
+    # `P1Ingest.blocks` keeps for a DAY, and `sync()`'s RETURN value is still
+    # the count of blocks newly banked on that call. What changed is only where
+    # the STATUS PAGE's figure is read from. The check that grades the dedupe
+    # must therefore grade `sync()`'s return, not this property, which now
+    # answers 1 from the database however many times the block was offered.
+
+    def recorded_in(self, when: datetime | None = None):
+        """Quarters banked in `when`'s billing month - `int`, or the sentinel.
+
+        ⚠️ The return type is `int | str` on purpose, and the `str` is
+        `COUNT_UNREADABLE`. A caller that formats this into a sentence gets a
+        true sentence in both cases; a caller that wants to do arithmetic on it
+        gets a TypeError, which is loud. That is the same trade `PeakReading`
+        makes by having no `peak_w_or(default)`.
+        """
+        n = self.store.banked_count(month_key(when or datetime.now(timezone.utc)))
+        return COUNT_UNREADABLE if n is None else n
+
+    @property
+    def recorded(self):
+        """Quarters banked in the month being billed TODAY.
+
+        ⚠️ This is the live status page's reading, where the peak beside it is
+        also read for `datetime.now()`. `checks(when=X)` for an X in another
+        month is a test affordance (TEST-17); the row scoped that way gets this
+        month's count beside that month's peak, which is strictly better than
+        the process-wide counter it replaces but is still a mismatch.
+        `recorded_in(when)` is the scoped form the row should read once
+        `main.py`'s status rows are free to change - TARIFF-11 holds them.
+        """
+        return self.recorded_in()
+
     # -- startup ------------------------------------------------------------
     def restore(self, averager, now: datetime | None = None) -> str:
         """Put the open block back. Returns which of the three cases happened."""
@@ -600,7 +722,6 @@ class PeakTracker:
                 continue
             if self.store.record_block(block, self.policy):
                 self._seen.add(key)
-                self.recorded += 1
                 n += 1
         if n:
             # A block just closed, so the checkpoint's block is gone: clearing it

goodwe_controller/app/validate.py

@@ -118,8 +118,14 @@ NOT READY banner already names the problem, (b) does not apply.
      It is warned about below, not refused.
 
   7. A price configuration that cannot mean what it says.  [(a)]
-     Three cases, all in `_price_problems()`: an unknown `price_provider` id
-     (refused rather than defaulted to 'off', per the §14 warning box);
+     Four cases, all in `_price_problems()`: an unknown `price_provider` id
+     (refused rather than defaulted to 'off', per the §14 warning box); a
+     RETIRED id - one this add-on really did ship and has been accepting ever
+     since, whose plugin never once fetched a price because its endpoint does
+     not exist (TARIFF-07), which is case (a) in its purest form: §11.4's
+     silent fall back to the static profile IS the layer the operator cannot
+     see, and it has been overriding their chosen source since the day they
+     set it;
      `price_provider` set alongside `price_now_entity`/`price_avg_entity`,
      which is TWO PRICE SOURCES ON ONE SITE where the Home Assistant pair
      silently wins; and `manual_csv` with no `price_csv_path`, which turns the
@@ -318,12 +324,20 @@ import logging
 
 from .arbitrage import enabled as arbitrage_on
 from .control import SLEW_RAIL_FRAC, LOOP_TICK_S, PLANT_SETTLE_S
+from .custom_formula import (
+    EXPORT_FORMULA_OPTION, FormulaInvalid, implausible_all_in,
+    parse_export_formula, parse_price_formula, stale_card)
 from .inverter import roster_entries
 from .maintenance import MAINT_OPTION_DEFAULTS
 from .p1 import is_enabled, validate_meter_options
 from .peakguard import PEAK_OPTION_DEFAULTS
-from .price import PRICE_OPTION_DEFAULTS, PROVIDERS
-from .static_tariff import ProfileInvalid, parse_static_profile
+from .price import (
+    PRICE_OPTION_DEFAULTS, PROVIDERS, RETIRED_PROVIDERS,
+    SUPERSEDED_TAXES_DEFAULTS_EUR_KWH)
+from .shadow import problems as shadow_problems
+from .static_tariff import (
+    ProfileInvalid, TAXES_PROFILE_OPTION, parse_static_profile,
+    parse_taxes_profile)
 from .watchdog import SIGN_OPTION_DEFAULTS
 
 _LOG = logging.getLogger("goodwe.config")
@@ -827,6 +841,18 @@ def validate_startup_config(opts: dict, dev_min=None, dev_max=None) -> list[str]
     # missing rating one line up.
     problems.extend(_roster_problems(opts))
 
+    # --- 11. SAFETY-10's shadow mode, and it is a REFUSAL ---------------------
+    # `shadow_mode` decides whether this controller commands the battery at all,
+    # so an unreadable value is not a detail to log and carry on past.
+    # `shadow.mode()` resolves an unrecognised one to SHADOW - the direction
+    # that does not move energy - and an install silently reinterpreted that way
+    # commands nothing, indefinitely, while its status page calmly explains
+    # that this is intentional. UX-02 made this validator the ONE rule surface
+    # both editors read, so the refusal belongs here rather than in a coercion
+    # nobody can see. The sentence spells `shadow_mode` so
+    # `configui.problems_by_field()` can file it under the field.
+    problems.extend(shadow_problems(opts))
+
     # --- 2. the configured ceiling against the device's own rating -----------
     # ⚠️ THE FLAT `max_w`, AND ONLY THE FLAT ONE. `dev_min`/`dev_max` are ONE
     # device's range - the flat `setpoint_entity`'s - so this rule can only ever
@@ -1242,17 +1268,74 @@ def _price_problems(opts: dict) -> list[str]:
     without a price feed is an add-on that a Belgian fixed-tariff site - a large
     share of the installed base, per §9.2 - cannot run at all.
 
-    Four refusals and two log lines (TARIFF-03 added one refusal, one parse and
-    two notices), and every refusal is still case (a) from this module's
-    docstring: a source the operator SET being overridden by a layer they cannot
-    see. The additions are `static_profile` alongside the Home Assistant price
-    pair - the same silent-loser shape as provider-plus-pair, and a LIVE one -
-    and a `static_profile` that does not tile the day, which would leave hours
-    with no price at all.
+    Five refusals and two log lines (TARIFF-03 added one refusal, one parse and
+    two notices; TARIFF-07 added the retired-id one; TARIFF-15 added three -
+    a `custom_formula` with no formula, a formula that does not parse or does
+    not reproduce its own card, and one whose card lands outside the plausible
+    band - plus two notices, a formula nothing reads and a stale card), and
+    every refusal is still case (a) from this module's docstring: a source the
+    operator SET being overridden by a layer they cannot see. The additions are `static_profile`
+    alongside the Home Assistant price pair - the same silent-loser shape as
+    provider-plus-pair, and a LIVE one - and a `static_profile` that does not
+    tile the day, which would leave hours with no price at all.
+
+    ⚠️ THE RETIRED-ID BRANCH IS NOT A FRIENDLIER SPELLING OF THE UNKNOWN-ID
+    ONE, AND MUST NOT COLLAPSE INTO IT. They answer different questions. An
+    unknown id is a TYPO: the operator meant something else and the fix is to
+    spell it right. A retired id is a CHOICE THE ADD-ON ACCEPTED - it was in
+    the schema, it was in the dropdown, it resolved to a class, and every
+    startup since said nothing. What that operator needs is not "this id is
+    wrong" but "this id has never once returned a price, and here is what your
+    site has actually been running instead" - because §11.4 made the failure
+    silent and NOTHING on their status page has ever distinguished it from a
+    working provider that never finds a cheap hour. The retired branch is
+    therefore FIRST, and it names the id, the endpoint, the observation, the
+    tariff that has really been in force, and the move to make.
     """
     problems: list[str] = []
     pid = str(opts.get("price_provider", "") or "off").strip() or "off"
 
+    if pid in RETIRED_PROVIDERS:
+        # ⚠️ BEFORE the unknown-id branch, and the order is load-bearing: a
+        # retired id is ALSO not in PROVIDERS, so the generic message would
+        # win on a reordering and the operator would be told they mistyped
+        # something they chose on purpose.
+        # ⚠️ AND THE SECOND SENTENCE CHANGES WITH `static_profile`, because
+        # "you have been on the static profile" is FALSE on a site that never
+        # set one. §11.4 falls back to the static profile; with no profile to
+        # fall back to, the site has had no tariff at all - a worse state, and
+        # one this message must not paper over.
+        been_running = (
+            f"the static day/night tariff in static_profile"
+            if str(opts.get("static_profile", "") or "").strip()
+            else "NOTHING AT ALL - static_profile is empty too, so there was "
+                 "no tariff to fall back to either")
+        problems.append(
+            f"price_provider is {pid!r}, which WAS a shipped plugin and has "
+            f"been WITHDRAWN (TARIFF-07). This is not a typo and you did not "
+            f"mistype it - the add-on offered this id, accepted it, and has "
+            f"said nothing at every startup since. "
+            f"⚠️ IT HAS NEVER FETCHED A PRICE, HERE OR ANYWHERE: "
+            f"{RETIRED_PROVIDERS[pid]}. Every fetch it ever made ended in "
+            f"SourceUnavailable, and §11.4 turns that into a SILENT fall back "
+            f"- so what this site has actually been running since the day the "
+            f"id was set is {been_running}. Nothing you could see would have "
+            f"differed from a working provider that simply never found a cheap "
+            f"hour, which is why you are being told now rather than left on "
+            f"it. WHAT TO DO: set price_provider to 'generic_dayahead' for the "
+            f"wholesale EPEX BE day-ahead curve, to which the add-on adds your "
+            f"price_markup_eur_kwh and price_taxes_eur_kwh - that APPROXIMATES "
+            f"a Belgian dynamic tariff and cannot reproduce your supplier's "
+            f"B x spot + A formula, so the level will be off even when the "
+            f"shape is right; or 'manual_csv' to enter all-in prices you "
+            f"compute yourself; or 'off' to run on static_profile "
+            f"deliberately. There is deliberately NO alias to your old "
+            f"supplier: aliasing would need your contract's own two "
+            f"coefficients, which live behind your klantenzone login and are "
+            f"in no public index, so the add-on would have to invent the "
+            f"numbers it prices your battery against.")
+        return problems      # nothing below can be judged against a dead id
+
     if pid != "off" and pid not in PROVIDERS:
         problems.append(
             f"price_provider is {pid!r}, which is not a shipped plugin. The "
@@ -1355,6 +1438,274 @@ def _price_problems(opts: dict) -> list[str]:
                 "for this product. Peak shaving, reserve management and the "
                 "maintenance cycle are unaffected.", profile.prices[0])
 
+    # ⚠️ TARIFF-17: THE TAXES PERIOD TABLE, PARSED AT STARTUP RATHER THAN AT
+    # 03:00, FOR `static_profile`'s REASON ONE OPTION OVER. This table is read
+    # by `price.assemble()` on the ~30 s planning path; a table that only fails
+    # when a fetch happens is a site that stops pricing mid-afternoon, and
+    # §11.4 turns that into a quiet fallback that looks exactly like a healthy
+    # fixed-tariff day. So the parse happens here, once, where a refusal is a
+    # banner naming the key.
+    raw_taxes_profile = opts.get(TAXES_PROFILE_OPTION, "")
+    taxes_table = None
+    if str(raw_taxes_profile or "").strip() \
+            or isinstance(raw_taxes_profile, (list, dict)):
+        try:
+            taxes_table = parse_taxes_profile(raw_taxes_profile)
+        except ProfileInvalid as e:
+            problems.append(f"{TAXES_PROFILE_OPTION} cannot be used: {e}")
+
+    if taxes_table is not None:
+        # ⚠️ TWO WRITERS OF ONE QUANTITY, ONE OF WHICH SILENTLY LOSES - the
+        # exact case (a) this module exists for, and the same refusal shape as
+        # the price-entity/static_profile pair above. The table decides when it
+        # is set, so a non-default scalar left beside it is a number the
+        # operator typed that changes nothing, on the quantity §11.4 makes
+        # hardest to notice. It is compared against the SHIPPED DEFAULTS rather
+        # than against presence, because the Supervisor writes every schema key
+        # into the options file whether the operator touched it or not - so
+        # "the operator did not type this" has to be read off the VALUE.
+        #
+        # ⚠️ TARIFF-18: "UNTOUCHED" IS A SET, NOT ONE NUMBER, AND THE DEFECT
+        # THAT MAKES IT ONE IS AN UPGRADE THAT STOPS A BATTERY CONTROLLER
+        # STARTING. The Supervisor sets `App.options = deepmerge(config.yaml
+        # defaults, stored options)`, so a saved blob carries every schema key
+        # whether the operator typed it or not - the reference install's export
+        # is 70 of 71. When TARIFF-18 moved this default 0.06 -> 0.11736, every
+        # such blob went from "equal to the shipped default" to "not equal to
+        # it" without anybody editing anything, and a site that also carries a
+        # taxes table would have met `SystemExit(78)` on the upgrade. The
+        # sentence below is about a number the OPERATOR TYPED; a superseded
+        # shipped default is not one, so it still reads as untouched. The set
+        # is in price.py beside the default it supersedes, because the two only
+        # ever move together.
+        scalar = _number(opts, "price_taxes_eur_kwh",
+                         PRICE_OPTION_DEFAULTS["price_taxes_eur_kwh"])
+        shipped = PRICE_OPTION_DEFAULTS["price_taxes_eur_kwh"]
+        untouched = (shipped,) + tuple(SUPERSEDED_TAXES_DEFAULTS_EUR_KWH)
+        superseded = ", ".join(
+            str(u) for u in SUPERSEDED_TAXES_DEFAULTS_EUR_KWH)
+        if scalar is not None \
+                and not any(abs(scalar - u) <= 1e-12 for u in untouched):
+            problems.append(
+                f"{TAXES_PROFILE_OPTION} is set AND price_taxes_eur_kwh is "
+                f"{scalar} rather than its shipped {shipped}. THE TABLE WINS: "
+                f"the add-on reads the per-period figures and never looks at "
+                f"the scalar, so the number you typed there would decide "
+                f"nothing and nothing would say so. Set price_taxes_eur_kwh "
+                f"back to {shipped}, or clear {TAXES_PROFILE_OPTION} to keep "
+                f"the flat figure. (A scalar still sitting on a SUPERSEDED "
+                f"default - {superseded} - is accepted and NOT refused: "
+                f"that is a number this add-on wrote into your options "
+                f"blob, not one you typed.)")
+
+        # ⚠️ THE UNITS RUNG, AND IT IS A SECOND QUANTITY RATHER THAN A
+        # RESTATEMENT. Every Belgian DSO prints these bands in c EUR/kWh
+        # (ORES `13,27`), and the whole table is copied off one card - so the
+        # factor-100 error arrives on EVERY row at once and nothing internal to
+        # the table disagrees with itself. The parser's own +-10 EUR/kWh bound
+        # catches a 13,27 typed raw, but NOT ORES IMPACT's night band of 5,090,
+        # which would be a 5.09 EUR/kWh levy sailing through. Belgian
+        # non-energy components run roughly 0.05-0.25 EUR/kWh, so anything at
+        # or above 1.0 is the wrong unit and not a tariff.
+        steep = sorted({p.eur_per_kwh for p in taxes_table.periods
+                        if abs(p.eur_per_kwh) >= 1.0})
+        if steep:
+            problems.append(
+                f"{TAXES_PROFILE_OPTION} carries {steep} EUR/kWh. Belgian "
+                f"levies and distribution run about 0.05-0.25 EUR/kWh, so "
+                f"these are almost certainly the CENT figures off the tariff "
+                f"card (ORES prints `13,27`, which is 0.1327 EUR/kWh) typed "
+                f"without the conversion - a factor of 100 that would make "
+                f"every hour look like an emergency. Divide by 100, or clear "
+                f"the option.")
+        negative = sorted({p.eur_per_kwh for p in taxes_table.periods
+                           if p.eur_per_kwh < 0})
+        if negative:
+            # ⚠️ A WARNING, NOT A REFUSAL. A negative non-energy component is
+            # implausible rather than impossible - a prosumer rebate is
+            # expressible this way - and refusing a site over it would be this
+            # module asserting a fact about Belgian tariff design it cannot
+            # observe. §14's warning box governs CONTRADICTIONS, and this is
+            # not one.
+            _LOG.warning(
+                "%s carries negative levies %s EUR/kWh. That is accepted, but "
+                "a tax component below zero is usually a sign error: the "
+                "add-on will SUBTRACT it from the published price in those "
+                "hours.", TAXES_PROFILE_OPTION, negative)
+
+    # ⚠️ TARIFF-15: THE FORMULA, GRADED AGAINST THE OPERATOR'S OWN CARD, AT
+    # STARTUP RATHER THAN AT 03:00.
+    #
+    # THE DEFECT THIS EXISTS TO PREVENT, and it is not one `code_leaks()` can
+    # see because it is not in code: an operator folds their NETWORK CHARGES
+    # into `offset` while `price_taxes_eur_kwh` carries them as well, and the
+    # site is billed against a price ~12 c EUR/kWh high on every hour for as
+    # long as nobody re-reads the configuration. §11.4 makes every price
+    # defect quiet, so nothing on the status page would ever differ.
+    #
+    # The card is what grades it. A Belgian tariff card prints the formula,
+    # the reference index it assumed AND the resulting price, so the add-on
+    # recomputes that printed price from the numbers the operator typed and
+    # refuses to start unless the two agree to within CARD_TOLERANCE. An
+    # inflated `offset` cannot pass - the printed estimate is the energy
+    # component alone, so ~12 c EUR/kWh moves 15.55 to ~27. The same check
+    # catches VAT omitted, VAT applied twice, a transposed digit, and a unit
+    # MISMATCH between the coefficients and the printed estimate. The one unit
+    # error it cannot see is the one applied to BOTH sides at once, because
+    # that cancels out of a comparison between them - which is why
+    # `implausible_all_in()` below is a second refusal on a second quantity
+    # rather than a restatement of this one.
+    #
+    # ⚠️ AND ITS LIMIT, IN THE SAME SENTENCE AS THE CLAIM, exactly as price.py
+    # states trap 1's: IT GRADES THE COEFFICIENTS AGAINST THE CARD, NOT THE
+    # CARD AGAINST REALITY. A consistent-but-wrong pair - both numbers off the
+    # wrong product - reproduces its own printed price and passes. Nothing can
+    # catch that.
+    spec = None                 # TARIFF-16 reads this back, below
+    raw_formula = opts.get("price_formula", "")
+    has_formula = bool(str(raw_formula or "").strip()) \
+        or isinstance(raw_formula, dict)
+    if pid == "custom_formula" and not has_formula:
+        problems.append(
+            "price_provider is 'custom_formula' but price_formula is empty, "
+            "so the add-on has no coefficients to price anything with. Every "
+            "fetch would return no-price-data and §11.4 would fall back "
+            "silently - which is the shape of defect this provider exists to "
+            "remove, arrived at by leaving one field blank. Copy the "
+            "Tariefformule line off your supplier's tariff card, e.g. "
+            "{\"index\":\"epex_be\",\"resolution\":\"hourly\","
+            "\"factor\":0.102,\"offset\":1.00,"
+            "\"units\":\"c_eur_per_kwh\",\"vat_pct\":6,"
+            "\"card\":{\"month\":\"2026-09\","
+            "\"index_eur_per_mwh\":133.9905,\"expect_incl_vat\":15.55}} "
+            "- see DOCS.md. Or set price_provider to 'generic_dayahead' for "
+            "the wholesale curve with a flat markup.")
+    elif has_formula:
+        try:
+            spec = parse_price_formula(raw_formula)
+        except FormulaInvalid as e:
+            spec = None
+            problems.append(f"price_formula cannot be used: {e}")
+        if spec is not None and pid != "custom_formula":
+            # ⚠️ A WARNING AND NOT A REFUSAL. This is not two price sources
+            # fighting over one flag - it is one that is simply not wired to
+            # anything - so the §14 warning box does not apply. But an option
+            # an operator filled in and that decides nothing is exactly the
+            # silent loser this module's case (a) is about, so it is said out
+            # loud rather than left to be discovered from a bill.
+            _LOG.warning(
+                "price_formula is filled in but price_provider is %r, so the "
+                "coefficients decide NOTHING - only 'custom_formula' reads "
+                "them. Set price_provider to 'custom_formula' to use them, or "
+                "clear price_formula so the configuration says what the "
+                "add-on is doing.", pid)
+        if spec is not None and pid == "custom_formula":
+            taxes = _number(opts, "price_taxes_eur_kwh",
+                            PRICE_OPTION_DEFAULTS["price_taxes_eur_kwh"])
+            band = implausible_all_in(spec, taxes if taxes is not None else 0.0)
+            if band:
+                problems.append(band)
+            aged = stale_card(spec)
+            if aged:
+                # ⚠️ WARN, NEVER REFUSE. ENGIE freezes a contract's
+                # coefficients for its duration, so a two-year-old card can be
+                # exactly right and a site refused over one is a site that
+                # cannot start.
+                _LOG.warning("%s", aged)
+
+    # ⚠️ TARIFF-16: THE INJECTION LEG, REFUSED AT STARTUP ON THE SAME RULE.
+    #
+    # THE DEFECT THIS EXISTS TO PREVENT: `export_price_eur_kwh` models
+    # injection as ONE scalar, and the published market is a line -
+    # Eneco `0,1 x BELPEX-H - 1,188` c EUR/kWh, "het injectietarief is
+    # dynamisch en kan per uur wijzigen", identical on the January and the
+    # September 2026 cards. A scalar cannot hold its own factor (0,100 against
+    # 0,102 on the same supplier's consumption leg), cannot hold a negative
+    # offset, cannot state that injection is VAT-EXEMPT while consumption is
+    # at 6%, and cannot go below zero in the midday hours a PV household
+    # actually exports in.
+    #
+    # ⚠️ AND WHAT IT DOES NOT AFFECT TODAY, said here rather than left to be
+    # inferred: `arbitrage.py` does not read the injection price at all. Both
+    # hours it compares are all-in CONSUMPTION prices, by its own
+    # accounting-basis comment. No trade turns on this option. What it changes
+    # is what the operator is told and what a future export-aware strategy
+    # rests on - which is why it is validated here rather than trusted.
+    raw_export = opts.get(EXPORT_FORMULA_OPTION, "")
+    has_export = bool(str(raw_export or "").strip()) \
+        or isinstance(raw_export, dict)
+    if has_export:
+        try:
+            xspec = parse_export_formula(raw_export)
+        except FormulaInvalid as e:
+            xspec = None
+            problems.append(f"{EXPORT_FORMULA_OPTION} cannot be used: {e}")
+        if xspec is not None:
+            # ⚠️ THE 6% ASYMMETRY, PRINTED RATHER THAN ASSUMED. The two legs
+            # carry INDEPENDENT `vat_pct` values and a Belgian site's are 6 and
+            # 0. Printing both beside each other is the only place an operator
+            # can see that the add-on knows it - a status page shows one price
+            # and no arithmetic.
+            _LOG.info(
+                "%s is set: injection priced as (%g x index %+g) x "
+                "(1 + %g/100) %s, i.e. %.4g x the wholesale price with a "
+                "%+.5f EUR/kWh offset. ⚠️ NO STRATEGY IN THIS ADD-ON READS "
+                "IT: arbitrage.py prices the sell side as displaced IMPORT "
+                "and compares two all-in CONSUMPTION prices, so this option "
+                "changes no decision the add-on takes today. It is what you "
+                "are shown, and the shape a future export-aware strategy "
+                "would read.",
+                EXPORT_FORMULA_OPTION, xspec.factor, xspec.offset,
+                xspec.vat_pct, xspec.units, xspec.passthrough,
+                xspec.offset_eur_kwh)
+            if spec is not None:
+                # ⚠️ THE ASYMMETRY, AS AN ORDERED PAIR RATHER THAN TWO NUMBERS
+                # IN ONE SENTENCE (MUTATION.md habit 14). "6 and 0 appear
+                # somewhere" is satisfied by the two legs transposed, which is
+                # the sentence telling an operator that the add-on has their
+                # VAT treatment exactly backwards.
+                _LOG.info(
+                    "the two legs are priced independently: consumption "
+                    "factor %g at vat_pct %g, injection factor %g at vat_pct "
+                    "%g. In Belgium those differ - \"injectietarieven zijn "
+                    "vrijgesteld van btw\" while consumption is at 6%% - and "
+                    "%s is the option that makes the difference "
+                    "expressible; a single scalar could not state it.",
+                    spec.factor, spec.vat_pct, xspec.factor, xspec.vat_pct,
+                    EXPORT_FORMULA_OPTION)
+            if not xspec.card_graded:
+                # ⚠️ A WARNING AND NEVER A REFUSAL, AND THE GAP IS NAMED
+                # RATHER THAN WORKED AROUND. `price_formula`'s card block is
+                # required because a Belgian card prints the consumption
+                # formula, the reference index AND the resulting price. Eneco's
+                # INJECTION formula is printed with no price beside it, so on
+                # that card there is nothing to reproduce. Requiring a block
+                # here would make the market's own published line
+                # inexpressible; inventing the estimate would grade the
+                # coefficients against arithmetic done with the same
+                # coefficients. So the leg is accepted, the two coefficient
+                # bounds in `implausible_injection()` are applied, and the
+                # operator is told which of the two checks did NOT run.
+                _LOG.warning(
+                    "%s has no \"card\" block, so its coefficients are "
+                    "UNGRADED: nothing recomputed a printed price from them. "
+                    "That is accepted because it is the real market - Eneco "
+                    "prints its injection formula with no price beside it, so "
+                    "there is nothing to grade against on that card - and "
+                    "refusing would make the published line inexpressible. "
+                    "What IS checked is the shape of the coefficients: the "
+                    "pass-through (%.4g x the wholesale price) and the offset "
+                    "(%+.5f EUR/kWh). If YOUR card prints an injection "
+                    "estimate, add {\"month\": ..., \"index_eur_per_mwh\": "
+                    "..., \"expect_incl_vat\": ...} and the add-on will "
+                    "refuse to start unless your numbers reproduce it.",
+                    EXPORT_FORMULA_OPTION, xspec.passthrough,
+                    xspec.offset_eur_kwh)
+            else:
+                xaged = stale_card(xspec)
+                if xaged:
+                    _LOG.warning("%s", xaged)
+
     # ⚠️ A WARNING, NOT A REFUSAL, AND THE ASYMMETRY IS DELIBERATE. §11.4 says a
     # site with no price data falls back to the static profile; a dynamic site
     # with none configured has nothing to fall back to when its feed dies. That

goodwe_controller/config.yaml

@@ -265,9 +265,17 @@ options:
   # TARIFF - what energy costs, and whether to trade on it
   # ==========================================================================
   # `off` is the shipped default and means the §11.4 no-price-data row applies:
-  # static profile, plan provisional, NO ARBITRAGE. Nothing in 0.5.x consumes
-  # the series yet - OPT-04 is the consumer - so turning this on today fetches,
-  # validates and publishes prices and changes no energy decision.
+  # static profile, plan provisional, NO ARBITRAGE.
+  #
+  # ⚠️ SELECTING A PROVIDER IS WHAT STARTS THE FETCH, AND IT IS NOT
+  # `arbitrage_enabled` (TARIFF-10). With a provider set and trading off - the
+  # shipped default - the add-on fetches the feed every 30 minutes, validates
+  # it, records the day in /data/price_history.json and reports what it holds
+  # on the *Price history* status row. It changes NO energy decision: the cheap
+  # window the maintenance cycle reads still comes from `static_profile`, and
+  # §10.1's arbitrage is gated on `arbitrage_enabled` alone. Until TARIFF-10
+  # the fetch was gated on `arbitrage_enabled` too, so this option did nothing
+  # whatsoever on a shipped install - the store was never even created.
   #
   # ⚠️ THESE DEFAULTS ARE MIRRORED ONCE, IN app/price.py's
   # PRICE_OPTION_DEFAULTS, and test_price.py reads THIS FILE and asserts the two
@@ -276,18 +284,65 @@ options:
   #
   # markup/taxes are the §14 `tariffs.energy_price.*` figures and are added by
   # the FRAMEWORK, only for the components the chosen plugin declares its feed
-  # does not already contain. engie_dynamic, totalenergies_dynamic, eneco_eddy
-  # and manual_csv publish a figure that already carries the markup, so setting
-  # it under those is ignored - and logged as ignored, never applied twice.
+  # does not already contain. manual_csv carries an all-in figure, so setting
+  # either under it is ignored - and logged as ignored, never applied twice.
+  # `custom_formula` (TARIFF-15) carries energy AND markup - your contract's
+  # formula IS the markup - so it takes price_taxes_eur_kwh only, and your
+  # price_markup_eur_kwh is ignored under it, with a line in the log saying so.
   price_provider: "off"
   price_markup_eur_kwh: 0.03
-  price_taxes_eur_kwh: 0.06
+
+  # TARIFF-18. The all-in Flemish non-energy figure, EUR/kWh, incl. 6 % VAT.
+  # Its components are named in app/price.py's FLEMISH_TAXES_COMPONENTS_EUR_KWH
+  # and test_price.py section 1b re-adds them:
+  #
+  #   Fluvius distribution (Antwerpen)              5,35  c EUR/kWh
+  #   Bijzondere accijns, "Alle verbruik"           4,876
+  #   Bijdrage groene stroom en WKK Vlaanderen      1,51
+  #   Energiebijdrage (0 EUR/MWh since 2026-08-01)  0
+  #                                                ------
+  #                                                11,736 c EUR/kWh = 0.11736
+  #
+  # ⚠️ THIS IS PER-DSO AND YOURS IS PROBABLY DIFFERENT. Only the distribution
+  # row moves: across the eight Fluvius DSOs it runs 5,28 c EUR/kWh
+  # (Midden-Vlaanderen) to 6,70 (West), so the Flemish total runs about 0.117
+  # to 0.131. Antwerpen is near the LOW end, which is the direction this
+  # default should err in - it is inert on which hour is cheapest, but §17's
+  # negative-price guard reads the ABSOLUTE all-in price, and a figure set too
+  # high would carry a genuinely negative hour above zero.
+  #
+  # ⚠️ WALLONIA AND BRUSSELS DO NOT BELONG IN THIS SCALAR AT ALL. Their
+  # distribution tariff has a day and a night band; use price_taxes_profile.
+  price_taxes_eur_kwh: 0.11736
 
   # §9.3: injection is priced SEPARATELY, and in Belgium it is often near zero -
-  # which by itself strongly favours self-consumption over export. A scalar, not
-  # a second series: no shipped supplier publishes a dynamic injection curve.
+  # which by itself strongly favours self-consumption over export. This is the
+  # FLAT injection price, for a site paid the same for every exported kWh.
+  #
+  # ⚠️ THE REASON THIS COMMENT USED TO GIVE - "no shipped supplier publishes a
+  # dynamic injection curve" - WAS FALSE, and TARIFF-07 struck the same
+  # sentence from app/price.py and DOCS.md without reaching this file. Eneco
+  # publishes `0,1 x BELPEX-H - 1,188` c EUR/kWh on the same card as its
+  # consumption formula, ENGIE publishes `(B x eSpot_15) - A`, and Aspiravi
+  # `0,07 x Belpex - 2`. A site on one of those sets price_export_formula
+  # below; this scalar stays the fixed-product default and is what every site
+  # uses today.
   export_price_eur_kwh: 0.04
 
+  # TARIFF-16. The INJECTION leg as a formula, in price_formula's own grammar
+  # and with its OWN coefficients: Eneco uses 0,102 on consumption and 0,100 on
+  # injection, and injection is VAT-EXEMPT where consumption is at 6%, so
+  # `vat_pct` here is normally 0. A negative `offset` is expected - it is what
+  # the published lines carry - and the resulting price legitimately goes below
+  # zero in the midday hours a PV household exports in.
+  #
+  # ⚠️ NO STRATEGY IN THIS ADD-ON READS IT. arbitrage.py prices the sell side
+  # as displaced IMPORT and compares two all-in CONSUMPTION prices; it does not
+  # read the injection price at all. This option is what the operator is shown
+  # and the shape a future export-aware strategy would rest on. Empty by
+  # default, which leaves every existing site on the scalar above.
+  price_export_formula: ""
+
   # §14's `tariffs.static_profile`, and "" is its `null`. §9.2: "a large share
   # of the installed base is on [a static profile]" - this is what makes those
   # sites first-class rather than "price_provider: off, good luck".
@@ -317,7 +372,100 @@ options:
   # to fall back to and a dead feed leaves the site with no tariff at all.
   # validate.py warns about exactly that.
   static_profile: ""
+
+  # TARIFF-17. THE TAXES COMPONENT AS A DAY/NIGHT TABLE, for the sites whose
+  # network tariff actually has one. "" means the flat price_taxes_eur_kwh
+  # above decides, which is what every install has had until now and is CORRECT
+  # IN FLANDERS: Fluvius distribution is a single rate, and its row on the
+  # tariff card offers only `Normaal | Uitsl. nacht` - exclusive night being a
+  # separate physical circuit, not the night register of a dual-rate meter.
+  #
+  # The Walloon and Brussels DSOs are on the same card with FOUR columns -
+  # `Enkelvoudig | Dag | Nacht | Uitsl. nacht` - and the gap is real money
+  # (c EUR/kWh): ORES dag 13,27 / nacht 7,39; AIESH 15,17 / 8,21; Tecteo RESA
+  # 12,20 / 7,01; Sibelga 9,39 / 7,10; ORES IMPACT 2026 16,578 / 5,090.
+  #
+  # ⚠️ WHY THIS IS NOT COSMETIC. The optimiser reads the SPREAD (max - min) and
+  # which hour is cheapest. A flat number is additive and identical every hour,
+  # so it cancels out of both - it cannot distort anything, and it also cannot
+  # express this. These bands are ANTI-CORRELATED with what the battery wants
+  # to do (cheap network hours are cheap spot hours), so flattening them
+  # UNDERSTATES the true spread and declines cycles that would have paid. See
+  # DOCS.md, "The three buckets".
+  #
+  # Same JSON grammar as static_profile above - the same tiling rule, the same
+  # day selectors, the same DST handling, because it is literally the same
+  # parser. ⚠️ THE VALUE IS THE TAXES COMPONENT ALONE, NOT AN ALL-IN PRICE:
+  #
+  #   {"periods": [
+  #      {"name":"dag",  "from":"07:00","to":"22:00","days":"mon-fri","eur_per_kwh":0.1327},
+  #      {"name":"nacht","from":"22:00","to":"07:00","days":"mon-fri","eur_per_kwh":0.0739},
+  #      {"name":"nacht","from":"00:00","to":"24:00","days":"sat,sun", "eur_per_kwh":0.0739}]}
+  #
+  # ⚠️ SET THIS *OR* price_taxes_eur_kwh, NOT BOTH. Two writers of one quantity,
+  # one of which silently wins, is refused at startup: leave the scalar at its
+  # shipped default when you fill this in. A scalar still sitting on the
+  # SUPERSEDED 0.06 is accepted too (TARIFF-18 moved that default, and your
+  # stored options carry the old number whether you typed it or not) - the
+  # refusal is about a figure you chose, not about one this add-on wrote.
+  price_taxes_profile: ""
+
+  # TARIFF-15. YOUR OWN TARIFF CARD, as two fixed coefficients. Used only when
+  # `price_provider: custom_formula`; "" is unset.
+  #
+  # A Belgian dynamic contract prices energy as `B x index + A`, and the two
+  # coefficients exist in exactly ONE place - the tariff card in your
+  # klantenzone. There is no machine-readable source for them anywhere (CREG's
+  # tariff-card pages 404, CREG Scan is a JS wizard, VREG was unreachable), so
+  # no plugin and no scraper can ever know YOUR numbers. You are the only party
+  # who can see them.
+  #
+  # A JSON object, on one line. You type what your card prints, IN THE CARD'S
+  # OWN UNITS; every unit conversion and the VAT multiplication are the
+  # add-on's job, because those are exactly the two steps that silently cost a
+  # factor of 10, 100 or 1.06.
+  #
+  #   {"index":"epex_be","resolution":"hourly","factor":0.102,"offset":1.00,
+  #    "units":"c_eur_per_kwh","vat_pct":6,
+  #    "card":{"month":"2026-09","index_eur_per_mwh":133.9905,
+  #            "expect_incl_vat":15.55}}
+  #
+  # price = (factor x index_eur_per_mwh + offset) x (1 + vat_pct/100), in
+  # `units`, converted to EUR/kWh by the add-on.
+  #
+  # ⚠️ THE `card` BLOCK IS REQUIRED AND IT IS THE SAFETY MECHANISM. Your card
+  # prints the formula, the reference index it assumed AND the resulting price.
+  # At startup the add-on recomputes that printed price from the numbers you
+  # typed and REFUSES TO START unless the two agree to within 0.01 - naming the
+  # discrepancy. That catches VAT left out or applied twice, a transposed
+  # digit, a unit MISMATCH between the coefficients and the printed price
+  # (10x/100x/1000x), and the expensive one: NETWORK CHARGES FOLDED INTO
+  # `offset`. A unit error applied to BOTH sides at once cancels out of that
+  # comparison; the add-on refuses that separately, by checking the card's own
+  # point against the band a Belgian retail tariff can occupy. Your card's formula line is the ENERGY component
+  # alone; the add-on adds price_taxes_eur_kwh on top, so folding ~12 c/kWh of
+  # network charge into `offset` would bill you for it twice - and it cannot
+  # pass, because it moves the computed 15.55 to about 27.
+  #
+  # ⚠️ AND THE LIMIT OF THAT CHECK, IN THE SAME BREATH: it grades your
+  # COEFFICIENTS AGAINST YOUR CARD, not your card against reality. Two numbers
+  # copied off the wrong product agree with each other perfectly and pass.
+  #
+  # ⚠️ FIXED COEFFICIENTS ONLY - the add-on evaluates NO expression of any kind
+  # and there is no field that takes one. An unknown key is refused rather than
+  # ignored. See DOCS.md for why (it is not only security: two coefficients can
+  # be graded against your card and an arbitrary expression cannot be graded
+  # against anything).
+  price_formula: ""
   price_csv_path: "/share/goodwe_prices.csv"
+  # ⚠️ AN OVERRIDE IS THE EXACT URL (TARIFF-09). The plugin sends it verbatim
+  # and appends nothing - including the `start`/`end` date range it derives from
+  # the horizon for its own feed - so an override gets whatever range that URL
+  # answers, which for a bare day-ahead endpoint is ONE Brussels day. Every hour
+  # past it is then carried from yesterday and flagged provisional, and §8.3
+  # keeps provisional hours out of the trade set. The plugin logs a WARNING
+  # naming that consequence on every fetch that uses an override; clearing this
+  # option is what restores the full horizon.
   price_feed_url: ""
   price_horizon_h: 48
   price_timeout_s: 10
@@ -344,6 +492,12 @@ options:
   # configuration: this is the first strategy in the add-on that moves energy
   # against the meter on purpose, so it is armed deliberately or not at all.
   #
+  # ⚠️ IT IS NOT WHAT TURNS THE PRICE FEED ON (TARIFF-10). `price_provider`
+  # above decides whether prices are FETCHED; this decides whether they move
+  # energy. Leaving this off on a site with a provider configured is a
+  # supported, documented state: prices are fetched, validated and recorded,
+  # and nothing trades.
+  #
   # ⚠️ IT NEEDS A PRICE SOURCE AND A P1 METER, and validate.py refuses the
   # combinations that cannot work rather than letting them look armed. With
   # `price_provider: off` and no `static_profile` there is no series to trade
@@ -592,6 +746,38 @@ options:
   # and not 150 or 200. 37 control cycles.
   delivery_hold_s: 185
 
+  # SAFETY-10. Run the whole decision path and command NOTHING - strategies,
+  # arbiter, clamps and guards all run, the decision and its reason are
+  # recorded, and every inverter is held at 0 W. `app/shadow.py` carries the
+  # argument; the three things to know before changing this line are:
+  #
+  #   auto  shadow WHILE CONTROL IS STOPPED, live once it is started. This is
+  #         the shipped value and it is what "default-on" means here.
+  #   on    always shadow, whatever the Start / stop button says. This is the
+  #         one an operator picks to watch a day of decisions on an armed site
+  #         before letting it trade.
+  #   off   ordinary control.
+  #
+  # ⚠️ IT IS NOT A BOOLEAN DEFAULTING TO `true`, AND THAT IS THE WHOLE CARD.
+  # The Supervisor composes an add-on's options as `{**these defaults, **the
+  # stored user options}`, so a NEW key with a new default reaches every
+  # EXISTING install on the next update - including one regulating a real
+  # battery. `shadow_mode: true` would silently stop it, and the only symptom
+  # would be a battery that has stopped doing anything. There is no mechanism
+  # in this options system that lets one key default differently for a new
+  # install and an existing one, so "default-on for new" has to be a value the
+  # add-on RESOLVES. `auto` is that value: a fresh install ships
+  # `auto_start: false` and therefore comes up in shadow mode; an install that
+  # is controlling is started, so `auto` resolves to live and NOTHING about it
+  # changes.
+  #
+  # ⚠️ AND UNDER `auto` THE START BUTTON LEAVES SHADOW MODE. Pressing *Start /
+  # stop control* is the operator saying "control the battery". Somebody who
+  # wants the decisions recorded WHILE the loop runs sets `on` explicitly -
+  # which is the configuration this option exists for, and the one that cannot
+  # be reached by accident.
+  shadow_mode: "auto"
+
   # ==========================================================================
   # ADVANCED - the control law and diagnostics
   # ==========================================================================
@@ -736,9 +922,32 @@ schema:
   # Supervisor rejects a typo in the UI. validate.py ALSO refuses an unknown id
   # against app/price.py's PROVIDERS registry, because sim/inject.py and the
   # checks reach validate_startup_config() with a dict the Supervisor never saw.
-  # Adding a sixth plugin means adding it here and to PROVIDERS - and nowhere
-  # else, which is AC2.
-  price_provider: list(off|generic_dayahead|engie_dynamic|totalenergies_dynamic|eneco_eddy|manual_csv)
+  # Adding a plugin means adding it here and to PROVIDERS - and nowhere else,
+  # which is AC2.
+  #
+  # ⚠️ THREE OF THESE FIVE IDS NO LONGER RESOLVE TO A PLUGIN, AND LEAVING THEM
+  # HERE IS A DECISION (TARIFF-07). engie_dynamic, totalenergies_dynamic and
+  # eneco_eddy were withdrawn - their endpoints do not exist and never did - and
+  # the obvious edit is to delete them from this line too. DO NOT. The Supervisor
+  # validates the options file against this schema BEFORE the add-on starts, so
+  # an id that is not listed here makes an EXISTING config schema-invalid: the
+  # operator gets an opaque "expected one of ..." from the Supervisor, the add-on
+  # never runs, and validate.py's retired-id refusal - the message that tells
+  # them their prices never worked and what to do instead - IS NEVER REACHED, on
+  # exactly the sites that need it. Schema tightness would cost the only thing
+  # this withdrawal is FOR.
+  #
+  # The cost of keeping them is that the dropdown still offers three dead ids to
+  # a NEW operator. That is the cheaper failure: choosing one is refused at the
+  # next startup by name, with the endpoint, the observation and the alternative
+  # - which is strictly more than a typo-shaped schema rejection would say. Both
+  # translations label them withdrawn in the option description as well.
+  #
+  # app/price.py's RETIRED_PROVIDERS is the list, test_price.py section 1 asserts
+  # this line offers exactly PROVIDERS + RETIRED_PROVIDERS + 'off' - derived, not
+  # typed - and register() refuses to re-register a retired id, so the two
+  # cannot both claim one.
+  price_provider: list(off|generic_dayahead|custom_formula|engie_dynamic|totalenergies_dynamic|eneco_eddy|manual_csv)
   price_markup_eur_kwh: float(0,1)
   price_taxes_eur_kwh: float(0,1)
 
@@ -747,11 +956,29 @@ schema:
   # bottoms out at 0 would make that site inexpressible.
   export_price_eur_kwh: float(-1,1)
 
+  # TARIFF-16. A JSON string in `price_formula`'s grammar, parsed by
+  # `custom_formula.parse_export_formula()` - the SAME parser with its option
+  # name as an argument, so a second unit table and a second card rule do not
+  # exist to diverge. The `card` block is OPTIONAL on this leg and required on
+  # the other: Eneco prints its injection formula with no price beside it, so
+  # on that card there is nothing to grade against, and the add-on says at
+  # startup that the leg is ungraded rather than inventing an estimate.
+  price_export_formula: str?
+
   # A JSON string rather than a nested schema, deliberately: it is ONE option
   # key (§14 has one), it survives config.yaml's flat options block, and
   # parse_static_profile() accepts an already-parsed dict too, so a future
   # nested schema is a config.yaml change and no code change at all.
   static_profile: str?
+  # TARIFF-17. A JSON string for `static_profile`'s reason, and parsed by
+  # `static_tariff.parse_taxes_profile()` - the SAME period grammar, so a
+  # second tiling rule and a second set of DST bugs do not exist to diverge.
+  price_taxes_profile: str?
+  # TARIFF-15. A JSON string for the same reason `static_profile` is one: it is
+  # ONE option key, it survives config.yaml's flat options block, and
+  # parse_price_formula() accepts an already-parsed dict too, so a future
+  # nested schema is a config.yaml change and no code change at all.
+  price_formula: str?
   price_csv_path: str?
   price_feed_url: str?
   price_horizon_h: int(1,72)
@@ -870,6 +1097,15 @@ schema:
   # running short of one unit's share must be reported well inside one.
   delivery_hold_s: int(30,900)
 
+  # SAFETY-10. ⚠️ A THREE-VALUED LIST AND NOT A `bool`, for the reason written
+  # against the default in the options block above: a boolean has one default
+  # and the Supervisor gives it to every install, new and existing alike.
+  # `app/shadow.MODES` is this tuple and `validate.py` rule 11 refuses anything
+  # else BY NAME, because `shadow.mode()` resolves an unreadable value to
+  # SHADOW - safe, but a silent reinterpretation that commands nothing for as
+  # long as nobody notices.
+  shadow_mode: list(auto|on|off)
+
   # ==========================================================================
   # ADVANCED - the control law and diagnostics
   # ==========================================================================

goodwe_controller/scenarios/energy-charts-be-price-2025-09-10-hourly.json

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+{"license_info":"CC BY 4.0 (creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0) from Bundesnetzagentur | SMARD.de","unix_seconds":[1757455200,1757458800,1757462400,1757466000,1757469600,1757473200,1757476800,1757480400,1757484000,1757487600,1757491200,1757494800,1757498400,1757502000,1757505600,1757509200,1757512800,1757516400,1757520000,1757523600,1757527200,1757530800,1757534400,1757538000],"price":[73.0,61.31,64.32,62.49,67.0,64.48,94.52,149.26,132.43,91.61,84.8,79.61,69.23,66.75,68.91,69.31,80.29,66.91,105.2,161.05,116.73,84.2,64.1,42.41],"unit":"EUR / MWh","deprecated":false}

goodwe_controller/scenarios/energy-charts-be-price-2026-09-09_2026-09-10-twoday.json

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+{"license_info":"CC BY 4.0 (creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0) from Bundesnetzagentur | SMARD.de","unix_seconds":[1788904800,1788905700,1788906600,1788907500,1788908400,1788909300,1788910200,1788911100,1788912000,1788912900,1788913800,1788914700,1788915600,1788916500,1788917400,1788918300,1788919200,1788920100,1788921000,1788921900,1788922800,1788923700,1788924600,1788925500,1788926400,1788927300,1788928200,1788929100,1788930000,1788930900,1788931800,1788932700,1788933600,1788934500,1788935400,1788936300,1788937200,1788938100,1788939000,1788939900,1788940800,1788941700,1788942600,1788943500,1788944400,1788945300,1788946200,1788947100,1788948000,1788948900,1788949800,1788950700,1788951600,1788952500,1788953400,1788954300,1788955200,1788956100,1788957000,1788957900,1788958800,1788959700,1788960600,1788961500,1788962400,1788963300,1788964200,1788965100,1788966000,1788966900,1788967800,1788968700,1788969600,1788970500,1788971400,1788972300,1788973200,1788974100,1788975000,1788975900,1788976800,1788977700,1788978600,1788979500,1788980400,1788981300,1788982200,1788983100,1788984000,1788984900,1788985800,1788986700,1788987600,1788988500,1788989400,1788990300,1788991200,1788992100,1788993000,1788993900,1788994800,1788995700,1788996600,1788997500,1788998400,1788999300,1789000200,1789001100,1789002000,1789002900,1789003800,1789004700,1789005600,1789006500,1789007400,1789008300,1789009200,1789010100,1789011000,1789011900,1789012800,1789013700,1789014600,1789015500,1789016400,1789017300,1789018200,1789019100,1789020000,1789020900,1789021800,1789022700,1789023600,1789024500,1789025400,1789026300,1789027200,1789028100,1789029000,1789029900,1789030800,1789031700,1789032600,1789033500,1789034400,1789035300,1789036200,1789037100,1789038000,1789038900,1789039800,1789040700,1789041600,1789042500,1789043400,1789044300,1789045200,1789046100,1789047000,1789047900,1789048800,1789049700,1789050600,1789051500,1789052400,1789053300,1789054200,1789055100,1789056000,1789056900,1789057800,1789058700,1789059600,1789060500,1789061400,1789062300,1789063200,1789064100,1789065000,1789065900,1789066800,1789067700,1789068600,1789069500,1789070400,1789071300,1789072200,1789073100,1789074000,1789074900,1789075800,1789076700],"price":[150.93,151.41,150.99,147.59,153.25,147.26,144.04,141.53,147.79,146.53,143.55,139.93,145.58,139.56,139.11,138.06,138.92,138.52,138.04,138.65,137.29,139.03,144.59,150.34,154.12,174.5,178.43,186.62,199.35,200.21,200.11,197.43,220.07,202.0,196.01,174.03,198.32,167.49,152.54,142.05,161.5,145.45,128.61,100.85,139.18,115.83,94.41,80.39,111.25,89.61,84.99,74.38,80.53,70.58,62.27,57.1,62.24,64.95,68.99,71.19,66.9,87.32,109.0,123.12,68.48,125.53,155.99,161.9,138.77,160.57,167.35,173.0,142.2,172.83,196.19,211.26,205.85,218.77,217.08,222.0,210.98,208.46,208.88,210.02,209.77,202.61,200.27,191.49,194.39,195.04,197.26,190.92,188.39,198.05,203.05,191.84,216.08,216.08,214.92,200.0,223.37,201.43,196.32,190.0,199.53,194.83,180.53,172.23,179.88,175.77,167.1,173.89,163.29,165.99,171.41,178.73,170.27,177.37,187.71,201.07,193.62,207.61,218.27,226.77,227.17,234.05,236.99,229.94,248.93,227.5,216.08,195.67,215.99,195.01,177.1,155.09,174.91,152.71,139.59,123.83,140.77,123.19,114.96,94.5,102.77,96.63,94.57,116.34,114.63,126.82,129.89,123.95,105.0,119.11,121.0,136.79,123.41,135.01,135.0,156.68,146.88,152.16,162.02,181.78,154.76,184.28,194.3,215.76,197.23,234.15,253.03,296.58,345.32,389.16,482.99,559.0,551.11,446.41,358.97,295.9,271.39,268.06,241.43,238.01,239.7,226.41,223.05,211.56,218.21,210.61,197.78,171.79],"unit":"EUR / MWh","deprecated":false}

goodwe_controller/scenarios/energy-charts-be-price-2026-09-10-quarterhourly.json

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+{"license_info":"CC BY 4.0 (creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0) from Bundesnetzagentur | SMARD.de","unix_seconds":[1788991200,1788992100,1788993000,1788993900,1788994800,1788995700,1788996600,1788997500,1788998400,1788999300,1789000200,1789001100,1789002000,1789002900,1789003800,1789004700,1789005600,1789006500,1789007400,1789008300,1789009200,1789010100,1789011000,1789011900,1789012800,1789013700,1789014600,1789015500,1789016400,1789017300,1789018200,1789019100,1789020000,1789020900,1789021800,1789022700,1789023600,1789024500,1789025400,1789026300,1789027200,1789028100,1789029000,1789029900,1789030800,1789031700,1789032600,1789033500,1789034400,1789035300,1789036200,1789037100,1789038000,1789038900,1789039800,1789040700,1789041600,1789042500,1789043400,1789044300,1789045200,1789046100,1789047000,1789047900,1789048800,1789049700,1789050600,1789051500,1789052400,1789053300,1789054200,1789055100,1789056000,1789056900,1789057800,1789058700,1789059600,1789060500,1789061400,1789062300,1789063200,1789064100,1789065000,1789065900,1789066800,1789067700,1789068600,1789069500,1789070400,1789071300,1789072200,1789073100,1789074000,1789074900,1789075800,1789076700],"price":[216.08,216.08,214.92,200.0,223.37,201.43,196.32,190.0,199.53,194.83,180.53,172.23,179.88,175.77,167.1,173.89,163.29,165.99,171.41,178.73,170.27,177.37,187.71,201.07,193.62,207.61,218.27,226.77,227.17,234.05,236.99,229.94,248.93,227.5,216.08,195.67,215.99,195.01,177.1,155.09,174.91,152.71,139.59,123.83,140.77,123.19,114.96,94.5,102.77,96.63,94.57,116.34,114.63,126.82,129.89,123.95,105.0,119.11,121.0,136.79,123.41,135.01,135.0,156.68,146.88,152.16,162.02,181.78,154.76,184.28,194.3,215.76,197.23,234.15,253.03,296.58,345.32,389.16,482.99,559.0,551.11,446.41,358.97,295.9,271.39,268.06,241.43,238.01,239.7,226.41,223.05,211.56,218.21,210.61,197.78,171.79],"unit":"EUR / MWh","deprecated":false}

goodwe_controller/scenarios/energy-charts-be-price-captures.json

@@ -0,0 +1,82 @@
+{
+ "card": "TARIFF-08, extended by TARIFF-09",
+ "what": "UNMODIFIED response bodies from the public EPEX BE day-ahead feed, captured so the SHIPPED parser can be replayed against what the source really publishes",
+ "why": "every price fixture in the suite was built from a `{\"data\": [{\"start\": ..., \"price_eur_mwh\": ...}]}` document that this feed has never published. The suite therefore graded `_points_from_json` against its own assumption - a closed loop that could not notice the assumption was wrong - and §11.4 turned the resulting failure into a silent fall back to the static profile. A captured real body is what breaks that loop, so these files are bytes, not a reconstruction: nothing here is pretty-printed, re-keyed or trimmed. TARIFF-09 adds a body from a request that names a DATE RANGE, for the same reason one layer out: the shipped plugin took `since`/`until` and asked for the bare default URL, so the feed answered ONE Brussels day and every hour past today was carried forward and dropped from the trade set as provisional. A two-day body captured from the range request is what makes \"asking for the range gets the range\" checkable against something the plugin did not shape.",
+ "source": "Energy-Charts API (Fraunhofer ISE), api.energy-charts.info",
+ "upstream": "Bundesnetzagentur | SMARD.de",
+ "licence": "CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)",
+ "licence_note": "the BE bidding zone is in the API's CC BY 4.0 list, so redistribution is permitted with attribution. DATA-02 established this against the API's own OpenAPI document before committing `epex-be-dayahead-2025-09-01_2026-09-01.json`; both bodies below carry the same `license_info` string, recorded per file and asserted by the replay test.",
+ "attribution": "Data licensed CC BY 4.0 by Bundesnetzagentur | SMARD.de, retrieved via the Energy-Charts API (Fraunhofer ISE), https://energy-charts.info. Published without changes.",
+ "retrieved_utc": "2026-09-10T06:35:00+00:00 (TARIFF-08's two), 2026-09-10T07:45:49+00:00 (TARIFF-09's)",
+ "retrieved_with": "curl, by hand; no code in `app/` fetches these",
+ "shape": "COLUMNAR: parallel `unix_seconds` (UTC epoch seconds) and `price` arrays, plus `unit`, `license_info` and `deprecated`. There is no `data` key and no per-point object.",
+ "replayed_by": "test_price.py sections 2b (TARIFF-08) and 2c (TARIFF-09)",
+ "files": {
+  "energy-charts-be-price-2026-09-10-quarterhourly.json": {
+   "url": "https://api.energy-charts.info/price?bzn=BE",
+   "note": "the SHIPPED default URL of `generic_dayahead`, verbatim and with no parameters, so the replay drives the bytes the add-on's own request produces",
+   "covers_local_day": "2026-09-10 (Europe/Brussels)",
+   "granularity_s": 900,
+   "intervals": 96,
+   "bytes": 1877,
+   "sha256": "176309d0020ad208320797385ef68b6a98ac248218539416cddf6579dd060487",
+   "unit_as_returned": "EUR / MWh",
+   "licence_as_returned": "CC BY 4.0 (creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0) from Bundesnetzagentur | SMARD.de",
+   "deprecated_as_returned": false,
+   "top_level_keys": [
+    "deprecated",
+    "license_info",
+    "price",
+    "unit",
+    "unix_seconds"
+   ],
+   "also_returned_verbatim_by": {
+    "url": "https://api.energy-charts.info/price?bzn=BE&start=2026-09-10&end=2026-09-11",
+    "retrieved_utc": "2026-09-10T07:46:55+00:00",
+    "note": "TARIFF-09's PRE-PUBLICATION case, and it needed no second file because the answer was BYTE-IDENTICAL to the bare-URL capture above - the same 1877 bytes and the same sha256. Asked for two days at 09:46 CEST, before the ~13:00-14:00 CET auction publishes 2026-09-11, the feed returned the ONE day that exists. That is the short answer this card requires to stay a `series` of what exists rather than becoming `no_data`, and the replay re-derives the identity from the bytes rather than restating it."
+   }
+  },
+  "energy-charts-be-price-2025-09-10-hourly.json": {
+   "url": "https://api.energy-charts.info/price?bzn=BE&start=2025-09-10&end=2025-09-10",
+   "note": "a day BEFORE Belgium's 15-minute MTU (2025-10-01), so the same endpoint answers HOURLY. Kept because the parser must not assume either spacing, and a fixture at only one granularity cannot grade that",
+   "covers_local_day": "2025-09-10 (Europe/Brussels)",
+   "granularity_s": 3600,
+   "intervals": 24,
+   "bytes": 572,
+   "sha256": "03fe41690810df224611f4016899f856457f67a3c12c7654da17b1331ff2eff4",
+   "unit_as_returned": "EUR / MWh",
+   "licence_as_returned": "CC BY 4.0 (creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0) from Bundesnetzagentur | SMARD.de",
+   "deprecated_as_returned": false,
+   "top_level_keys": [
+    "deprecated",
+    "license_info",
+    "price",
+    "unit",
+    "unix_seconds"
+   ]
+  },
+  "energy-charts-be-price-2026-09-09_2026-09-10-twoday.json": {
+   "url": "https://api.energy-charts.info/price?bzn=BE&start=2026-09-09&end=2026-09-10",
+   "retrieved_utc": "2026-09-10T07:45:49+00:00",
+   "note": "TARIFF-09. A RANGE request, and the counterfactual the ticket is built on: `start`/`end` are INCLUSIVE Brussels calendar dates and this one answers 192 quarter-hours across TWO local days, where the bare `?bzn=BE` of the same endpoint answers 96 across one. The shipped `generic_dayahead` now derives these two dates from the `since`/`until` it is handed.",
+   "covers_local_days": [
+    "2026-09-09",
+    "2026-09-10"
+   ],
+   "granularity_s": 900,
+   "intervals": 192,
+   "bytes": 3579,
+   "sha256": "4d83f5efb4294a4a682562eac619bf35e45c95edde957bfa94c402e1777cc9b3",
+   "unit_as_returned": "EUR / MWh",
+   "licence_as_returned": "CC BY 4.0 (creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0) from Bundesnetzagentur | SMARD.de",
+   "deprecated_as_returned": false,
+   "top_level_keys": [
+    "deprecated",
+    "license_info",
+    "price",
+    "unit",
+    "unix_seconds"
+   ]
+  }
+ }
+}

goodwe_controller/test_clamp.py

@@ -74,6 +74,7 @@ Read MUTATION.md before you report a survivor.
 import asyncio
 import io
 import math
+import re
 import sys
 from datetime import datetime, timedelta, timezone
 
@@ -87,6 +88,7 @@ from app.arbiter import P_LOOP, Claim, UnitBounds, allocate, resolve
 from app.control import Tuning, compute
 from app.inverter import Inverter
 from app.main import Controller
+from app import shadow
 
 fails = []
 T0 = datetime(2026, 8, 30, 9, 0, 0, tzinfo=timezone.utc)
@@ -670,8 +672,15 @@ def arm(c, value):
 
 async def _direct():
     hass = _Hass(0.0)
+    # ⚠️ SAFETY-10: `shadow_mode: "off"` EXPLICITLY, BECAUSE THIS FIXTURE
+    # NEVER PRESSES START. The shipped default is `auto`, which is SHADOW
+    # MODE while control is stopped - so without this line the probe below
+    # would be graded against a controller that is correctly refusing to
+    # command anything, and the clamp it is here to exercise would never be
+    # reached. The shipped write path is unaffected: a stopped controller
+    # only ever writes 0 W in production, which shadow mode also writes.
     c = Controller({"setpoint_entity": "number.sp", "max_w": 2000,
-                    "meter_source": "off"},
+                    "meter_source": "off", "shadow_mode": "off"},
                    hass, _Store(), _Pub(), stop=asyncio.Event())
     c.dev_min, c.dev_max = -LIVE_MAX_W, LIVE_MAX_W
     # The shape the heartbeat, shutdown() and handle_action() all use - each one
@@ -1121,10 +1130,16 @@ A_UNIT, B_HYPO = "inverter-a", "inverter-b"
 
 
 def fresh(**over):
-    """A Controller with a stub HA, no cycle run, and therefore NO record."""
+    """A Controller with a stub HA, no cycle run, and therefore NO record.
+
+    ⚠️ SAFETY-10: `shadow_mode: "off"` for `_direct()`'s reason - this fixture
+    never presses Start, and the shipped default is shadow mode while control
+    is stopped. Part 7 grades who is allowed to reach the WIRE; a controller
+    that is correctly commanding nothing cannot answer that question.
+    """
     hass = _Hass(0.0)
     c = Controller(dict({"setpoint_entity": "number.sp", "max_w": 2000,
-                         "meter_source": "off"}, **over),
+                         "meter_source": "off", "shadow_mode": "off"}, **over),
                    hass, _Store(), _Pub(), stop=asyncio.Event())
     c.dev_min, c.dev_max = -LIVE_MAX_W, LIVE_MAX_W
     return hass, c
@@ -1414,6 +1429,432 @@ check("...and the numbers those cycles put on the wire are the arbiter's own "
       hass_r.writes and all(abs(w) <= LIVE_MAX_W for w in hass_r.writes))
 
 
+# --------------------------------------------------------------------------- #
+# 8. SAFETY-10 - SHADOW MODE: THE DECISION PATH RUNS AND NOTHING REACHES THE
+#    INVERTER
+# --------------------------------------------------------------------------- #
+# This part belongs in THIS file and not in a new one: shadow mode is a
+# substitution inside `_write_unit()`, one line below SAFETY-03's clamp and two
+# below SAFETY-28's gate, and the property it claims - "nothing reaches the
+# inverter" - is the same property parts 5 and 7 already grade from the other
+# side. The fake `set_number()` in this file IS the wire.
+#
+# ⚠️ EVERY CHECK BELOW IS GRADED ON THE WRITES OR ON THE RENDERED SURFACE, NOT
+# ON `Controller.shadow`. A check that asserted the flag would pass on a build
+# in which the flag is set and the substitution is deleted, which is precisely
+# the build this section exists to refuse.
+#
+# ⚠️ AND EVERY ONE OF THEM RUNS THE SAME STIMULUS IN BOTH MODES. MUTATION.md's
+# rule: a per-thing check that has never seen the things DISAGREE is a total.
+# `_s10_live` and `_s10_shadow` are the same 6000 W import through the same
+# `Controller.cycle()`; the only difference is one option.
+print("\n8. SAFETY-10 - shadow mode\n")
+
+
+def _s10(shadow_mode, *, auto=True, cycles=25, grid=6000.0, dev=None, **over):
+    """The same wired run as part 3, with `shadow_mode` and the start button.
+
+    ⚠️ `auto` IS A PARAMETER BECAUSE `shadow_mode: auto` READS IT. The three
+    values and the two button positions are six states and they are not all
+    the same state; the pure-function table over all six is in
+    `test_validate.py`, and 8f says why it is not here.
+    """
+    async def go():
+        hass = _Hass(grid, track=True)
+        c = Controller(dict(
+            {"setpoint_entity": "number.sp", "meter_entity": "sensor.grid",
+             "soc_entity": "sensor.soc", "batt_entity": "sensor.batt",
+             "meter_source": "off", "max_w": LIVE_MAX_W, "gain": 0.6,
+             "slew_w": 1000, "deadband_w": 15, "target_grid_w": 0,
+             "step_w": 10, "heartbeat_s": 10, "stale_input_s": 15,
+             "shadow_mode": shadow_mode},
+            **over), hass, _Store(), _Pub(), stop=asyncio.Event())
+        c.auto = auto
+        # `dev` narrows what the DEVICE says it will accept, which is the
+        # clamp's second stage - the only way to make the clamp engage on a
+        # target the loop has already bounded at `max_w`.
+        c.dev_min, c.dev_max = ((-LIVE_MAX_W, LIVE_MAX_W) if dev is None
+                                else (-dev, dev))
+        # ⚠️ CAPTURED PER CYCLE, BECAUSE THE HEARTBEAT OVERWRITES IT.
+        # `clamp_last` is assigned by every write, and the heartbeat below
+        # writes `inv.target` - 0 W in shadow mode - so the clamp's verdict on
+        # the DECISION is gone by the end of the run. Looking for it afterwards
+        # would grade the refresh instead of the cycle.
+        c.clamp_seen = []
+        for n in range(cycles):
+            await c.read_inputs()
+            await c.cycle()
+            if c.clamp_last is not None:
+                c.clamp_seen.append(c.clamp_last)
+            # ⚠️ THE HEARTBEAT IS DRIVEN HERE AND NOT LEFT OUT, BECAUSE IT IS
+            # THE HALF THAT PROVES SHADOW MODE IS NOT SILENCE. `_write_unit()`
+            # skips an unchanged value unless `force` is set, so a cycles-only
+            # fixture sees exactly ONE 0 W write and could not tell "holds the
+            # inverter at 0 W" from "wrote 0 W once and went quiet" - and the
+            # second of those leaves a real install's ESP32 in a tripped
+            # stale-input watchdog for the whole run. `heartbeat_s=0` makes
+            # every tick due, which is the shipped path with its clock wound
+            # forward rather than a second implementation of it.
+            await c.send_heartbeats(float(n), 0.0)
+        return hass, c
+    return asyncio.run(go())
+
+
+_live_h, _live_c = _s10("off")
+_shad_h, _shad_c = _s10("on")
+
+# --- 8a. THE PRECONDITION, WHICH IS THE HALF THAT MAKES THE REST MEAN ANYTHING
+# MUTATION.md habit 4: a check whose DATA cannot reach the failure it names is
+# decoration. "No non-zero value was written" is trivially true of a stimulus
+# that would not have produced one, so the same stimulus is first shown to
+# produce a large one with the option off.
+check("PRECONDITION: with shadow_mode off this stimulus really does drive the "
+      f"wire - {len(_live_h.writes)} writes, "
+      f"{len([w for w in _live_h.writes if w != 0.0])} of them non-zero, "
+      f"largest {max((abs(w) for w in _live_h.writes), default=0):.0f} W",
+      len([w for w in _live_h.writes if w != 0.0]) >= 10
+      and max((abs(w) for w in _live_h.writes), default=0) > 1000.0
+      and 0.0 not in _live_h.writes)
+
+# --- 8b. NOTHING THE DECISION PATH PRODUCED REACHES THE INVERTER -------------
+check("AC 1: in shadow mode EVERY value that reached set_number() is 0 W. "
+      f"Distinct values written: {sorted(set(_shad_h.writes))}",
+      _shad_h.writes and set(_shad_h.writes) == {0.0})
+
+# ⚠️ AND IT IS NOT SILENCE. The inverter holds its last command forever and the
+# ESP32's stale-input watchdog needs a refresh; a shadow mode that stopped
+# writing would leave a standing command up under a page saying nothing is
+# commanded. A check that only asserted "no non-zero write" would pass on that
+# build too - this is the half that separates them.
+check("...and it WROTE that 0 W rather than going silent, which is what keeps "
+      f"the inverter from holding its last command ({len(_shad_h.writes)} "
+      "writes)",
+      len(_shad_h.writes) >= 2)
+
+# --- 8c. THE DECISION PATH ACTUALLY RAN ------------------------------------
+# "Nothing reached the inverter" is also true of a controller that decided
+# nothing. Both halves, or the feature is an off switch with a long name.
+check("the full decision path still ran: the loop reached a target and the "
+      f"arbiter resolved one ({_shad_c.loop_w!r} W, "
+      f"would have commanded {_shad_c.shadow_would_w!r} W)",
+      _shad_c.loop_w is not None and abs(_shad_c.loop_w) > 500.0
+      and _shad_c.shadow_would_w is not None
+      and abs(_shad_c.shadow_would_w) > 500.0)
+check("...and the decision it recorded is a number a live controller would "
+      "have written - it is inside the rail and it is not the 0 W that went "
+      "on the wire",
+      _shad_c.shadow_would_w != 0.0
+      and abs(_shad_c.shadow_would_w) <= LIVE_MAX_W)
+
+# --- 8d. THE CARRIED COMMAND TRACKS THE WIRE, WHICH IS WHAT MAKES THE EXIT
+#         SAFE
+check("the carried site command is what is STANDING ON THE WIRE, not the "
+      f"decision ({_shad_c.target!r} W standing, "
+      f"{_shad_c.shadow_would_w!r} W decided)",
+      _shad_c.target == 0.0 and _shad_c.shadow_would_w != 0.0)
+check("...and every unit's share is too, so SAFETY-42's delivery watchdog is "
+      "not handed a share nothing was told to produce",
+      all(i.target == 0.0 for i in _shad_c.inverters))
+
+
+def _s10_exit(shadow_first):
+    """Run twelve cycles, force shadow mode off, take ONE more cycle.
+
+    Answers with `inv.last_write` either side of that boundary - WHAT STANDS ON
+    THE WIRE, updated only on an accepted write, which is the number the
+    inverter is actually latched on. Reading `hass.writes` instead would be
+    blind to the converged case, where the controller correctly re-sends
+    nothing at all.
+
+    ⚠️ THE COMPARISON IS AGAINST THE SAME RUN THAT NEVER ENTERED SHADOW MODE,
+    not against a constant. `slew_w` bounds a step from the standing command,
+    so "did it resume from the wire or from a fiction" is a question about a
+    DIFFERENCE, and a hard-coded expectation would be the number the code
+    produces compared with itself.
+    """
+    async def go():
+        hass = _Hass(6000.0, track=True)
+        c = Controller(
+            {"setpoint_entity": "number.sp", "meter_entity": "sensor.grid",
+             "soc_entity": "sensor.soc", "batt_entity": "sensor.batt",
+             "meter_source": "off", "max_w": LIVE_MAX_W, "gain": 0.6,
+             "slew_w": 1000, "deadband_w": 15, "target_grid_w": 0,
+             "step_w": 10, "heartbeat_s": 10, "stale_input_s": 15,
+             "shadow_mode": "on" if shadow_first else "off"},
+            hass, _Store(), _Pub(), stop=asyncio.Event())
+        c.auto = True
+        c.dev_min, c.dev_max = -LIVE_MAX_W, LIVE_MAX_W
+        for _ in range(12):
+            await c.read_inputs()
+            await c.cycle()
+        before = c.inverters[0].last_write
+        c.o["shadow_mode"] = "off"
+        await c.read_inputs()
+        await c.cycle()
+        # ⚠️ NOT `float()`. `last_write` is None until something is ACCEPTED,
+        # and a build in which shadow mode writes nothing at all would turn
+        # this fixture into a TypeError - which MUTATION.md's FCST-06 section
+        # is about: a traceback grades none of the checks after it AND reads
+        # like a survivor. It is handed back as None and named below instead.
+        return before, c.inverters[0].last_write, c
+    return asyncio.run(go())
+
+
+_exit_before, _exit_after, _exit_c = _s10_exit(True)
+_never_before, _never_after, _never_c = _s10_exit(False)
+print(f"    shadow run: standing {_exit_before!r} W -> {_exit_after!r} W on "
+      "the first live cycle")
+print(f"    never in shadow: standing {_never_before!r} W -> "
+      f"{_never_after!r} W on the same cycle")
+check("SOMETHING REACHED THE WIRE IN SHADOW MODE. `last_write` is set only on "
+      "an ACCEPTED write, so None here is the build that stops writing "
+      "altogether and leaves the inverter latched on its last command - the "
+      "failure shadow mode must not be a new way to reach",
+      _exit_before is not None and _exit_after is not None
+      and _never_before is not None and _never_after is not None)
+_exit_before = -1.0 if _exit_before is None else float(_exit_before)
+_exit_after = -1.0 if _exit_after is None else float(_exit_after)
+_never_before = 0.0 if _never_before is None else float(_never_before)
+_never_after = 0.0 if _never_after is None else float(_never_after)
+check("PRECONDITION: the two arrangements DISAGREE - the run that was never in "
+      "shadow mode is standing somewhere else entirely at that boundary, so "
+      "the comparison below is not a number against itself",
+      _never_before != _exit_before and abs(_never_before) > 1000.0)
+check("PRECONDITION: and the shadow run really was standing at 0 W, so the "
+      "step below is measured from the wire and not from a coincidence",
+      _exit_before == 0.0)
+check("AC 2, leaving: the first live command after shadow mode is one slew "
+      "step from the 0 W that was actually standing on the wire - NOT one step "
+      "from the decision shadow mode reached, which never existed at the "
+      f"battery. |{_exit_after:.0f}| <= slew 1000 W",
+      abs(_exit_after) <= 1000.0)
+check("...and the run that was never in shadow mode is NOT inside that bound "
+      "at the same cycle, which is what says the bound is a real constraint "
+      "here and not a property of the stimulus",
+      abs(_never_after) > 1000.0)
+
+
+def _s10_enter():
+    """Live first, then shadow mode, on a battery standing somewhere else."""
+    async def go():
+        hass = _Hass(6000.0, track=True)
+        c = Controller(
+            {"setpoint_entity": "number.sp", "meter_entity": "sensor.grid",
+             "soc_entity": "sensor.soc", "batt_entity": "sensor.batt",
+             "meter_source": "off", "max_w": LIVE_MAX_W, "gain": 0.6,
+             "slew_w": 1000, "deadband_w": 15, "target_grid_w": 0,
+             "step_w": 10, "heartbeat_s": 10, "stale_input_s": 15,
+             "shadow_mode": "off"}, hass, _Store(), _Pub(),
+            stop=asyncio.Event())
+        c.auto = True
+        c.dev_min, c.dev_max = -LIVE_MAX_W, LIVE_MAX_W
+        for _ in range(12):
+            await c.read_inputs()
+            await c.cycle()
+        standing = hass.writes[-1]
+        c.o["shadow_mode"] = "on"
+        await c.read_inputs()
+        await c.cycle()
+        # ⚠️ `inverters[0].last_write`, NOT `hass.writes[-1]`. The question is
+        # WHAT THE INVERTER IS LATCHED ON after the first shadow cycle, and a
+        # build that writes NOTHING leaves it latched on the live value while
+        # `hass.writes[-1]` still reads that same number - the two look
+        # identical from the write list and are opposite at the battery.
+        return standing, float(c.inverters[0].last_write), c
+    return asyncio.run(go())
+
+
+_stood, _first_shadow, _enter_c = _s10_enter()
+print(f"    standing when shadow mode came on: {_stood:.0f} W")
+check("PRECONDITION: the battery was standing at a real, non-zero command when "
+      "shadow mode was switched on - otherwise 'it reached 0 W' says nothing",
+      abs(_stood) > 500.0)
+check("AC 2, entering: after ONE shadow cycle the inverter is latched on 0 W, "
+      "not on what it was doing a cycle earlier. The inverter holds its last "
+      "command FOREVER, so a shadow mode that merely stopped writing would "
+      "leave that command standing under a page saying nothing is commanded "
+      f"({_stood:+.0f} W -> {_first_shadow:+.0f} W)",
+      _first_shadow == 0.0)
+
+# --- 8e. THE OTHER GUARDS ON THE WRITE PATH STILL OBSERVE --------------------
+# The substitution is the LAST thing before the wire, below SAFETY-28's gate and
+# below SAFETY-03's clamp, so both still grade the number the decision path
+# produced. A shadow run that could not say "it would have hit the rating here"
+# is answering a different question from the one it is for.
+_cl_h, _cl_c = _s10("on", cycles=12, grid=9000.0, dev=400.0)
+_cl_req = [r.requested_w for r in _cl_c.clamp_seen]
+print(f"    decision {_cl_c.shadow_would_w!r} W; what the clamp was asked "
+      f"about at each cycle boundary: {sorted(set(_cl_req))}")
+check("PRECONDITION: the decision is a real, non-zero number and the wire "
+      "carried only 0 W on this run, so the two are distinguishable",
+      _cl_c.shadow_would_w is not None and _cl_c.shadow_would_w != 0.0
+      and set(_cl_h.writes) == {0.0})
+check("SAFETY-03 still OBSERVES in shadow mode: the clamp was asked about the "
+      "number THE DECISION PATH PRODUCED, not about the 0 W that went on the "
+      "wire. That is what puts the substitution BELOW the clamp, and it is "
+      "what lets a shadow run report that the rating would have been hit",
+      _cl_req and all(r == _cl_c.shadow_would_w for r in _cl_req))
+check("...and the clamp's own alarm still ran on it - the winding-loop "
+      "engagement reached the action log on a run where nothing was commanded",
+      any("clamp" in e.lower() or "CLAMP" in e for e in _cl_c.events))
+check("SAFETY-28's gate still OBSERVES too - it refused nothing on this run, "
+      "which is the same answer it gives live, so shadow mode has not been "
+      "implemented by making every write unauthorised",
+      not [e for e in _cl_c.events if "WRITE REFUSED" in e])
+
+# ⚠️ AND SAFETY-18 IS GRADED ON WHAT IT WAS HANDED, WHICH IS AN ORDERING
+# CLAIM. `check_meter_frozen()` takes `self.target` - the arbiter's RESOLVED
+# INTENT - and `_shadow_settle()` re-seeds that to 0 W at the very end of the
+# cycle, AFTER it. Re-seed one line earlier and the freeze detector grades a
+# 0 W that no decision produced: its conjunction needs a command at the rail,
+# so it goes permanently blind and the whole suite stays green. The detector's
+# own `evaluate` is wrapped here because the arguments are the only place that
+# ordering is observable.
+_fz_seen = []
+_fz_real = _shad_c.freeze_wd.evaluate
+
+
+def _fz_spy(unchanged, target, *a, **k):
+    _fz_seen.append(target)
+    return _fz_real(unchanged, target, *a, **k)
+
+
+_shad_c.freeze_wd.evaluate = _fz_spy
+
+
+async def _one_more():
+    await _shad_c.read_inputs()
+    await _shad_c.cycle()
+
+
+asyncio.run(_one_more())
+_shad_c.freeze_wd.evaluate = _fz_real
+print(f"    SAFETY-18 was handed: {_fz_seen}")
+check("PRECONDITION: the freeze detector was consulted at all on that cycle",
+      len(_fz_seen) == 1)
+check("SAFETY-18 still OBSERVES the DECISION: it is handed the arbiter's "
+      "resolved intent, not the 0 W the wire gate substituted. Re-seeding one "
+      "line earlier would hand it a command no decision produced and its "
+      "conjunction - a command at the rail against a meter that has stopped "
+      "moving - could never be satisfied again",
+      _fz_seen and _fz_seen[0] == _shad_c.shadow_would_w
+      and _fz_seen[0] != shadow.WIRE_W)
+
+# --- 8f. THE MODE TABLE LIVES IN test_validate.py ---------------------------
+# `shadow.engaged()` is a pure function of the option and the start button, and
+# the six states it answers for are graded beside the rule that validates the
+# option - not here, where a defeat of the DEFAULT stops part 3's wired run
+# reaching the wire at all and takes this whole file down before part 8 runs.
+# ⚠️ THAT IS MEASURED, NOT ANTICIPATED: the mutation that makes `auto` resolve
+# to shadow unconditionally aborts part 3 with an IndexError, so its red count
+# here is a LOWER BOUND and none of part 8 is graded (MUTATION.md, FCST-06).
+
+# --- 8g. THE OPERATOR STOP, WHICH IS THE ONE FAILSAFE THIS CARD CHANGES ------
+_stop_live_h, _stop_live_c = _s10("off", auto=False, cycles=6)
+_stop_shad_h, _stop_shad_c = _s10("auto", auto=False, cycles=6)
+print(f"    stopped, shadow off: {_stop_live_c.reason!r}")
+print(f"    stopped, shadow on : {_stop_shad_c.reason!r}")
+check("PRECONDITION: with shadow mode off, a stopped controller files the "
+      "P_SAFETY stop claim and the arbiter resolves to THAT source, at 0 W",
+      _stop_live_c.reason.startswith("safety")
+      and _stop_live_c.target == 0.0)
+check("in shadow mode that claim is NOT filed, so the arbiter resolves to the "
+      "REAL winner and the recorded decision is the real one. A P_SAFETY claim "
+      "out-ranks everything - left in, every shadow run would answer the wrong "
+      f"question ({_stop_shad_c.reason!r})",
+      _stop_shad_c.reason.startswith("loop")
+      and _stop_shad_c.shadow_would_w is not None
+      and abs(_stop_shad_c.shadow_would_w) > 0.0)
+check("...and the actuator ends at exactly the same place either way, because "
+      "the substitution that replaced the claim is STRICTLY STRONGER: a claim "
+      "can be out-ranked and a wire gate cannot",
+      set(_stop_shad_h.writes) == {0.0} == set(_stop_live_h.writes))
+
+# --- 8h. THE RENDERED SURFACE (TARIFF-11's pattern) -------------------------
+# Graded on `status_payload()`, which IS the status page: web.py's `PAGE` is a
+# static shell whose banner and rows are filled from this JSON. Named slots, not
+# substring tests, so a transposition moves a slot.
+_ROW = "Shadow mode"
+_shad_pay = _shad_c.status_payload()
+_live_pay = _live_c.status_payload()
+_shad_rows = dict(_shad_pay["rows"])
+_live_rows = dict(_live_pay["rows"])
+print(f"    banner: {_shad_pay['banner']!r}")
+print(f"    row   : {_shad_rows.get(_ROW)!r}")
+check("the status page has a Shadow mode row in BOTH states, so its ABSENCE is "
+      "never how an operator learns which one they are in",
+      _ROW in _shad_rows and _ROW in _live_rows)
+check("AC 3: the banner states plainly that the battery is not being "
+      "controlled",
+      "SHADOW MODE" in _shad_pay["banner"]
+      and "NOT being controlled" in _shad_pay["banner"])
+check("...and it is not green. A page that reads `ok` while nothing is being "
+      "commanded is the 'looks healthy but is inert' failure itself",
+      _shad_pay["level"] == "warn")
+check("...and it is FIRST in the cascade: the same controller has other "
+      "conditions to report and none of them displaces this sentence",
+      _live_pay["banner"] != _shad_pay["banner"]
+      and "SHADOW MODE" not in _live_pay["banner"])
+_slot = re.search(r"WOULD HAVE COMMANDED ([-+][\d ]+) W, inverter held at "
+                  r"([-\d]+) W", _shad_rows[_ROW])
+check("the row answers 'what would it have done' with a NUMBER in its own "
+      "named slot, and says where the inverter actually is in a second one - "
+      "two slots in one sentence, so a transposition moves them",
+      _slot is not None)
+if _slot is not None:
+    _would = float(_slot.group(1).replace(" ", ""))
+    check("...and that number is the decision the path reached, not the 0 W "
+          f"standing on the wire ({_would:.0f} vs {_shad_c.target:.0f})",
+          _would == round(float(_shad_c.shadow_would_w))
+          and _would != _shad_c.target)
+    check("...and the second slot is the STANDING command, so the two cannot "
+          "be read as one number",
+          float(_slot.group(2)) == 0.0)
+check("the row answers 'and why' by carrying the arbiter's own sentence, "
+      "rather than a re-derivation of it",
+      _shad_c.reason in _shad_rows[_ROW])
+check("with shadow mode off the row says so, and says what follows from it - "
+      "which is the arrangement that makes the one above a claim about this "
+      "controller and not about the string",
+      "NOT in shadow mode" in _live_rows[_ROW]
+      and "DOES reach the inverter" in _live_rows[_ROW]
+      and "WOULD HAVE COMMANDED" not in _live_rows[_ROW])
+
+# ⚠️ A STANDING LATCH IS NAMED RATHER THAN HIDDEN. The shadow banner sits above
+# the three `bad` branches, so it has to carry what they would have said - a
+# latch that is up while the controller is inert is up the moment it stops
+# being inert.
+_shad_c.inverters[0].sign_wd.tripped = True
+_latched = _shad_c.status_payload()
+print(f"    banner with a latch up: {_latched['banner']!r}")
+check("a failsafe latch that is standing is NAMED in the shadow banner and "
+      "turns it red, so nobody turns shadow mode off into a battery that will "
+      "not move and a page that never mentioned why",
+      _latched["level"] == "bad"
+      and "LATCH IS STILL UP" in _latched["banner"]
+      and _shad_c.inverters[0].name in _latched["banner"])
+check("...and it still says the battery is not being controlled, so the latch "
+      "has not displaced the sentence that may never be displaced",
+      "NOT being controlled" in _latched["banner"])
+_shad_c.inverters[0].sign_wd.tripped = False
+
+# --- 8i. THE RECORD A LATER ANALYSIS READS ----------------------------------
+# A shadow run is only worth running if it answers "what would it have done,
+# and why" AFTERWARDS, from the 40-row action log, and not only on a page
+# somebody happened to be looking at.
+_shadow_lines = [e for e in _shad_c.events if "SHADOW" in e]
+print(f"    action log, shadow lines: {len(_shadow_lines)} of "
+      f"{len(_shad_c.events)}")
+check("the action log records that shadow mode came on, in words",
+      any("SHADOW MODE ON" in e for e in _shadow_lines))
+check("...and what it would have commanded, with the arbiter's reason beside "
+      "it",
+      any("would have commanded" in e and "loop" in e for e in _shadow_lines))
+check("...EDGE-logged, not level-logged: 25 cycles did not flush the 40-row "
+      "log that has to carry the context of what the run found",
+      len(_shadow_lines) < 25 and len(_shad_c.events) <= 40)
+
+
 print()
 if fails:
     print(f"{len(fails)} FAILED: {', '.join(fails)}")

goodwe_controller/test_defaults_pin.py

@@ -7,7 +7,7 @@ WHAT UX-01 AC 4 ASKED FOR, IN ITS OWN WORDS: "every `schema:` key absent from
 check, not a grep."
 
 WHAT SHIPPED. Clause one is VACUOUS: `options:` and `schema:` declare the same
-71 keys, so "every schema key absent from options" quantifies over the empty set
+72 keys, so "every schema key absent from options" quantifies over the empty set
 and is true of any tree, including one with no defaults at all. Clause two -
 "the table changed goes red" - does work, six times over, once per mirror in its
 own suite. Clause three, THE ONE WITH THE CONTENT, was never written. The only

goodwe_controller/test_inverter.py

@@ -224,9 +224,18 @@ A_RATING = 5000.0
 # had become so; validate.py rule 10 refused it the day it existed, which is
 # what a rule about a relationship is for. 0 means "follow the rail"
 # (`control.SLEW_RAIL_FRAC * max_w`) and is what config.yaml ships.
+# ⚠️ SAFETY-10: `shadow_mode="off"` EXPLICITLY, BECAUSE NOTHING HERE PRESSES
+# START. The shipped default is `auto`, which is SHADOW MODE while control is
+# stopped - and in shadow mode every write is substituted with 0 W at the one
+# choke point these parts grade. Without this line the per-unit clamp, the
+# per-unit write budget and the per-unit heartbeat would all be measured on a
+# controller that is correctly refusing to command anything, which is a
+# different (and vacuous) claim. The shipped write path is unaffected: a
+# stopped controller only ever writes 0 W in production anyway.
 BASE_OPTS = dict(A_ENT, meter_source="off", meter_entity="sensor.grid",
                  max_w=A_RATING, gain=0.6, slew_w=0, deadband_w=15,
-                 target_grid_w=0, step_w=10, heartbeat_s=10, stale_input_s=15)
+                 target_grid_w=0, step_w=10, heartbeat_s=10, stale_input_s=15,
+                 shadow_mode="off")
 
 
 def built(opts=None, store=None, hass=None, second=None):

goodwe_controller/test_packshare.py

@@ -1067,14 +1067,19 @@ class _V:
 
 _here = _Pt(_NOW)
 _other = _Pt(_NOW - timedelta(hours=3))
+# SAFETY-45's `headroom_w` is the last positional. It is set to a value that
+# CANNOT BIND on either call - larger than every sizing below - so this part
+# goes on grading OPT-09's per-pack sizing and not the capacity-tariff cap that
+# now sits beside it. test_arbitrage.py section 3b is where it is made to bind.
+_CLEAR_W = 1e9
 _sell = arbitrage._act(_Plan(_here), _NOW, _V(_other, _here), 60.0,
-                       0.0, 0.0, 20.0, 90.0)
+                       0.0, 0.0, 20.0, 90.0, _CLEAR_W)
 _sell_ok = arbitrage._act(_Plan(_here), _NOW, _V(_other, _here), 60.0,
-                          0.0, 4600.0, 20.0, 90.0)
+                          0.0, 4600.0, 20.0, 90.0, _CLEAR_W)
 _buy = arbitrage._act(_Plan(_here), _NOW, _V(_here, _other), 60.0,
-                      0.0, 0.0, 20.0, 90.0)
+                      0.0, 0.0, 20.0, 90.0, _CLEAR_W)
 _buy_ok = arbitrage._act(_Plan(_here), _NOW, _V(_here, _other), 60.0, 5000.0,
-                         0.0, 20.0, 90.0)
+                         0.0, 20.0, 90.0, _CLEAR_W)
 print(f"    sized at 0 W: sell -> {_sell.action}, buy -> {_buy.action}; "
       f"sized at a rating: sell -> {_sell_ok.action}, buy -> {_buy_ok.action}")
 check("⚠️ A TRADE NOTHING CAN TAKE IS NOT A TRADE. A 0 W sizing IDLES on both "

goodwe_controller/test_peakguard.py

@@ -138,8 +138,8 @@ from app.peakguard import (
     BLIND_COVERAGE, BLIND_FROZEN, BLIND_NO_BLOCK, CEILING_CAP,
     CEILING_MONTH_PEAK, FLOOR_AT_SOC_FLOOR, FLOOR_SOC_UNREADABLE,
     PEAK_OPTION_DEFAULTS, Pack, PeakDecision, binding_soc_floor, blindness,
-    decide, discharge_permitted, excess_w, pack_floor_pct, pack_permissions,
-    quarter_ceiling_w, uncovered_s,
+    charge_headroom_w, decide, discharge_permitted, excess_w, pack_floor_pct,
+    pack_permissions, quarter_ceiling_w, uncovered_s,
 )
 from app.validate import validate_startup_config
 from app.tariff import (
@@ -379,8 +379,17 @@ check("at the engagement boundary the excess is zero, so the floor is exactly "
 released = decide(p_edge, batt_w=BATT_NOW, cap_w=CAP_W, reading=None,
                   achievable_w=LIVE_MAX_W, max_hold_s=MAX_HOLD_S, soc=SOC_OK, soc_floor=SOC_FLOOR)
 would_release_on_excess = excess_w(p_edge, CEIL) <= 0.0
+# ⚠️ `floor_w` IS FORMATTED DEFENSIVELY, AND MUTATION.md's OWN LEDGER IS WHY.
+# The mutation this check exists for - reverting the `floor > 0` rung to
+# `excess > 0` - makes `floor_w` None HERE, so a bare `:.0f` raises TypeError
+# and ABORTS THE WHOLE FILE on the line after the check that just went red.
+# Parts 2-13 are then ungraded and the recorded coverage of that mutation is
+# smaller than the truth: exactly what MAINT-05's `delinquent(...)['b']`
+# subscript did to test_delivery.py, and habit 5 ("a check whose failure mode
+# is a hang - or a crash - needs a deadline, or a name") in the other costume.
 print(f"    at the boundary: excess {e_edge:.3f} W (an `excess > 0` test would "
-      f"RELEASE: {would_release_on_excess}), floor {released.floor_w:.0f} W "
+      f"RELEASE: {would_release_on_excess}), floor "
+      f"{'(none)' if released.floor_w is None else f'{released.floor_w:.0f} W'} "
       f"(the shipped `floor > 0` test holds: {released.engaged})")
 check("...and the claim is held there, not released. `excess` falls to zero as "
       "soon as the battery is already taking the watts, so thresholding IT is "
@@ -5947,6 +5956,281 @@ check("...and the row is green and un-warned, which is what makes the "
       "operator scrolls past", _rows38[0]["ok"] and not _rows38[0]["warn"]
       and _S38_CEIL_W - _S38_PROJ.projected_w == 2713.0)
 
+# ==============================================================================
+print()
+print("13. SAFETY-45 - charge_headroom_w(): the number decide() used to throw "
+      "away")
+# ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
+# `decide()` computes `wanted = batt_w + excess` - the DISCHARGE that lands the
+# quarter exactly on the ceiling - and returns `engaged=False, floor_w=None`
+# the moment that number is not positive. A negative `wanted` is not "nothing
+# to say": it is a permitted CHARGE of `-wanted` W, and discarding it is what
+# let an arbitrage charge sit at max_w against a quarter it was blowing.
+#
+# ⚠️ NOTHING IN decide() CHANGES IN THIS CARD, AND THAT IS THE POINT. The
+# `wanted <= 0` branch is 2026-08-20's anti-bang-bang rung and part 6's replay
+# is what proves it still holds; this part grades a PURE READ of the number it
+# already carried. 13g asserts the branch is still there rather than trusting
+# the diff.
+# ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+def _proj_at(net_w, elapsed):
+    return PeakTracker.project(averager_at(net_w, elapsed),
+                               B + timedelta(seconds=elapsed))
+
+
+def _decide_on(projection, *, batt_w, soc=SOC_OK, cap_w=CAP_W,
+               achievable_w=LIVE_MAX_W, reading=None, frozen=False):
+    return decide(projection, batt_w=batt_w, cap_w=cap_w, reading=reading,
+                  achievable_w=achievable_w, soc=soc, soc_floor=SOC_FLOOR,
+                  max_hold_s=MAX_HOLD_S, frozen=frozen)
+
+
+def _decide_at(net_w, elapsed, **kw):
+    return _decide_on(_proj_at(net_w, elapsed), **kw)
+
+
+def _avg_held(base_w, elapsed, held_w, *, start=B, step=5.0):
+    """`elapsed` seconds BANKED at `base_w`, then `held_w` standing at the edge.
+
+    ⚠️ THE HISTORY AND THE HELD VALUE ARE SEPARATE FIXTURE AXES, and 13c is why
+    this helper exists rather than `averager_at(load - batt, ...)`. The averager
+    credits a sample from its own timestamp to the NEXT one, so the last sample
+    contributes ZERO accumulated seconds and only becomes `held`. That is the
+    real shape of a battery whose command changed a moment ago - the quarter's
+    banked seconds do not retroactively change - and a fixture that moved the
+    whole history with it would be grading a different quarter each time.
+    """
+    a = QuarterAverager(phases=1, max_hold_s=MAX_HOLD_S)
+    t = 0.0
+    while t < elapsed:
+        a.add(sample(start + timedelta(seconds=t), base_w))
+        t += step
+    a.add(sample(start + timedelta(seconds=elapsed), held_w))
+    return a
+
+
+# --- 13a. the number, and it is DERIVED rather than read back ---------------
+# The house is flat at 2600 W under a 3500 W cap, the battery is idle, and 300 s
+# of the block are banked. 600 s remain, so the block can still absorb
+# 900 W x 900/600 = 1350 W of extra offtake and finish exactly on the ceiling.
+_H45_GAP = 900.0
+_H45_LOAD = CAP_W - _H45_GAP
+_H45_EL, _H45_REM = 300.0, QUARTER_S - 300.0
+_h45_idle = _decide_at(_H45_LOAD, _H45_EL, batt_w=0.0)
+_h45_head = charge_headroom_w(_h45_idle)
+# The CONSEQUENCE, computed from the fixture's own literals and not from the
+# module's arithmetic: hold that charge for the rest of the block and the
+# BILLED AVERAGE is the ceiling. This is the meaning of the number, which is a
+# different statement from the expression that produces it (habit 2).
+_H45_FINAL = (_H45_LOAD * _H45_EL
+              + (_H45_LOAD + _h45_head) * _H45_REM) / QUARTER_S
+print(f"    house {_H45_LOAD:.0f} W under a {CAP_W:.0f} W cap, battery 0 W, "
+      f"{_H45_EL:.0f} s banked: engaged={_h45_idle.engaged}, "
+      f"wanted={_h45_idle.wanted_w:+.0f} W, headroom={_h45_head:.0f} W")
+print(f"    holding that charge for the remaining {_H45_REM:.0f} s bills the "
+      f"block at {_H45_FINAL:.1f} W against a {CAP_W:.0f} W ceiling")
+check("the guard files NOTHING here - this is the shipped `wanted <= 0` branch, "
+      "untouched, and the state SAFETY-45 is about",
+      not _h45_idle.engaged and _h45_idle.floor_w is None
+      and _h45_idle.wanted_w is not None and _h45_idle.wanted_w < 0.0)
+check(f"...and yet the quarter can afford {_h45_head:.0f} W of charging, which "
+      f"is the number that was being discarded. Graded by its CONSEQUENCE - "
+      f"the block lands on the ceiling to the watt - rather than by "
+      f"re-deriving -wanted_w with the module's own formula",
+      near(_H45_FINAL, CAP_W, 0.5))
+check(f"...and it is none of the other numbers this fixture has: not the cap "
+      f"({CAP_W:.0f}), not max_w ({LIVE_MAX_W:.0f}), not the house "
+      f"({_H45_LOAD:.0f}) and not the raw gap under the ceiling "
+      f"({_H45_GAP:.0f}) - the 900/remaining gain is 1.5 here and a check that "
+      f"could not tell those apart would be decoration",
+      not any(near(_h45_head, v, 1.0)
+              for v in (CAP_W, LIVE_MAX_W, _H45_LOAD, _H45_GAP)))
+
+# --- 13a2. AND THE IDENTITY HOLDS ACROSS THE WHOLE BLOCK --------------------
+# ⚠️ THE AMPLIFICATION IS REAL AND IT IS REPORTED WITH ITS SIZE (habit 13).
+# 900/remaining reaches 180 in the last five seconds, so the headroom there is
+# enormous - and it is bounded in EFFECT, not in magnitude: at every elapsed,
+# holding it bills the block at exactly the ceiling.
+H45_ID = []
+for _el in (0.0, 60.0, 300.0, 600.0, 870.0, 895.0):
+    _rem = QUARTER_S - _el
+    _hd = charge_headroom_w(_decide_at(_H45_LOAD, _el, batt_w=0.0))
+    H45_ID.append((_el, _hd,
+                   (_H45_LOAD * _el + (_H45_LOAD + _hd) * _rem) / QUARTER_S))
+print("    headroom across the block (elapsed, headroom W, billed W): "
+      + ", ".join(f"({a:.0f}, {b:.0f}, {c:.1f})" for a, b, c in H45_ID))
+check("at EVERY point in the block, holding the headroom for the rest of it "
+      "bills the block at exactly the ceiling - so the 162 kW answer five "
+      "seconds from the boundary and the 900 W answer at the top of it are the "
+      "same statement about the bill",
+      all(near(c, CAP_W, 0.5) for _, _, c in H45_ID))
+check("...and the fixture SPANS the amplification rather than sitting in one "
+      f"corner of it: the headroom moves by a factor of "
+      f"{max(b for _, b, _ in H45_ID) / min(b for _, b, _ in H45_ID):.0f} "
+      f"across those six points",
+      max(b for _, b, _ in H45_ID) > 100.0 * min(b for _, b, _ in H45_ID))
+
+# --- 13b. HOLDING implies ZERO OR UNKNOWN, swept - the family, not one case -
+# ⚠️ THE PROPERTY THAT MAKES THIS SAFE TO HAND A STRATEGY. Every state that
+# files a claim has `wanted > 0`, `wanted is None` or `blind`, so this function
+# can never hand a caller permission the guard's own `lo` is at that instant
+# refusing. Swept over the same grid part 5's no-negative-floor proof uses,
+# widened with the two ways a cycle can fail to measure at all.
+H45_N = H45_BAD = H45_POS = H45_NONE = H45_ZERO = 0
+for _load in (0.0, CAP_W - 500.0, CAP_W, CAP_W + 300.0, CAP_W + 3000.0,
+              LIVE_MAX_W * 3):
+    for _el in (30.0, 450.0, 870.0):
+        for _bw in (-LIVE_MAX_W, -2000.0, 0.0, 400.0, 4000.0, None):
+            for _sc in (None, BMS_FLOOR, SOC_FLOOR, SOC_FLOOR + 0.5, 100.0):
+                for _fz in (False, True):
+                    _d45 = _decide_at(_load, _el, batt_w=_bw, soc=_sc,
+                                      frozen=_fz)
+                    _hr = charge_headroom_w(_d45)
+                    H45_N += 1
+                    if _hr is None:
+                        H45_NONE += 1
+                    elif _hr > 0.0:
+                        H45_POS += 1
+                    else:
+                        H45_ZERO += 1
+                    if _d45.engaged and _hr not in (None, 0.0):
+                        H45_BAD += 1
+print(f"    swept {H45_N} (load x elapsed x battery x SoC x frozen) "
+      f"combinations: {H45_BAD} ENGAGED decisions answering a positive "
+      f"headroom; {H45_POS} permit charging, {H45_ZERO} answer 0 W, "
+      f"{H45_NONE} unmeasured")
+check(f"NOT ONE of the {H45_N} combinations answers a positive headroom while "
+      f"the guard is ENGAGED. A decision whose `lo` is at that instant "
+      f"forbidding charging can never be read as permission to charge",
+      H45_BAD == 0 and H45_N > 800)
+check("...and the sweep is vacuous in no direction: it reaches decisions that "
+      f"permit charging ({H45_POS}), decisions that permit none ({H45_ZERO}) "
+      f"and decisions nothing measured ({H45_NONE}), so all three answers are "
+      f"exercised", H45_POS > 0 and H45_ZERO > 0 and H45_NONE > 0)
+
+# --- 13c. IT IS INVARIANT IN THE BATTERY, WHICH IS WHY SIZING A TRADE TO IT
+#          CANNOT OSCILLATE -------------------------------------------------
+# Raise the charge by dW and the METER rises by dW, so `excess` rises by exactly
+# dW while `batt_w` falls by dW: `wanted` does not move. The headroom is a
+# FEED-FORWARD number - a function of the house, the ceiling and the seconds
+# already banked - so consuming it adds no feedback path around the plant.
+# Without this property the whole fix would be one loop replacing another.
+H45_INV, H45_EX = [], []
+for _bw in (-LIVE_MAX_W, -2000.0, -500.0, 0.0, 500.0, 2000.0):
+    # ONE banked history, and the battery's change visible only in the HELD
+    # value - which is what a command given a moment ago actually looks like.
+    _d = _decide_on(PeakTracker.project(
+        _avg_held(_H45_LOAD, _H45_EL, _H45_LOAD - _bw),
+        B + timedelta(seconds=_H45_EL)), batt_w=_bw)
+    H45_INV.append(charge_headroom_w(_d))
+    H45_EX.append(round(_d.excess_w, 1))
+print(f"    same house, same banked quarter, battery {-LIVE_MAX_W:+.0f}.."
+      f"{2000.0:+.0f} W: headroom {[round(v, 3) for v in H45_INV]}")
+print(f"    ...while the EXCESS those runs see is {H45_EX}")
+check("the headroom does NOT move when the battery moves across the whole "
+      "range of what it can do - it is a property of the HOUSE and the "
+      "CEILING, not of what the battery happens to be doing, which is what "
+      "makes a trade sized from it feed-forward rather than a second loop "
+      "around the plant",
+      max(H45_INV) - min(H45_INV) < 1.0)
+check(f"...and the fixture SEPARATES it from the two quantities it is built "
+      f"out of: the battery moved {LIVE_MAX_W + 2000.0:.0f} W and the excess "
+      f"with it, over {len(set(H45_EX))} distinct values, so an implementation "
+      f"answering `-batt_w` or `abs(excess)` would give six different answers "
+      f"here (habit 4)",
+      len(set(H45_EX)) == len(H45_EX)
+      and len(set(round(v, 3) for v in H45_INV)) == 1)
+
+# --- 13d. AND A BOUNDARY HANDS IT BACK AT THE AFFORDABLE RATE, NOT AT max_w --
+# ⚠️ SAFETY-45's SECOND HALF, AND THE CLAIM IS NOT "IT DOES NOT CHANGE".
+# `project()` resets to the held level at `elapsed = 0`, and the headroom
+# collapses with it - from 162 kW to 900 W here. What the card is about is WHAT
+# IT COLLAPSES TO: the house and the cap, and nothing else. The behaviour being
+# removed re-armed at `max_w` regardless of either.
+_H45_END = charge_headroom_w(_decide_at(_H45_LOAD, 895.0, batt_w=0.0))
+_H45_TOP = charge_headroom_w(_decide_at(_H45_LOAD, 0.0, batt_w=0.0))
+print(f"    across a boundary, same house: {_H45_END:.0f} W with 5 s of the "
+      f"old quarter left -> {_H45_TOP:.0f} W with the new one 0 s old, against "
+      f"a max_w of {LIVE_MAX_W:.0f} W")
+check(f"at the top of the new quarter the headroom is exactly the ceiling less "
+      f"the house ({CAP_W:.0f} - {_H45_LOAD:.0f} = {_H45_GAP:.0f} W). A trade "
+      f"refused at 14:59 resumes at 15:00 at the rate the new quarter can "
+      f"afford - the projection resets, this does not reset TO max_w",
+      near(_H45_TOP, _H45_GAP, 1.0) and _H45_TOP < LIVE_MAX_W)
+check("...and the check is not passing because nothing moved: the headroom on "
+      "the other side of that boundary is two orders of magnitude larger, and "
+      "the PROJECTION really did reset",
+      _H45_END > 100.0 * _H45_TOP and _proj_at(_H45_LOAD, 0.0).elapsed_s < 1.0)
+
+# --- 13e. the unmeasured answers, and None is NOT unlimited -----------------
+_h45_nobatt = _decide_at(_H45_LOAD, _H45_EL, batt_w=None)
+_h45_blind = _decide_at(_H45_LOAD, _H45_EL, batt_w=0.0, frozen=True)
+print(f"    no battery reading: {charge_headroom_w(_h45_nobatt)}; "
+      f"BLIND: {charge_headroom_w(_h45_blind)}; no decision at all: "
+      f"{charge_headroom_w(None)}")
+check("a guard that never ran answers None, not a number - `meter_source: off` "
+      "reaches this with no decision at all and a caller that read it as a "
+      "large headroom would be guard_state()'s None-is-not-False collapse one "
+      "layer down", charge_headroom_w(None) is None)
+check("...and a cycle with NO BATTERY MEASUREMENT answers None too: there is "
+      "nothing to size a floor from, so there is nothing to size a trade from "
+      "either", charge_headroom_w(_h45_nobatt) is None
+      and _h45_nobatt.wanted_w is None)
+check("...and BLIND answers 0.0 - a NUMBER, and the number is no charging. "
+      "The claim it files already says exactly that at `floor 0 W`, and this "
+      "agrees with it rather than restating it",
+      charge_headroom_w(_h45_blind) == 0.0 and _h45_blind.blind
+      and _h45_blind.floor_w == 0.0)
+check("...and the three are TOLD APART: blind is 0.0 and the two unmeasured "
+      "states are None, so a caller can refuse for the reason that is true "
+      "rather than for whichever fired first",
+      charge_headroom_w(_h45_blind) is not None
+      and charge_headroom_w(_h45_nobatt) is None)
+
+# --- 13f. the SoC floor does not become charging permission -----------------
+# ⚠️ THE ONE ENGAGED STATE WHERE THE GUARD IS DELIBERATELY NOT DISCHARGING.
+# SAFETY-24's floor-limited decision files `lo = 0.0` - "charging stays
+# blocked" - on a quarter that IS over the ceiling. If that read as headroom,
+# an empty pack in a blown quarter would be told to buy.
+_h45_lim = _decide_at(CAP_W + 2000.0, _H45_EL, batt_w=0.0, soc=SOC_FLOOR - 1.0)
+print(f"    floor-limited over a blown quarter: engaged={_h45_lim.engaged}, "
+      f"floor_limited={_h45_lim.floor_limited}, wanted="
+      f"{_h45_lim.wanted_w:+.0f} W, headroom={charge_headroom_w(_h45_lim)}")
+check("a FLOOR-LIMITED decision - the guard wanted a discharge and SoC refused "
+      "to size it - answers 0.0 headroom. The quarter is over the ceiling; the "
+      "pack being empty is not a reason to fill it from the grid in it",
+      _h45_lim.floor_limited and _h45_lim.engaged
+      and charge_headroom_w(_h45_lim) == 0.0)
+
+# --- 13g. decide() ITSELF IS UNCHANGED, PINNED -----------------------------
+# ⚠️ MUTATION.md habit 4, in the direction a diff cannot cover. The whole safety
+# argument of this card is "the 2026-08-20 rung is still there and part 6 still
+# grades it". That is a claim about the SOURCE, so it is pinned on the source -
+# and on the BEHAVIOUR, because a shape pin alone would pass a rung that had
+# been inverted.
+_H45_SRC = (HERE / "app" / "peakguard.py").read_text(encoding="utf-8")
+_H45_TREE = ast.parse(_H45_SRC)
+_h45_fn = next(n for n in ast.walk(_H45_TREE)
+               if isinstance(n, ast.FunctionDef) and n.name == "decide")
+_H45_RUNG = [n for n in ast.walk(_h45_fn) if isinstance(n, ast.If)
+             and ast.unparse(n.test) == "wanted <= 0.0"]
+check("the `wanted <= 0.0` rung is still in decide(), spelled exactly that "
+      "way, on the AST rather than as a substring - it is the rung whose "
+      "removal put 2026-08-20's quarter 49 W over the limit after seventeen "
+      "engage/release cycles in 900 s", len(_H45_RUNG) == 1)
+check("...and it still DISENGAGES rather than merely reporting: the fixture "
+      "13a is built on reaches it and files no claim, so the pin above is not "
+      "grading a rung that has been inverted under it",
+      peakguard.claim(_h45_idle) is None)
+_h45_head_fn = next(n for n in _H45_TREE.body if isinstance(n, ast.FunctionDef)
+                    and n.name == "charge_headroom_w")
+check("...and charge_headroom_w() is a PURE READ of the decision - one "
+      "positional parameter, no projection, no clock and no options - so it "
+      "cannot become a second answer to the question decide() already answers",
+      [a.arg for a in _h45_head_fn.args.args] == ["decision"]
+      and not _h45_head_fn.args.kwonlyargs)
+
 # ==============================================================================
 print()
 shutil.rmtree(TMP, ignore_errors=True)

goodwe_controller/test_price_forecast.py

@@ -289,22 +289,29 @@ check("...and never repairs a flag: the audit's only outcomes are silence and "
                                        for i, u in enumerate(DAY[:PUBLISHED_N])})
       is None)
 
-# ⚠️ A PUBLISHED POINT MAY BE PROVISIONAL. eneco_eddy's current-quarter print
-# is settled after the fact and says so (§9.2). "Published" is not "firm".
-_eddy = series_of(DAY[:2], lambda u: t_price(brussels(u).hour),
-                  PriceProduct.REALTIME, "eneco_eddy", provisional=True)
+# ⚠️ A PUBLISHED POINT MAY BE PROVISIONAL. A real-time / imbalance product's
+# current interval is settled after the fact and says so per point (§9.2).
+# "Published" is not "firm", and §9.3 carries the flag PER POINT for exactly
+# this. No shipped plugin declares REALTIME since TARIFF-07, so the series is
+# declared here - which is the only place the case can come from now, and is
+# why this stimulus did not go with the plugin.
+_rt = series_of(DAY[:2], lambda u: t_price(brussels(u).hour),
+                PriceProduct.REALTIME, "_realtime_not_shipped",
+                provisional=True)
 _eddy_filled = derived(lambda: fill_from_yesterday(
-    _eddy, yesterday=YESTERDAY, since=D0, until=D1, stamp=D0))
+    _rt, yesterday=YESTERDAY, since=D0, until=D1, stamp=D0))
 check("a PUBLISHED point that the feed itself flagged provisional keeps that "
       "flag - the audit checks provenance, and does not force published hours "
       "to False",
       _eddy_filled.kind == "series"
       and all(p.provisional for p in _eddy_filled.points[:2])
-      and _eddy_filled.points[0] is _eddy.points[0])
+      and _eddy_filled.points[0] is _rt.points[0])
 
 # ⚠️ AND A SUB-HOURLY FEED IS NOT DECIMATED TO ONE POINT AN HOUR (FCST-04 H1).
-# `eneco_eddy` settles per QUARTER and `_validate_raw()` accepts any
-# strictly-increasing spacing, so a published hour can hold four points. The
+# BELGIAN DAY-AHEAD ITSELF SETTLES PER QUARTER - the 15-minute MTU of
+# 2025-10-01, which `generic_dayahead` reads as 96 points a day - and
+# `_validate_raw()` accepts any strictly-increasing spacing, so a published
+# hour can hold four points. The
 # fill walks WHOLE HOURS to decide what needs carrying; that must not become a
 # rule about what a published hour may contain. Measured on FCST-04's first
 # draft, which keyed the published set `{_utc_hour(p.start): p ...}`: a
@@ -316,7 +323,7 @@ _QUARTERS = PriceRead.series(
                 eur_per_kwh=round(0.100000 + 0.011300 * n, 6),
                 provisional=False)
      for n in range(_QN)],
-    PriceProduct.REALTIME, "eneco_eddy", D0)
+    PriceProduct.DAY_AHEAD, "generic_dayahead", D0)
 _QHOURS = {_fc._utc_hour(p.start) for p in _QUARTERS.points}
 check(f"the quarter-hourly fixture really is sub-hourly - {_QN} points across "
       f"{len(_QHOURS)} hours - or every check below passes for an hourly feed "
@@ -942,13 +949,20 @@ _normal_named_eddy = derived(lambda: min_accepted_spread(
     PriceProduct.DAY_AHEAD, frozenset(), BASE, provider="eneco_eddy"))
 check("the widening follows the DECLARED PriceProduct even when the provider "
       "is called 'generic_dayahead', and does NOT follow the name "
-      "'eneco_eddy' when the declared product is day-ahead - so a sixth "
-      "supplier is widened by its declaration and not by an id in a list",
+      "'eneco_eddy' when the declared product is day-ahead - so a supplier is "
+      "widened by its declaration and not by an id in a list",
       near(_wide_named_dayahead, _wide, 1e-9)
       and near(_normal_named_eddy, _normal, 1e-9))
-check("...and the shipped plugin §9.2 names IS the one that declares REALTIME, "
-      "so the mechanism is pointed at the real product",
-      PROVIDERS["eneco_eddy"].capabilities().product is PriceProduct.REALTIME
+# ⚠️ 'eneco_eddy' ABOVE IS NOW A RETIRED ID AND THE CHECK IS STRONGER FOR IT.
+# It was chosen because it was the one plugin that really did declare REALTIME,
+# so the check read "the name does not override the declaration". It declares
+# nothing now, which makes the string a pure name with no product behind it -
+# exactly the input an id-sniffing implementation would still widen.
+check("...and NO shipped plugin declares REALTIME since TARIFF-07, so the "
+      "widening path is reached by declaration alone - kept deliberately, see "
+      "DECISIONS/TARIFF-07-withdrawing-three-plugins.md",
+      [p for p, c in PROVIDERS.items()
+       if c.capabilities().product is PriceProduct.REALTIME] == []
       and uncertainty_of(PriceProduct.REALTIME)
       == frozenset({Uncertainty.REALTIME_PRODUCT})
       and uncertainty_of(PriceProduct.DAY_AHEAD) == frozenset())
@@ -1087,19 +1101,65 @@ _cfg = derived(lambda: open(os.path.join(HERE, "config.yaml"),
 # why, as this line does.
 _OPT04_KEYS = ["arbitrage_enabled", "cycle_cost_threshold_eur",
                "arbitrage_soc_floor", "arbitrage_soc_ceiling"]
-check(f"the in-code mirror holds exactly TARIFF-02's, TARIFF-03's and OPT-04's "
-      f"keys - FCST-03 still added none of its own {_defaults}",
+# TARIFF-15 added the fifth, and came here to say so as this comment instructs:
+# `price_formula` is the `custom_formula` provider's only option - one JSON
+# string carrying one contract's coefficients - and it lives in this dict and
+# in config.yaml and nowhere else, which is the arrangement `static_profile`
+# already has for the same reason.
+_T15_KEYS = ["price_formula"]
+# TARIFF-17 added the sixth, and comes here to say so as the comment above
+# instructs. `price_taxes_profile` is the hour-varying spelling of
+# `price_taxes_eur_kwh` - a period table of the TAXES component, for the Walloon
+# and Brussels DSOs whose distribution tariff really does have a day and a night
+# band (ORES 13,27 / 7,39 c EUR/kWh). It is an ADDITION and not a replacement:
+# the scalar is untouched, every site on it is unaffected, and validate.py
+# refuses the configuration that sets both. It lives in this dict and in
+# config.yaml and nowhere else, which is `static_profile`'s arrangement for
+# `static_profile`'s reason.
+_T17_KEYS = ["price_taxes_profile"]
+# TARIFF-16. `price_export_formula` - the INJECTION leg as `factor x index +
+# offset` with its OWN coefficients and its OWN vat_pct, because a Belgian card
+# prices injection on a second formula (Eneco 0,100 against 0,102 on
+# consumption, VAT-exempt against 6%). Like TARIFF-17's key it is an ADDITION:
+# `export_price_eur_kwh` is untouched, every site on the scalar is unaffected,
+# and it lives in this dict and in config.yaml and nowhere else.
+_T16_KEYS = ["price_export_formula"]
+check(f"the in-code mirror holds exactly TARIFF-02's, TARIFF-03's, OPT-04's, "
+      f"TARIFF-15's, TARIFF-17's and TARIFF-16's keys - FCST-03 still added "
+      f"none of its own {_defaults}",
       _defaults == sorted(["price_provider", "price_markup_eur_kwh",
                            "price_taxes_eur_kwh", "export_price_eur_kwh",
                            "price_csv_path", "price_feed_url",
                            "price_horizon_h", "price_timeout_s",
-                           "static_profile"] + _OPT04_KEYS))
-# ...and the four are genuinely NEW, not a rename of something that was already
-# there, or the line above would pass while the mirror silently lost a key.
-check("...and OPT-04's four keys are additions rather than replacements: the "
-      "nine TARIFF-02/03 keys are all still present",
+                           "static_profile"]
+                          + _OPT04_KEYS + _T15_KEYS + _T17_KEYS
+                          + _T16_KEYS))
+# ...and the later keys are genuinely NEW, not a rename of something that was
+# already there, or the line above would pass while the mirror silently lost a
+# key.
+check("...and OPT-04's four, TARIFF-15's one, TARIFF-17's one and TARIFF-16's "
+      "one are additions rather than replacements: the nine TARIFF-02/03 keys "
+      "are all still present",
       isinstance(_defaults, list)
-      and len(set(_defaults) - set(_OPT04_KEYS)) == 9)
+      and len(set(_defaults) - set(_OPT04_KEYS) - set(_T15_KEYS)
+              - set(_T17_KEYS) - set(_T16_KEYS)) == 9)
+# ⚠️ AND THE ONE TARIFF-17 IS THE HOUR-VARYING TWIN OF IS STILL THERE, BY NAME.
+# The line above counts nine, and a rename of `price_taxes_eur_kwh` to
+# `price_taxes_profile` would also count nine. The scalar path being unchanged
+# is this card's first acceptance criterion, and a count cannot grade it.
+# ⚠️ THE LITERAL 0.11736 IS TARIFF-18's, AND IT IS TYPED HERE ON PURPOSE. The
+# claim is "the scalar is still its own key, holding its own real number", and
+# reading that number out of the dict under test would compare it against
+# itself. TARIFF-18 raised it from 0.06; if it moves again this line goes red
+# and whoever moved it comes here and says which card.
+check("...and `price_taxes_eur_kwh` is still its own key beside the table, so "
+      "TARIFF-17 widened the framework rather than renaming the scalar - and "
+      "it still holds TARIFF-18's Flemish figure",
+      isinstance(_defaults, list)
+      and "price_taxes_eur_kwh" in _defaults
+      and "price_taxes_profile" in _defaults
+      and _price.PRICE_OPTION_DEFAULTS["price_taxes_eur_kwh"] == 0.11736
+      and _price.PRICE_OPTION_DEFAULTS["price_taxes_profile"] == "")
 check("...and every one of them is still in config.yaml, which stays the "
       "source of truth",
       isinstance(_cfg, str)

goodwe_controller/test_price_history.py

@@ -288,9 +288,25 @@ def allin(mwh):
 
 
 def feed_body(instants, table):
-    return json.dumps({"data": [
-        {"start": u.isoformat(), "price_eur_mwh": table[brussels(u).hour]}
-        for u in instants]}).encode()
+    """A `generic_dayahead` body in the COLUMNAR shape the real feed publishes.
+
+    ⚠️ TARIFF-08. This used to build `{"data": [{"start": ...,
+    "price_eur_mwh": ...}]}` - a shape `api.energy-charts.info` has never
+    published and that the shipped parser was nevertheless written to expect.
+    Every price fixture in the repository fed that invented shape, so the
+    suite graded the parser against the parser's own assumption while the live
+    plugin raised `SourceUnavailable` on every fetch. Real captured bodies are
+    replayed in test_price.py section 2b; the fixtures here are SYNTHETIC
+    prices in the REAL shape, because this file is grading the fill and the
+    history, not the parse.
+    """
+    return json.dumps({
+        "unix_seconds": [int(u.timestamp()) for u in instants],
+        "price": [table[brussels(u).hour] for u in instants],
+        "unit": "EUR / MWh",
+        "license_info": "CC BY 4.0 (creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0) "
+                        "from Bundesnetzagentur | SMARD.de",
+        "deprecated": False}).encode()
 
 
 def transport_for(body):
@@ -299,8 +315,12 @@ def transport_for(body):
     return _t
 
 
+# ⚠️ NO `price_feed_url` (TARIFF-09). An override is used VERBATIM and the
+# plugin appends no date range to it, so a CFG that sets one - even to the
+# feed's own address - would exercise the override path in every check in this
+# file and never the shipped default. The override has its own grading in
+# test_price.py section 2c.
 CFG = {"price_provider": "generic_dayahead",
-       "price_feed_url": "https://api.energy-charts.info/price?bzn=BE",
        "price_timeout_s": 1,
        "price_markup_eur_kwh": MARKUP,
        "price_taxes_eur_kwh": TAXES,
@@ -501,6 +521,220 @@ check("...and the plan is still a provider plan, not a §11.4 fallback: the "
       _after.origin == "provider" and _after.product is PriceProduct.DAY_AHEAD)
 
 
+# --------------------------------------------------------------------------- #
+print()
+print("1c. TARIFF-09 - the feed is now ASKED for the horizon, and tomorrow "
+      "comes back FIRM")
+#
+# ⚠️ WHAT SECTION 1 COULD NOT SEE, AND WHY. Everything above grades the FILL
+# against a feed that published one day, and it was right to: FCST-04 covers
+# the window between midnight and the ~13:00-14:00 CET auction. But
+# `generic_dayahead.fetch()` accepted `since`/`until` and requested the bare
+# `?bzn=BE`, which answers one Brussels day AT EVERY HOUR OF EVERY DAY - so the
+# one-day feed was not the pre-publication state, it was the ONLY state, and
+# §8.3 dropped every hour past today from the trade set as provisional. The
+# optimiser never saw tomorrow as firm.
+#
+# Measured on the merged tree (4257e38) at 2026-09-10T09:00+02:00 over a 48 h
+# horizon, live feed, yesterday seeded: 15 firm whole hours and 33 carried,
+# and BOTH ends of the permitted cycle inside 2026-09-10. At 23:00 it was 1
+# firm and 47 carried, and the firm spread no longer cleared the round-trip
+# cost at all. The ceiling was structural - at hour H a one-day window gives at
+# most 24-H firm hours - which is why no amount of carrying could fix it.
+#
+# The two plans below differ in ONE thing: what the feed answered. The code
+# path, the window, the store and the instant are identical, so the difference
+# is the horizon and nothing else (habit 7).
+
+TOMORROW_D = "2026-01-16"
+TOMORROW_H = bday_hours(TOMORROW_D)
+
+# ⚠️ TOMORROW'S PRICES MUST NOT OVERLAP TODAY'S OR YESTERDAY'S, or a point's
+# day of origin is not recoverable from its number and every claim below is
+# about a coincidence. Asserted, not assumed.
+TOMORROW_MWH = {h: 300.0 + h for h in range(24)}
+TOMORROW_MWH[18] = 900.0        # the dear evening TOMORROW: the global peak of
+                                # the 48 h window, and it is on the second day
+
+PRICE_AT = {u: TODAY_MWH[brussels(u).hour] for u in TODAY_H}
+PRICE_AT.update({u: TOMORROW_MWH[brussels(u).hour] for u in TOMORROW_H})
+
+
+def body_at(instants):
+    """A columnar body priced PER INSTANT, so two days can differ at the same
+    local hour. `feed_body()` keys on the local hour alone and cannot."""
+    return json.dumps({
+        "unix_seconds": [int(u.timestamp()) for u in instants],
+        "price": [PRICE_AT[u] for u in instants],
+        "unit": "EUR / MWh",
+        "license_info": "CC BY 4.0 (creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0) "
+                        "from Bundesnetzagentur | SMARD.de",
+        "deprecated": False}).encode()
+
+
+def recording(body):
+    """A transport that serves bytes and remembers the URL it was asked for."""
+    seen = []
+
+    async def _t(url, timeout_s):
+        seen.append(url)
+        return body
+    _t.seen = seen
+    return _t
+
+
+_vals_today = {TODAY_MWH[h] for h in range(24)}
+_vals_tmrw = {TOMORROW_MWH[h] for h in range(24)}
+_vals_yday = {YESTERDAY_MWH[h] for h in range(24)}
+check(f"the three days' price tables share no value at all "
+      f"({len(_vals_today)}/{len(_vals_tmrw)}/{len(_vals_yday)} distinct), so "
+      f"which day a point came from is recoverable from the point",
+      not (_vals_today & _vals_tmrw) and not (_vals_tmrw & _vals_yday)
+      and not (_vals_today & _vals_yday))
+check(f"...and both fixture days are 24 Brussels hours long "
+      f"({len(TODAY_H)}/{len(TOMORROW_H)}), found by search rather than by "
+      f"adding 24 UTC hours",
+      len(TODAY_H) == 24 and len(TOMORROW_H) == 24)
+
+# THE TWO FEED STATES, one code path.
+_t_two = recording(body_at(TODAY_H + TOMORROW_H))
+_h_two = store()
+_ph.PriceHistory._remember(_h_two, series_of(YDAY_H, YESTERDAY_MWH), NOW)
+_pub = run(resolve_tariff(CFG, NOW, _until, transport=_t_two, now=NOW,
+                          history=_h_two))
+
+_t_one = recording(body_at(TODAY_H))
+_h_one = store()
+_ph.PriceHistory._remember(_h_one, series_of(YDAY_H, YESTERDAY_MWH), NOW)
+_pre = run(resolve_tariff(CFG, NOW, _until, transport=_t_one, now=NOW,
+                          history=_h_one))
+
+# ⚠️ THE REQUEST, WHICH IS THE THING THIS CARD CHANGED. Both calls ask for the
+# same three Brussels days; only the answer differs. The expected dates are
+# spelled out here rather than derived from the module that builds them.
+check(f"the shipped plugin asks the feed for the Brussels days the horizon "
+      f"touches, on both calls -> {_t_two.seen}",
+      _t_two.seen == _t_one.seen
+      == ["https://api.energy-charts.info/price?bzn=BE"
+          "&start=2026-01-15&end=2026-01-17"])
+check("...and it is no longer the bare URL that answers a single day, which "
+      "is what made the one-day state permanent rather than pre-publication",
+      "start=" in _t_two.seen[0] and "end=" in _t_two.seen[0])
+
+
+def split(plan):
+    """(firm, carried), and ([], []) for a plan that observed no series.
+
+    ⚠️ THE EMPTY ANSWER IS DELIBERATE. A mutation that turns the short
+    pre-publication answer into `no_data` makes `plan.read.points` raise
+    `Absence` by design, and an unguarded read here would take this file down
+    with a traceback rather than reporting a named FAIL - "the suite is red"
+    and "the check that watches this is red" are different claims
+    (MUTATION.md, reporting a mutation, point 3). With this guard the counts
+    below go red BY NAME, which is what a mutation report can cite.
+    """
+    if not plan.has_prices:
+        return [], []
+    firm = [p for p in plan.read.points if not p.provisional]
+    carried = [p for p in plan.read.points if p.provisional]
+    return firm, carried
+
+
+def local_days(points):
+    return sorted({brussels(p.start).strftime("%Y-%m-%d") for p in points})
+
+
+_f2, _c2 = split(_pub)
+_f1, _c1 = split(_pre)
+
+# The expected counts are re-derived from the fixture by set arithmetic: the
+# horizon hours the feed printed, versus the horizon hours it did not.
+_window = [SINCE_HOUR + timedelta(hours=n) for n in range(HORIZON_H)]
+_two_pub_utc = {u.astimezone(UTC) for u in TODAY_H + TOMORROW_H}
+_one_pub_utc = {u.astimezone(UTC) for u in TODAY_H}
+_want_f2 = len([u for u in _window if u.astimezone(UTC) in _two_pub_utc])
+_want_f1 = len([u for u in _window if u.astimezone(UTC) in _one_pub_utc])
+check(f"WITH TOMORROW PUBLISHED the 48 h plan is {len(_f2)} firm hours and "
+      f"{len(_c2)} carried; with only today, {len(_f1)} firm and {len(_c1)} "
+      f"carried. Re-derived from the fixture: {_want_f2} and {_want_f1}",
+      len(_f2) == _want_f2 and len(_f1) == _want_f1
+      and len(_f2) + len(_c2) == HORIZON_H
+      and len(_f1) + len(_c1) == HORIZON_H
+      and len(_f2) > len(_f1))
+check(f"...and the firm hours now span TWO Brussels local days "
+      f"{local_days(_f2)}, where the one-day answer spans exactly one "
+      f"{local_days(_f1)}. This is the acceptance criterion, and the ONE thing "
+      f"no amount of carry-forward could ever produce: a carried hour is "
+      f"provisional by construction",
+      len(local_days(_f2)) == 2 and len(local_days(_f1)) == 1
+      and local_days(_f2) == [TODAY_D, TOMORROW_D])
+
+# ⚠️ THE TAIL IS STILL CARRIED, WHICH IS FCST-04 STILL DOING ITS JOB. A 48 h
+# horizon asked for at 09:17 runs 9 hours into a THIRD Brussels day, and no
+# day-ahead market publishes that far. The fix widens what is firm; it does not
+# claim the market publishes more than it does.
+check(f"FCST-04 still fills the remainder: the {len(_c2)} hours past the "
+      f"market's own horizon are carried from yesterday and flagged, on a "
+      f"third Brussels day {local_days(_c2)} - so the plan still covers all "
+      f"{HORIZON_H} hours",
+      len(_c2) > 0 and local_days(_c2) == ["2026-01-17"]
+      and all(p.provisional for p in _c2))
+check("...and the plan is still a provider plan reporting itself provisional, "
+      "not a §11.4 fallback",
+      _pub.origin == "provider" and _pub.provisional)
+
+# ⚠️ THE PRE-PUBLICATION ANSWER IS A SERIES OF WHAT EXISTS, NOT `no_data`.
+# Asking for tomorrow before the auction returns fewer days than requested.
+# A `no_data` there would switch a working site's arbitrage off every morning.
+check(f"the short answer stays a SERIES of what exists - {_pre.read.kind}, "
+      f"{len(_pre.read.points)} hours, origin {_pre.origin!r} - and is never "
+      f"no_data and never a truncated series presented as complete "
+      f"({len(_c1)} of its hours are flagged provisional)",
+      _pre.read.kind == "series" and _pre.origin == "provider"
+      and len(_pre.read.points) == HORIZON_H and len(_c1) > 0)
+
+# --- the trade set, which is where the whole thing lands ------------------- #
+_A9 = dict(peak_guard_active=False, min_spread_eur_kwh=0.0,
+           uncertainty=frozenset())
+_v2 = _pub.arbitrage(**_A9)
+_v1 = _pre.arbitrage(**_A9)
+check("both plans still ALLOW a trade, so the two verdicts below are compared "
+      "against each other and not against a refusal",
+      _v2.kind == "allowed" and _v1.kind == "allowed")
+_v2 = _v2 if _v2.kind == "allowed" else None
+_v1 = _v1 if _v1.kind == "allowed" else None
+
+# ⚠️ NON-DEGENERACY, DERIVED. The global cheapest firm hour must be on TODAY
+# and the global dearest on TOMORROW, or "the trade set spans two days" is a
+# property of the arithmetic rather than of the fix.
+def _day_of(v, end):
+    """The Brussels day of one end of a permitting verdict, or "" for a
+    refusal - so a mutation that turns the verdict into a refusal is a named
+    FAIL below rather than an `Absence` traceback."""
+    return "" if v is None else brussels(getattr(v, end).start).strftime(
+        "%Y-%m-%d")
+
+
+_lo2, _hi2 = _day_of(_v2, "cheapest"), _day_of(_v2, "dearest")
+_lo1, _hi1 = _day_of(_v1, "cheapest"), _day_of(_v1, "dearest")
+check(f"WITH TOMORROW FIRM the trade set contains hours from BOTH days: "
+      f"buy on {_lo2}, sell on {_hi2}",
+      sorted({_lo2, _hi2}) == [TODAY_D, TOMORROW_D])
+check(f"...where the one-day answer's buy AND sell are both inside {_lo1} - "
+      f"a trade set that is a subset of ONE calendar day, structurally, which "
+      f"is the defect this card is about",
+      _lo1 == _hi1 == TODAY_D)
+_s2 = None if _v2 is None else _v2.spread_eur_kwh
+_s1 = None if _v1 is None else _v1.spread_eur_kwh
+check(f"...and the cross-day spread is strictly larger ({_s2} vs {_s1} "
+      f"EUR/kWh), so the second day is not merely visible but PRICED",
+      _s2 is not None and _s1 is not None and _s2 > _s1)
+check("...and both ends of the permitted cycle are FIRM, which "
+      "`_firm_or_die()` asserts at construction and §8.3 requires",
+      _v2 is not None and not _v2.cheapest.provisional
+      and not _v2.dearest.provisional)
+
+
 # --------------------------------------------------------------------------- #
 print()
 print("2. AC2 - the spread stopped being taken over hours that have gone")
@@ -545,9 +779,10 @@ check("the carried hours are NOT in the trade set - the verdict's cheapest and "
 print()
 print("2b. a QUARTER-HOURLY feed keeps every print, and its spread with them")
 
-# ⚠️ THE DEFECT THIS SECTION EXISTS FOR. `eneco_eddy` is the Belgian imbalance
-# product and settles per QUARTER; `_validate_raw()` accepts any
-# strictly-increasing spacing, so a published hour may hold four points.
+# ⚠️ THE DEFECT THIS SECTION EXISTS FOR. Belgian DAY-AHEAD settles per QUARTER
+# - the 15-minute MTU took effect on 2025-10-01, so `generic_dayahead` reads 96
+# points a day - and `_validate_raw()` accepts any strictly-increasing spacing,
+# so a published hour may hold four points.
 # FCST-04's first draft keyed the published set `{_utc_hour(p.start): p ...}` -
 # LAST POINT OF THE HOUR WINS, the other three dropped - and on an all-firm,
 # fully-published 96-point feed the plan came out 15 points long with its
@@ -559,14 +794,24 @@ for _n in range(len(TODAY_H) * (60 // _QSTEP_MIN)):
     _qu = TODAY_H[0] + timedelta(minutes=_QSTEP_MIN * _n)
     # A spiky within-the-hour profile, so decimation is visible in the SPREAD
     # and not only in a count.
-    _qrows.append({"start": _qu.isoformat(),
-                   "price_eur_mwh": 100.0 + 40.0 * (_n % 4) + brussels(_qu).hour})
-_qbody = json.dumps({"data": _qrows}).encode()
+    _qrows.append((_qu,
+                   100.0 + 40.0 * (_n % 4) + brussels(_qu).hour))
+# ⚠️ COLUMNAR, like the real feed - see feed_body(). And 900 s spacing is not a
+# hypothetical here: Belgium moved to a 15-minute MTU on 2025-10-01 and
+# `api.energy-charts.info` has answered 96 points a day ever since, which is
+# exactly what test_price.py section 2b replays from a captured body.
+_qbody = json.dumps({
+    "unix_seconds": [int(_u.timestamp()) for _u, _v in _qrows],
+    "price": [_v for _u, _v in _qrows],
+    "unit": "EUR / MWh",
+    "license_info": "CC BY 4.0 (creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0) "
+                    "from Bundesnetzagentur | SMARD.de",
+    "deprecated": False}).encode()
 check(f"the fixture really is sub-hourly - {len(_qrows)} points across "
       f"{len(TODAY_H)} Brussels hours - or every check below passes for an "
       f"hourly feed too and grades nothing",
       len(_qrows) == 4 * len(TODAY_H)
-      and len({_r["start"] for _r in _qrows}) == len(_qrows))
+      and len({_r[0] for _r in _qrows}) == len(_qrows))
 
 _q_before = run(resolve_tariff(CFG, NOW, _until, transport=transport_for(_qbody),
                                now=NOW, history=NoHistory()))

goodwe_controller/test_static_tariff.py

@@ -59,6 +59,7 @@ is TEST-15, and it has already turned one live mutation into a false survivor.
 Read MUTATION.md before you report a survivor.
 """
 
+import ast
 import gzip
 import json
 import sys
@@ -71,8 +72,9 @@ from app.price import (
 )
 from app.price_history import NoHistory
 from app.static_tariff import (
-    MEAN_WINDOW_DAYS, ProfileInvalid, StaticProfile, TariffPlan,
-    parse_static_profile, resolve_tariff, static_plan, static_status,
+    MEAN_WINDOW_DAYS, ProfileInvalid, StaticProfile, TAXES_PROFILE_OPTION,
+    TariffPlan, parse_static_profile, parse_taxes_profile, resolve_tariff,
+    static_plan, static_status,
 )
 from app.validate import validate_startup_config
 
@@ -87,6 +89,16 @@ def check(name, cond):
         fails.append(name)
 
 
+def _reason_of(fn):
+    """The message fn() raised, or "" - so a check can assert WHICH rule
+    refused rather than only that something did (MUTATION.md habit 6)."""
+    try:
+        fn()
+    except Exception as e:                                    # noqa: BLE001
+        return str(e)
+    return ""
+
+
 def raises(fn, exc):
     """True only if fn() raises EXACTLY `exc`. A different exception is False -
     'it was refused' and 'it broke on the way to being refused' must not grade
@@ -743,8 +755,10 @@ def run(coro):
     return asyncio.run(coro)
 
 
+# ⚠️ NO `price_feed_url` (TARIFF-09): an override is used verbatim and the
+# plugin appends no date range to it, so setting one - even to the feed's own
+# address - exercises the override path rather than the shipped default.
 _cfg = opts(TWO_PERIOD, price_provider="generic_dayahead",
-            price_feed_url="https://api.energy-charts.info/price?bzn=BE",
             price_timeout_s=1, price_markup_eur_kwh=0.03,
             price_taxes_eur_kwh=0.06)
 _fb = run(resolve_tariff(_cfg, THU, THU + timedelta(days=1), transport=_dead,
@@ -778,9 +792,20 @@ check("a dead feed with NO static_profile has nothing to fall back to, and "
       _fb_none.origin == "none" and not _fb_none.has_prices)
 
 # A live feed still wins over the profile.
-_body = json.dumps({"data": [
-    {"start": (THU + timedelta(hours=i)).isoformat(), "price_eur_mwh": 40 + i}
-    for i in range(24)]}).encode()
+# ⚠️ COLUMNAR (TARIFF-08). `api.energy-charts.info` publishes parallel
+# `unix_seconds`/`price` arrays and no `data` key; the `{"data": [...]}` body
+# this used to build was invented by the parser it was grading, which is how a
+# provider that could never parse a live response shipped green. Real captured
+# bodies are replayed in test_price.py section 2b - the prices here are
+# synthetic, the SHAPE is not.
+_body = json.dumps({
+    "unix_seconds": [int((THU + timedelta(hours=i)).timestamp())
+                     for i in range(24)],
+    "price": [40 + i for i in range(24)],
+    "unit": "EUR / MWh",
+    "license_info": "CC BY 4.0 (creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0) "
+                    "from Bundesnetzagentur | SMARD.de",
+    "deprecated": False}).encode()
 
 
 async def _live(url, timeout_s):
@@ -1117,6 +1142,189 @@ check("...and the table really does exercise both rungs and the allowing path, "
       {want for _n, _p, want in _TABLE9} == {"flat", "firm-pair", "allowed"})
 
 
+
+# --------------------------------------------------------------------------- #
+print()
+print("10. TARIFF-17 - ONE period grammar, not two. A second tiling rule is a "
+      "second set of DST bugs")
+# ⚠️ THE ACCEPTANCE CRITERION THIS GRADES, and why it needs two checks rather
+# than one. `price_taxes_profile` carries the TAXES component as a period table
+# so that a Walloon day/night distribution band can reach the optimiser. The
+# obvious way to build it is a second parser next to this one - and the two
+# would agree on every ordinary day and diverge on the 23- and 25-hour days,
+# where nobody looks and where §11.4 makes the divergence quiet.
+#
+# So the claim is an IDENTITY ("it is this grammar"), and MUTATION.md habit 10
+# says pin an identity structurally and a meaning behaviourally. Both are here:
+#   10a  the grammar family is DEFINED IN EXACTLY ONE MODULE, computed by
+#        parsing every file under app/ rather than by a list somebody typed;
+#   10b  the two options produce the SAME REFUSAL SENTENCES, derived from each
+#        other, which is what a fork would break first.
+
+print()
+print("10a. the grammar is defined in exactly one module under app/, and the "
+      "scope is COMPUTED")
+# ⚠️ A HAND-WRITTEN SCOPE IS THE SAME DEFECT AS A HAND-WRITTEN FIXTURE
+# (habit 12): it passes while the copy sits in the file nobody added to the
+# list. Every `app/*.py` is parsed; the family is taken from THIS module's own
+# top-level names, so it cannot drift from what the grammar actually is.
+#
+# ⚠️ AND THE FAMILY LIST HAS ONE DELIBERATE OMISSION, STATED HERE RATHER THAN
+# ROUNDED OFF (habit 13). `_days` is NOT in it, because `maintenance.py` has a
+# `_days` of its own - a NAMESAKE, not a copy - and the check below would go
+# red on it and be deleted by whoever hit it. The namesake is asserted to BE a
+# namesake, by signature, immediately afterwards, so the omission is graded
+# rather than assumed.
+_T17_FAMILY = ("Period", "StaticProfile", "ProfileInvalid", "_check_tiling",
+               "_raise_gap", "_raise_overlap", "_minutes", "_price",
+               "parse_static_profile", "DAY_NAMES", "MINUTES_PER_DAY",
+               "_DAY_INDEX", "_DAY_ALIASES", "SUPPORTED_TZ")
+
+
+def _t17_defs(path):
+    """Top-level names a module DEFINES - classes, functions and assignments."""
+    tree = ast.parse(path.read_text(encoding="utf-8"))
+    out = set()
+    for node in tree.body:
+        if isinstance(node, (ast.FunctionDef, ast.AsyncFunctionDef,
+                             ast.ClassDef)):
+            out.add(node.name)
+        elif isinstance(node, ast.Assign):
+            out |= {t.id for t in node.targets if isinstance(t, ast.Name)}
+    return out
+
+
+_T17_APP = sorted((HERE / "app").glob("*.py"))
+_T17_WHERE = {name: sorted(p.name for p in _T17_APP if name in _t17_defs(p))
+              for name in _T17_FAMILY}
+for _n, _w in sorted(_T17_WHERE.items()):
+    print(f"    {_n:<22} defined in {_w}")
+check(f"every one of the {len(_T17_FAMILY)} grammar names is defined in "
+      f"EXACTLY ONE of the {len(_T17_APP)} modules under app/ - a copy of "
+      f"`_check_tiling` in price.py would take this red",
+      all(len(w) == 1 for w in _T17_WHERE.values()))
+check("...and that module is static_tariff.py in every case, so the grammar "
+      "did not move house either",
+      {w[0] for w in _T17_WHERE.values() if w} == {"static_tariff.py"})
+check("...and the pin is not vacuous: each of those names really is a "
+      "top-level definition, so the scan found something rather than nothing",
+      all(w for w in _T17_WHERE.values()) and len(_T17_APP) > 5)
+
+
+def _t17_sig(module, name):
+    tree = ast.parse((HERE / "app" / module).read_text(encoding="utf-8"))
+    fn = next(n for n in tree.body
+              if isinstance(n, ast.FunctionDef) and n.name == name)
+    return [a.arg for a in fn.args.args]
+
+
+_T17_DAYS = (_t17_sig("static_tariff.py", "_days"),
+                            _t17_sig("maintenance.py", "_days"))
+print(f"    _days: static_tariff{_T17_DAYS[0]} vs maintenance{_T17_DAYS[1]}")
+check(f"...and the ONE name held out of the family is held out honestly: "
+      f"`maintenance._days{tuple(_T17_DAYS[1])}` renders an age in words and "
+      f"is not a second copy of the grammar's "
+      f"`_days{tuple(_T17_DAYS[0])}` day selector",
+      _T17_DAYS[0] != _T17_DAYS[1] and _T17_DAYS[0] == ["value", "field"]
+      and _T17_DAYS[1] == ["n"])
+# ⚠️ WHAT THIS PIN CANNOT SEE, WITH ITS SHAPE (habit 13). It grades WHERE the
+# grammar is defined, never WHAT it means: `_check_tiling` could be rewritten
+# in place to accept a gap and this would still pass. Section 5 and 10b are
+# what grade the meaning. It also covers `app/` only, and a second grammar
+# living under `tools/` or in a check file is outside it.
+
+_T17_BODY = ast.parse(
+    (HERE / "app" / "static_tariff.py").read_text(encoding="utf-8"))
+_T17_WRAP = next(
+    (n for n in _T17_BODY.body
+     if isinstance(n, ast.FunctionDef) and n.name == "parse_taxes_profile"),
+    None)
+_T17_CALLS = ([ast.unparse(n.func) for n in ast.walk(_T17_WRAP)
+               if isinstance(n, ast.Call)] if _T17_WRAP else [])
+check(f"...and `parse_taxes_profile` is a WRAPPER and not a fork: its whole "
+      f"body calls {_T17_CALLS}, pinned on the AST rather than on the source "
+      f"text, because `\"parse_static_profile\" in src` is true of a copy that "
+      f"merely mentions it",
+      _T17_CALLS == ["parse_static_profile"])
+
+
+print()
+print("10b. and the two options give the SAME refusals - derived from each "
+      "other, not typed twice")
+# ⚠️ EVERY EXPECTED SENTENCE HERE IS THE OTHER OPTION'S OWN SENTENCE with the
+# key substituted. Nothing is transcribed, so a fork that reworded one refusal
+# - or that quietly stopped refusing something - is red on the row it broke and
+# not on all of them.
+_T17_BAD = [
+    ("a gap", {"periods": [{"name": "d", "from": "07:00", "to": "22:00",
+                            "days": "all", "eur_per_kwh": 0.13}]}),
+    ("an overlap", {"periods": [
+        {"name": "a", "from": "00:00", "to": "24:00", "days": "all",
+         "eur_per_kwh": 0.13},
+        {"name": "b", "from": "07:00", "to": "22:00", "days": "all",
+         "eur_per_kwh": 0.07}]}),
+    ("a bad HH:MM", {"periods": [{"name": "d", "from": "7.5", "to": "22:00",
+                                  "days": "all", "eur_per_kwh": 0.13}]}),
+    ("a bad day", {"periods": [{"name": "d", "from": "00:00", "to": "24:00",
+                                "days": "funday", "eur_per_kwh": 0.13}]}),
+    ("missing days", {"periods": [{"name": "d", "from": "00:00", "to": "24:00",
+                                   "eur_per_kwh": 0.13}]}),
+    ("a zero-length window", {"periods": [
+        {"name": "d", "from": "07:00", "to": "07:00", "days": "all",
+         "eur_per_kwh": 0.13}]}),
+    ("no periods list", {"timezone": "europe/brussels"}),
+    ("an empty periods list", {"periods": []}),
+    ("a foreign timezone", {"timezone": "utc", "periods": []}),
+    ("periods that are not a list", {"periods": 3}),
+    ("a row that is not an object", {"periods": ["dag"]}),
+    ("invalid JSON", "{not json"),
+    ("a 24:00 start", {"periods": [{"name": "d", "from": "24:00", "to": "07:00",
+                                    "days": "all", "eur_per_kwh": 0.13}]}),
+]
+_T17_ROWS = []
+for _what, _bad in _T17_BAD:
+    _a = _reason_of(lambda: parse_static_profile(_bad))
+    _b = _reason_of(lambda: parse_taxes_profile(_bad))
+    _T17_ROWS.append((_what, _a, _b,
+                      _a.replace("static_profile", TAXES_PROFILE_OPTION) == _b))
+for _what, _a, _b, _same in _T17_ROWS:
+    print(f"    {'ok ' if _same else 'XX '}{_what:<28} {_b[:74]}")
+check(f"all {len(_T17_ROWS)} malformations are refused IDENTICALLY under both "
+      f"options, sentence for sentence, once the key name is substituted - "
+      f"which is what one parser means and a fork could not hold",
+      all(row[3] for row in _T17_ROWS))
+check("...and every one of them really did refuse, or 'the two agree' would be "
+      "two empty strings agreeing",
+      all(row[1] and row[2] for row in _T17_ROWS))
+check("...and the sentences are not all the same sentence, or the row above "
+      "would be one comparison repeated 13 times",
+      len({row[2] for row in _T17_ROWS}) == len(_T17_ROWS))
+
+# ⚠️ THE ONE REFUSAL THAT IS DELIBERATELY DIFFERENT, and it is different
+# because the two options carry different QUANTITIES in the same grammar. A
+# period without `eur_per_kwh` gets a sentence naming what was wanted, and an
+# operator who typed an ALL-IN price into the taxes table is out by an energy
+# price with nothing reporting it.
+_T17_NOPRICE = {"periods": [{"name": "d", "from": "00:00", "to": "24:00",
+                             "days": "all"}]}
+_T17_M_S = _reason_of(lambda: parse_static_profile(_T17_NOPRICE))
+_T17_M_T = _reason_of(lambda: parse_taxes_profile(_T17_NOPRICE))
+print(f"    static_profile : {_T17_M_S[-96:]}")
+print(f"    taxes table    : {_T17_M_T[-96:]}")
+check("the 'you left the number out' refusal is the one sentence the two do "
+      "NOT share, and each names its own quantity: an all-in price for "
+      "static_profile, the taxes component alone for the table",
+      "an all-in eur_per_kwh" in _T17_M_S
+      and "an all-in eur_per_kwh" not in _T17_M_T
+      and "TAXES component alone" in _T17_M_T
+      and "NOT an all-in price" in _T17_M_T
+      and _T17_M_S.replace("static_profile", TAXES_PROFILE_OPTION) != _T17_M_T)
+check("...and both still name the ROW the operator has to go and fix, which is "
+      "the half they do share",
+      "periods[1].eur_per_kwh is missing" in _T17_M_S
+      and "periods[1].eur_per_kwh is missing" in _T17_M_T)
+
+
 # --------------------------------------------------------------------------- #
 print()
 if fails:

goodwe_controller/test_tariff.py

@@ -2,8 +2,8 @@
 
     python3 test_tariff.py
 
-Ten parts. What each is for, and - where it matters - what it is deliberately
-NOT allowed to be tested at:
+Twelve parts. What each is for, and - where it matters - what it is
+deliberately NOT allowed to be tested at:
 
   1. THE BLOCK ARITHMETIC, against a worked example written out segment by
      segment. The fixture is chosen to be non-degenerate on three axes at once:
@@ -33,6 +33,17 @@ NOT allowed to be tested at:
      proven equal to the tier it derives from, and proven never to be lowered.
   9. AC 3, ON THE REPLAY DATA THAT ACTUALLY EXISTS. See the honesty note below.
  10. THE WIRING, through the real `Controller` and its real status page.
+ 11. TARIFF-13: THE COVERAGE FIGURE PRINTED BESIDE THE PEAK, across a REAL
+     restart - a second `Controller` against the same file. The peak was
+     always durable; the count of banked quarters was an `int` on the
+     tracker and reset to 0, so the page asserted "0 quarter(s) banked"
+     for a month it had measured 120 of. An unreadable store must not
+     produce a coverage figure of 0 either - part 5's argument, one
+     column over.
+ 12. TARIFF-13: WHICH QUARTER A TIED PEAK IS ATTRIBUTED TO, decided
+     (earliest wins) rather than left emergent, and pinned on BOTH
+     readers with a newest-first fixture - ascending arrival cannot tell
+     "the earliest quarter" from "the first row written".
 
 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 ⚠️ PART 9 IS A TWO-DAY MEASUREMENT AND SAYS SO. THE 30-DAY ANSWER IS ELSEWHERE
@@ -106,9 +117,9 @@ from pathlib import Path
 from app.main import Controller
 from app.p1 import P1Ingest, QuarterAverager, QUARTER_S, make_sample, split_signed
 from app.tariff import (
-    BILLING_TZ, CHECKPOINT_S, NO_RECORD, NOT_OBSERVED, POLICY_MAX,
-    POLICY_NET, POLICY_SUM, PeakStore, PeakTracker, _EUTimezone, billed_w,
-    month_key,
+    BILLING_TZ, CHECKPOINT_S, COUNT_UNREADABLE, NO_RECORD, NOT_OBSERVED,
+    POLICY_MAX, POLICY_NET, POLICY_SUM, PeakStore, PeakTracker, _ClosedBlock,
+    _EUTimezone, billed_w, month_key,
 )
 
 fails = []
@@ -932,18 +943,28 @@ check("the closed quarter reached SQLite through the tracker the cycle calls",
 
 # ⚠️ `cycle()` calls sync() ONCE A SECOND against a `blocks` list that keeps a
 # closed quarter for a DAY. Without a dedupe that is ~86 000 re-banks of the
-# same row per block, and `recorded` - the number the status page prints as
-# "quarters banked" - would be a count of loop iterations rather than of
-# quarters. The database stays correct either way, which is exactly why this
-# needs its own check instead of being caught by the peak.
+# same row per block, and a coverage figure derived from the number of times a
+# block was OFFERED would be a count of loop iterations rather than of quarters.
+# The database stays correct either way, which is exactly why this needs its own
+# check instead of being caught by the peak.
+#
+# ⚠️ GRADED ON `sync()`'s RETURN, and on the STORE's tally for the month the
+# quarter is in - TARIFF-13. It used to be graded on `PeakTracker.recorded`,
+# which was then an `int` incremented inside this very loop, so the dedupe and
+# the figure that reported it were the same variable. They are not any more:
+# `recorded_in()` counts rows in `quarter_blocks`, where re-banking the same
+# `quarter_start` is a PRIMARY KEY no-op and could never have shown up as a
+# second quarter. A check written against it alone would now pass however many
+# times sync() re-banked, which is why the return value is the load-bearing
+# half of this assertion and is asserted first.
 again = c.peak.sync(c.p1)
 third = c.peak.sync(c.p1)
 print(f"    sync() called three times over the same closed quarter: "
-      f"{n}, {again}, {third} newly banked; tracker reports "
-      f"{c.peak.recorded} quarter(s)")
+      f"{n}, {again}, {third} newly banked; the store holds "
+      f"{c.peak.recorded_in(B)} quarter(s) for {month_key(B)}")
 check("...and syncing the same quarter again banks nothing new, so the count "
       "the status page shows is quarters and not cycles",
-      again == 0 and third == 0 and c.peak.recorded == 1)
+      again == 0 and third == 0 and c.peak.recorded_in(B) == 1)
 check("...and the peak is unchanged by the repeat",
       near(c.peak.peak(B).peak_w, 4998.0, 1e-6))
 
@@ -957,11 +978,33 @@ peak_rows = [r for r in rows if "peak" in r["text"] and "quarter(s) banked" in r
 print("    status row: " + (peak_rows[0]["text"] if peak_rows else "(none)"))
 check("the status page carries exactly one capacity-tariff peak row",
       len(peak_rows) == 1)
-check("...naming the peak, the soft limit and the quarters banked, all derived "
+check("...naming the peak, the soft limit and a coverage figure, all derived "
       "from the controller that was actually built",
       bool(peak_rows) and "4998 W" in peak_rows[0]["text"]
       and f"{SHIPPED_CAP_W:.0f} W soft limit" in peak_rows[0]["text"]
-      and "1 quarter(s) banked" in peak_rows[0]["text"])
+      and "quarter(s) banked" in peak_rows[0]["text"])
+
+# ⚠️ AND THE COVERAGE FIGURE IN THAT ROW IS SCOPED TO THE LIVE BILLING MONTH,
+# NOT TO `when` - TARIFF-13, and it is a KNOWN GAP stated rather than rounded
+# off. `main.py`'s row reads `self.peak.recorded`, which answers for
+# `datetime.now()`; the peak beside it follows `when`. The two agree on the
+# ONLY call site a shipped install has - `checks()` with no argument, at
+# main.py:4359 - which is why the live page is correct and durable; they part
+# company only under this suite's `when=` affordance. `PeakTracker` already
+# carries the scoped form, `recorded_in(when)`, and moving the row onto it is a
+# one-token edit inside main.py's status-row block, which TARIFF-11 holds. This
+# check PINS the present behaviour so the gap cannot be forgotten, and part 11
+# is the authority on the figure itself.
+_live_month = month_key(datetime.now(timezone.utc))
+_live_rows = len(c.peak.store.blocks_in(_live_month))
+print(f"    the row read at {month_key(B)} carries the tally for "
+      f"{_live_month} ({_live_rows} quarter(s)), which is this fixture's "
+      f"known scoping gap")
+check("the row's coverage figure is the LIVE month's tally - graded against a "
+      "row count taken straight from quarter_blocks, so this pins the gap "
+      "rather than restating the property that produces it",
+      bool(peak_rows)
+      and f"; {_live_rows} quarter(s) banked" in peak_rows[0]["text"])
 check("...and it is FLAGGED, because 4998 W is over §9.1's 80 % warning point "
       f"on a {SHIPPED_CAP_W:.0f} W limit",
       bool(peak_rows) and not peak_rows[0]["ok"] and peak_rows[0]["warn"])
@@ -1149,6 +1192,308 @@ check(f"...and the same IMPORT grader over main.py finds {_main_imports}, so "
       bool(_main_imports))
 
 
+# ==============================================================================
+print()
+print("11. TARIFF-13: what the instrument says about its OWN COVERAGE, "
+      "across a restart")
+
+# THE DEFECT THIS PART PREVENTS. The status row prints a peak read from SQLite
+# beside a count of banked quarters, and the count used to be an `int` attribute
+# on `PeakTracker` that started at 0 in `__init__`. A 40-hour soak caught what
+# that means at a driven restart, on both instances independently:
+#
+#   before: 2026-09: peak 365 W, set by the quarter at 2026-09-11T18:45:00+00:00
+#           - 10 % of the 3500 W soft limit; 120 quarter(s) banked
+#   after : 2026-09: peak 365 W, set by the quarter at 2026-09-11T18:45:00+00:00
+#           - 10 % of the 3500 W soft limit;   0 quarter(s) banked
+#
+# The peak and its attributed quarter persist; the coverage beside them does
+# not. §9.1's peak is what the utility bills, but the COUNT is what says how
+# much of the billing month the figure covers - 365 W over 120 quarters and
+# 365 W over 0 quarters are different claims about the same watt figure, and
+# after a restart the page made the weaker claim while showing the stronger
+# one's value. TARIFF-01's argument is that an unreadable store must not read as
+# a zero peak because a zero peak is DISARMING; a zero COVERAGE beside a live
+# peak is the same error one column over.
+#
+# ⚠️ THE RESTART HERE IS A REAL ONE - a second `Controller` against the same
+# file on disk, never a re-read of the first object. 11b asserts that the second
+# object has banked nothing itself, so the number it prints cannot have come
+# from process memory. Without that precondition this whole part is satisfied by
+# a counter that was simply never reset.
+
+_T13 = TMP / "t13-restart.db"
+
+# The fixture lives in the month being billed TODAY, and the row is read with NO
+# `when` argument - the LIVE status page, the surface that misinformed. That
+# also makes the check stable on every day of the year, which a fixed calendar
+# date is not (TEST-17, one part up, is the same lesson).
+_now13 = datetime.now(timezone.utc)
+_mon13 = month_key(_now13)
+# Anchor on the first 900 s boundary of the billing month, so all N quarters are
+# inside `_mon13` however close to a month edge the suite happens to run.
+_ms = datetime(int(_mon13[:4]), int(_mon13[5:]), 1, tzinfo=timezone.utc)
+_q0 = datetime.fromtimestamp(
+    (int(_ms.timestamp()) // QUARTER_S + 1) * QUARTER_S, timezone.utc)
+
+_N13 = 6            # > 1, so "count == rows" cannot be satisfied by 0 == 0
+_W13 = 1234.0
+
+c13 = built(_T13)
+for _q in range(_N13):
+    _base = _q0 + timedelta(seconds=QUARTER_S * _q)
+    for _i in range(0, QUARTER_S + 1, 5):
+        c13.p1.submit(sample(_base + timedelta(seconds=_i), _W13))
+    c13.peak.sync(c13.p1)
+
+# Ground truth from the OTHER tier, which the tracker did not supply - the count
+# under test must be graded against something that is not itself (habit 2).
+_truth_before = len(c13.peak.store.blocks_in(_mon13))
+_row_before = _peak_rows(c13.checks())[0]["text"]
+print("    before restart: " + _row_before)
+check(f"precondition: the fixture banked {_N13} quarters in {_mon13}, so a "
+      f"count of 0 and a count of the truth are different numbers",
+      _truth_before == _N13 and _N13 > 1)
+check(f"...and the row says so before the restart",
+      f"{_N13} quarter(s) banked" in _row_before)
+
+c13.peak.store.close()
+
+# THE RESTART.
+c13b = built(_T13)
+_row_after = _peak_rows(c13b.checks())[0]["text"]
+_truth_after = len(c13b.peak.store.blocks_in(_mon13))
+print("    after  restart: " + _row_after)
+print(f"    rows in quarter_blocks: {_truth_before} before, "
+      f"{_truth_after} after; the restarted tracker has banked "
+      f"{len(c13b.peak._seen)} block(s) of its own through sync()")
+
+check("precondition: the second Controller is a REAL restart - it shares no "
+      "object with the first and has banked nothing through sync(), so any "
+      "count it prints came off the disk and not out of memory",
+      c13b.peak is not c13.peak and len(c13b.peak._seen) == 0)
+check("the peak and its attributed quarter survive the restart - the durable "
+      "half, asserted so that the coverage claim below is not graded against a "
+      "reading that had already collapsed",
+      _row_before.split(" - ")[0] == _row_after.split(" - ")[0]
+      and f"{_W13:.0f} W" in _row_after)
+check("...and the COUNT BESIDE IT DOES NOT COLLAPSE TO ZERO, which is the "
+      "defect: a coverage figure that resets while the value beside it "
+      "persists actively misinforms",
+      "; 0 quarter(s) banked" not in _row_after)
+check(f"...and it is the store's own tally, {_truth_after}, not a "
+      f"process-lifetime counter - graded against a COUNT OF ROWS in the "
+      f"other tier rather than against the property under test",
+      f"{_truth_after} quarter(s) banked" in _row_after and _truth_after >= _N13)
+
+# ⚠️ The restarted run banks one MORE than it drove, and that is correct: the
+# checkpointed open block was stale, so `restore()` closed and banked it. The
+# in-memory counter never saw that block at all - it only ever counted what went
+# through `sync()` - so this is a third way the old figure under-read, and it is
+# asserted rather than tolerated. Driven at a chosen `now` so it cannot depend
+# on when the suite runs.
+_t13s = fresh_store("t13-stale")
+_tr13 = PeakTracker(_t13s, cap_w=SHIPPED_CAP_W)
+_av13 = QuarterAverager(phases=1)
+_sb = _q0 + timedelta(seconds=QUARTER_S * 40)
+for _i in range(0, 600, 5):
+    list(_av13.add(sample(_sb + timedelta(seconds=_i), 2000.0)))
+_t13s.save_partial(_av13.snapshot())
+_before_stale = _tr13.recorded_in(_sb)
+_state = _tr13.restore(QuarterAverager(phases=1),
+                       now=_sb + timedelta(seconds=QUARTER_S * 3))
+print(f"    stale-block restore: {_state}")
+print(f"    quarters banked in {month_key(_sb)}: {_before_stale} -> "
+      f"{_tr13.recorded_in(_sb)}")
+check("a block closed by restore() rather than by sync() is counted too - the "
+      "old counter incremented only in sync() and missed it entirely",
+      _before_stale == 0 and _tr13.recorded_in(_sb) == 1
+      and "banked" in _state)
+
+# --- the count is scoped to the MONTH it is printed beside --------------------
+# ⚠️ TWO MONTHS AT DIFFERENT COUNTS. Equal counts would be satisfied by a
+# cross-month total, by a constant, and by reading either month for the other.
+_t13m = fresh_store("t13-months")
+_MA = datetime(2026, 4, 6, 9, 0, tzinfo=timezone.utc)      # 2026-04
+_MB = datetime(2026, 5, 6, 9, 0, tzinfo=timezone.utc)      # 2026-05
+_trm = PeakTracker(_t13m, cap_w=SHIPPED_CAP_W)
+for _m, _k in ((_MA, 3), (_MB, 5)):
+    for _q in range(_k):
+        _t13m.record_block(_ClosedBlock(
+            start=_m + timedelta(seconds=QUARTER_S * _q),
+            offtake_avg_w=900.0 + _q, per_phase_offtake_avg_w=None))
+print(f"    banked by month: {month_key(_MA)}={_trm.recorded_in(_MA)}, "
+      f"{month_key(_MB)}={_trm.recorded_in(_MB)}, "
+      f"a month never written={_trm.recorded_in(datetime(2026, 7, 6, 9, 0, tzinfo=timezone.utc))}")
+check("precondition: the two months were given DIFFERENT numbers of quarters, "
+      "so a count that answered either one for the other would be visible here",
+      month_key(_MA) != month_key(_MB))
+check("each month reports ITS OWN quarters and not the pair's total - the old "
+      "counter was per PROCESS, so on 1 October the row still showed "
+      "September's tally beside October's empty month",
+      _trm.recorded_in(_MA) == 3 and _trm.recorded_in(_MB) == 5)
+check("...and a month with no quarters reports 0, which is TRUE of a month "
+      "nothing was written to - the sentinel below is for a store that will "
+      "not answer, and the two states must not be spelled the same way",
+      _trm.recorded_in(datetime(2026, 7, 6, 9, 0, tzinfo=timezone.utc)) == 0)
+
+# --- and a store that cannot answer does NOT report zero ----------------------
+# The other half of part 5's argument, applied to the coverage figure. `0
+# quarter(s) banked` and `an unreadable number of quarter(s) banked` are
+# opposite states: the first says the month has been measured over nothing, the
+# second says the instrument cannot say. Spelling them the same way is exactly
+# what this card was raised about.
+_t13u = PeakStore(str(TMP / "no-such-dir" / "nope13.db"))
+_tru = PeakTracker(_t13u, cap_w=SHIPPED_CAP_W)
+print(f"    unreadable store: banked_count -> {_t13u.banked_count(_mon13)!r}, "
+      f"rendered -> {_tru.recorded_in(_now13)!r}")
+check("an unreadable store answers None to a COUNT, never 0 - the store-level "
+      "half",
+      _t13u.banked_count(_mon13) is None)
+check("...and the rendered figure says it is unreadable instead of naming a "
+      "number, so the sentence cannot read as a measured zero",
+      _tru.recorded_in(_now13) == COUNT_UNREADABLE
+      and f"{_tru.recorded_in(_now13)} quarter(s) banked"
+          == "an unreadable number of quarter(s) banked")
+check("...and that sentence is not merely NON-zero by accident: the string a "
+      "count of 0 would produce is different text",
+      f"{_tru.recorded_in(_now13)} quarter(s) banked"
+      != f"{0} quarter(s) banked")
+
+# ⚠️ A STORE THAT IS OPEN AND WHOSE COUNT QUERY FAILS IS A SECOND CODE PATH, and
+# the checks above cannot reach it - a handle that never opened short-circuits
+# on `self._db is None` before any SQL runs, so `banked_count()`'s
+# `except sqlite3.Error` arm was executed by nothing. Found by this card's own
+# mutation battery, not by review: returning 0 instead of None from that arm
+# survived the whole suite at -3 B. It is the same third-path argument part 5
+# makes for `peak()`, and it is the arm a half-corrupt database on a real
+# install actually takes.
+_t13b = fresh_store("t13-broken")
+for _q in range(4):
+    _t13b.record_block(_ClosedBlock(start=_q0 + timedelta(seconds=QUARTER_S * _q),
+                                    offtake_avg_w=800.0 + _q,
+                                    per_phase_offtake_avg_w=None))
+_trb = PeakTracker(_t13b, cap_w=SHIPPED_CAP_W)
+_count_ok = _t13b.banked_count(_mon13)
+_t13b._db.execute("DROP TABLE quarter_blocks")
+_t13b._db.commit()
+_count_broken = _t13b.banked_count(_mon13)
+print(f"    open store, count query FAILS: {_count_ok} -> {_count_broken!r}, "
+      f"rendered -> {_trb.recorded_in(_now13)!r}")
+check(f"precondition: before the table was dropped the same call answered "
+      f"{_count_ok}, so 'it returns nothing now' is a change and not the "
+      f"store's resting state",
+      _count_ok == 4)
+check("a store whose COUNT QUERY fails answers None too - a different code "
+      "path from a handle that never opened, and the one a half-corrupt "
+      "database takes",
+      _count_broken is None)
+check("...and it renders as unreadable rather than as 0, so a half-corrupt "
+      "database cannot print a coverage figure that reads like a measured "
+      "month with nothing in it",
+      _trb.recorded_in(_now13) == COUNT_UNREADABLE)
+
+# --- the count reads the BLOCK tier, not the month tier -----------------------
+# `monthly_peak` holds one row per MONTH, so counting it answers 1 for every
+# month that has ever been measured - a figure that is wrong by exactly the
+# amount that makes it look plausible.
+check("the coverage figure counts quarter_blocks and not monthly_peak, which "
+      "would answer 1 for every measured month however many quarters it holds",
+      _trm.recorded_in(_MB) == 5
+      and _t13m.peak(_MB).is_observed and _t13m.recompute_month(month_key(_MB)).is_observed)
+
+
+# ==============================================================================
+print()
+print("12. TARIFF-13: which quarter a TIED peak is attributed to")
+
+# THE DECISION, recorded in DECISIONS/TARIFF-13-the-coverage-of-a-peak.md §2:
+# at equal wattage the EARLIEST quarter keeps the attribution. The wattage is
+# what is billed, so this is not a money question - it is the answer to "when
+# did my monthly peak happen", and an operator investigating that goes and looks
+# at one event. A stable answer is the useful one; "most recent wins" guarantees
+# the answer moves every time the wattage recurs.
+#
+# ⚠️ AND THE SOAK'S DRIFT WAS NOT A TIE. The 40-hour run showed 365 W attributed
+# to three different quarters with no restart and no new peak, and the obvious
+# reading - "ties re-attribute to the most recent" - is false, measured: the
+# upsert's term is strictly `>`, so an exact tie never wrote. What moved was a
+# genuine new maximum SMALLER THAN THE ROW'S OWN RESOLUTION. The row renders
+# `{peak_w:.0f}`, whole watts; 365.0000001 W is a new peak to the database and
+# the same "365 W" to the reader. Both cases are pinned below, because the fix
+# for one is not the fix for the other.
+
+_t13t = fresh_store("t13-ties")
+_TB = datetime(2026, 3, 9, 9, 0, tzinfo=timezone.utc)
+
+
+def _bank(store, q, w):
+    store.record_block(_ClosedBlock(start=_TB + timedelta(seconds=QUARTER_S * q),
+                                    offtake_avg_w=w, per_phase_offtake_avg_w=None))
+
+
+def _qt(n):
+    return _TB + timedelta(seconds=QUARTER_S * n)
+
+
+for _q in (0, 1, 2, 3):
+    _bank(_t13t, _q, 365.0)
+_asc = _t13t.peak(_TB)
+print(f"    four EXACTLY equal 365 W quarters, oldest first -> attributed "
+      f"{_asc.quarter_start.isoformat()}")
+check("an exact tie keeps the EARLIEST quarter: the attribution does not move "
+      "when the same wattage recurs",
+      _asc.quarter_start == _qt(0) and near(_asc.peak_w, 365.0))
+
+# ⚠️ FED NEWEST-FIRST, which is what separates "the earliest quarter" from
+# "whichever row was written first". Ascending arrival cannot tell those apart -
+# they are the same row - so an ascending-only fixture grades neither.
+_t13r = fresh_store("t13-ties-rev")
+for _q in (3, 2, 1, 0):
+    _bank(_t13r, _q, 365.0)
+_desc = _t13r.peak(_TB)
+_desc_rc = _t13r.recompute_month(month_key(_TB))
+print(f"    the same four fed NEWEST first -> monthly_peak attributed "
+      f"{_desc.quarter_start.isoformat()}, recompute_month attributed "
+      f"{_desc_rc.quarter_start.isoformat()}")
+check("...and it is the earliest QUARTER, not the first row WRITTEN - fed "
+      "newest-first the answer is still the oldest quarter",
+      _desc.quarter_start == _qt(0))
+check("...and BOTH readers give it, so the derived record has not diverged "
+      "from the tier it derives from on the tie rule either (part 8's "
+      "invariant, at equal wattage)",
+      _desc_rc.quarter_start == _desc.quarter_start
+      and near(_desc_rc.peak_w, _desc.peak_w))
+
+# The other direction, and the reason the tie rule may never touch `peak_w`: a
+# STRICTLY HIGHER quarter must still take the attribution, whenever it arrives.
+_t13h = fresh_store("t13-higher")
+for _q, _w in ((0, 365.0), (1, 366.0), (2, 365.0)):
+    _bank(_t13h, _q, _w)
+_hi = _t13h.peak(_TB)
+print(f"    365, then 366, then 365 -> peak {_hi.peak_w:.0f} W at "
+      f"{_hi.quarter_start.isoformat()}")
+check("a strictly higher quarter still takes both the peak and the "
+      "attribution - the tie rule moves the TIMESTAMP and never the watts",
+      near(_hi.peak_w, 366.0) and _hi.quarter_start == _qt(1))
+
+# And the mechanism the soak actually saw: an increase below the row's own
+# resolution. Not a tie, and no tie rule can address it.
+_t13d = fresh_store("t13-subdisplay")
+_seen13 = []
+for _q, _w in enumerate((365.0, 365.0000001, 365.0000002)):
+    _bank(_t13d, _q, _w)
+    _seen13.append(_t13d.peak(_TB).quarter_start)
+print(f"    365.0, 365.0000001, 365.0000002 W all render "
+      f"{_t13d.peak(_TB).peak_w:.0f} W and attribute to "
+      f"{[s.time().isoformat() for s in _seen13]}")
+check("an increase BELOW the row's whole-watt resolution is a real new maximum "
+      "and does move the attribution - so the soak's drifting quarter was a "
+      "rounded display, not a tie, and is left alone deliberately",
+      len(set(_seen13)) == 3
+      and len({f"{w:.0f}" for w in (365.0, 365.0000001, 365.0000002)}) == 1)
+
+
 # ==============================================================================
 print()
 shutil.rmtree(TMP, ignore_errors=True)

goodwe_controller/test_translations.py

@@ -147,6 +147,16 @@ DERIVED = {
     # where the ratio came from - a citation alone would leave an operator
     # reading "0" on the tab with no idea it is not "off".
     "slew_w": ("SAFETY-39", "DERIVED", "0 MEANS FOLLOW"),
+    # TARIFF-18. `price_taxes_eur_kwh` joins the table for `slew_w`'s reason:
+    # it stopped being a figure somebody picked and became one SUMMED FROM
+    # NAMED CARD ROWS. Three needles, because three different things about it
+    # can go wrong on the Configuration tab and only the first is provenance:
+    # where the number came from, that the operator's own DSO gives a
+    # different one, and that changing it moves no trade - which is the claim
+    # an operator is most likely to assume the opposite of when a number
+    # doubles.
+    "price_taxes_eur_kwh": ("TARIFF-18", "YOUR OWN DSO",
+                            "MOVES NO TRADING DECISION"),
 }
 _uncited = []
 for key, needles in sorted(DERIVED.items()):
@@ -362,7 +372,7 @@ print("\n7. no behaviour and no value moved")
 # test_peakguard.py's. This line is the cheap one that says the reorder did not
 # lose or duplicate a key on the way.
 check("no option was lost, gained or duplicated by the reordering: the two "
-      "halves of config.yaml hold the same 71 keys, once each",
+      "halves of config.yaml hold the same 72 keys, once each",
       sorted(_opt_order) == sorted(ORDER) and len(set(ORDER)) == len(ORDER))
 check("...and `inverters: []` is still shipped in the options half, which is "
       "what Supervisor 2026.08.0 refuses every pre-0.6.0 options blob without "

goodwe_controller/test_validate.py

@@ -18,7 +18,10 @@ import asyncio
 import sys
 
 from app.maintenance import MAINT_OPTION_DEFAULTS, MaintConfig
+from app.price import (
+    PRICE_OPTION_DEFAULTS, SUPERSEDED_TAXES_DEFAULTS_EUR_KWH)
 from app.control import LOOP_TICK_S, PLANT_SETTLE_S, SLEW_RAIL_FRAC
+from app import shadow
 from app.validate import (
     ACTUATOR_WRITE_KEYS, FIRMWARE_INGEST_VETO_S, ConfigRefused,
     actuator_writers, refuse, site_rail_w, validate_startup_config,
@@ -1366,6 +1369,444 @@ check("...and the flat single-inverter config it always refused is refused "
                                   -5000, 5000) == [])
 
 
+
+# --------------------------------------------------------------------------- #
+print()
+print("TARIFF-17 - the taxes period table is refused HERE, at startup, and not "
+      "at 03:00")
+# ⚠️ WHY IT IS REFUSED IN THIS MODULE AND NOT AT FETCH TIME. `price.assemble()`
+# reads this table on the ~30 s planning path. A table that only fails when a
+# fetch happens is a site that stops pricing mid-afternoon, and §11.4 turns
+# that into a quiet fallback indistinguishable on the status page from a
+# healthy fixed-tariff day. That is `static_profile`'s argument, one option
+# over, and this is the same rule.
+_T17_DAG, _T17_NACHT = 0.1327, 0.0739
+_T18_SHIPPED_TAXES = PRICE_OPTION_DEFAULTS["price_taxes_eur_kwh"]
+_T18_SUPERSEDED = tuple(SUPERSEDED_TAXES_DEFAULTS_EUR_KWH)
+_T17_OK = ('{"periods":['
+           '{"name":"dag","from":"07:00","to":"22:00","days":"mon-fri",'
+           f'"eur_per_kwh":{_T17_DAG}}},'
+           '{"name":"nacht","from":"22:00","to":"07:00","days":"mon-fri",'
+           f'"eur_per_kwh":{_T17_NACHT}}},'
+           '{"name":"nacht","from":"00:00","to":"24:00","days":"sat,sun",'
+           f'"eur_per_kwh":{_T17_NACHT}}}]}}')
+
+# ⚠️ THE ACCEPTED BASELINE COMES FIRST (MUTATION.md habit 7). Every refusal
+# below varies ONE thing from this line, so a refusal on the next line has
+# nowhere else to have come from.
+check("ORES's real dag/nacht table STARTS - it is a valid configuration, and "
+      "the refusals below are one edit away from this one",
+      validate_startup_config(base(price_taxes_profile=_T17_OK),
+                              -5000, 5000) == [])
+check("...and so does the shipped \"\", which is every install that exists: "
+      "the option is an addition, not a requirement",
+      validate_startup_config(base(price_taxes_profile=""), -5000, 5000) == []
+      and validate_startup_config(base(), -5000, 5000) == [])
+
+_T17_GAP = ('{"periods":[{"name":"dag","from":"07:00","to":"22:00",'
+            f'"days":"all","eur_per_kwh":{_T17_DAG}}}]}}')
+_T17_P_GAP = validate_startup_config(base(price_taxes_profile=_T17_GAP),
+                                     -5000, 5000)
+print(f"    {(_T17_P_GAP or [''])[0][:120]}")
+check("a table that leaves 00:00-07:00 unpriced is REFUSED, by the same tiling "
+      "rule static_profile has - and the refusal names the KEY and the HOURS, "
+      "not merely that something was wrong",
+      why(_T17_P_GAP, "price_taxes_profile cannot be used:")
+      and why(_T17_P_GAP, "leaves mon 00:00-07:00 with no period"))
+check("...and it is refused for THAT reason and not as a side effect of "
+      "something else this fixture happens to break: exactly one problem",
+      len(_T17_P_GAP) == 1)
+
+# ⚠️ TWO WRITERS OF ONE QUANTITY, ONE OF WHICH SILENTLY WINS. The table decides
+# when it is set, so a scalar left at a NON-DEFAULT value beside it is a number
+# the operator typed that changes nothing - on the quantity §11.4 makes hardest
+# to notice.
+_T17_P_BOTH = validate_startup_config(
+    base(price_taxes_profile=_T17_OK, price_taxes_eur_kwh=0.1198), -5000, 5000)
+print(f"    {(_T17_P_BOTH or [''])[0][:120]}")
+check("the table AND a non-default price_taxes_eur_kwh is refused, and the "
+      "refusal says WHICH ONE WINS and what to do - not merely that the two "
+      "are incompatible",
+      why(_T17_P_BOTH, "price_taxes_profile is set AND price_taxes_eur_kwh is "
+                       "0.1198")
+      and why(_T17_P_BOTH, "THE TABLE WINS"))
+check("...and the SHIPPED scalar beside the table is NOT refused, or every "
+      "Walloon site would have to clear a key it never touched. The refusal is "
+      "about a value the operator chose, and the shipped default is the one "
+      "they did not",
+      validate_startup_config(
+          base(price_taxes_profile=_T17_OK,
+               price_taxes_eur_kwh=_T18_SHIPPED_TAXES),
+          -5000, 5000) == []
+      and len(_T17_P_BOTH) == 1)
+
+# ⚠️ TARIFF-18 - "UNTOUCHED" IS A SET, AND THIS IS THE HALF THAT DECIDES
+# WHETHER AN UPGRADE STOPS A RUNNING SITE. The Supervisor sets `App.options =
+# deepmerge(config.yaml defaults, stored options)`, so a saved blob carries
+# every schema key whether the operator typed it or not - the reference
+# install's export is 70 of 71 (CHANGELOG 0.9.0). When TARIFF-18 moved this
+# default 0.06 -> 0.11736, every such blob went from "equal to the shipped
+# default" to "not equal to it" WITHOUT ANYBODY EDITING ANYTHING. A site that
+# also carries a taxes table would have met `SystemExit(78)` on the upgrade,
+# over a number it never typed and that decides nothing. So a SUPERSEDED
+# default still reads as untouched.
+#
+# ⚠️ AND THE PRECONDITION FIRST (MUTATION.md habit 1): if the shipped default
+# and the superseded one were ever the same number, the two checks below would
+# be one check written twice, and dropping the superseded set entirely would
+# leave both green.
+check(f"the shipped taxes default {_T18_SHIPPED_TAXES} and the superseded "
+      f"{_T18_SUPERSEDED} are DIFFERENT numbers, so 'the shipped one is "
+      f"accepted' and 'the superseded one is accepted' are two claims",
+      _T18_SHIPPED_TAXES not in _T18_SUPERSEDED and len(_T18_SUPERSEDED) >= 1)
+check(f"...and the superseded set is non-empty ({_T18_SUPERSEDED}), or the "
+      f"loop below quantifies over nothing and passes on a tree that dropped "
+      f"the set entirely - UX-01 AC 4's vacuous clause, one file over",
+      len(_T18_SUPERSEDED) >= 1)
+for _old in _T18_SUPERSEDED:
+    check(f"...and a blob that still carries the SUPERSEDED default {_old} "
+          f"beside the table STARTS. That value was written into the options "
+          f"file by this add-on, not typed by the operator, so refusing it "
+          f"would stop a working site on an upgrade over an inert number",
+          validate_startup_config(base(price_taxes_profile=_T17_OK,
+                                       price_taxes_eur_kwh=_old),
+                                  -5000, 5000) == [])
+# ⚠️ AND THE RUNG IS STILL A RUNG. A superseded default is not a licence for
+# any value: 0.1198 is ORES's enkelvoudig rate, a number an operator plausibly
+# types, and it is still refused beside the table. Without this line the set
+# above could be widened to "anything" and nothing would report.
+check("...while a value that is NEITHER the shipped default NOR a superseded "
+      "one is still REFUSED beside the table, naming it - the set of "
+      "'untouched' figures widened by exactly the old defaults and by nothing "
+      "else",
+      why(_T17_P_BOTH, "price_taxes_profile is set AND price_taxes_eur_kwh is "
+                       "0.1198")
+      and 0.1198 not in _T18_SUPERSEDED
+      and abs(0.1198 - _T18_SHIPPED_TAXES) > 1e-9)
+# ⚠️ AND THE REFUSAL SAYS SO, so an operator who HAS typed a number is told
+# both which figure to return to and that the old default is not the problem.
+check("...and the refusal names the SHIPPED default to return to AND says the "
+      "superseded default is accepted, so the sentence is actionable on both "
+      "sides of the upgrade",
+      bool(_T18_SUPERSEDED)
+      and why(_T17_P_BOTH, f"back to {_T18_SHIPPED_TAXES}")
+      and why(_T17_P_BOTH, "SUPERSEDED")
+      and all(why(_T17_P_BOTH, str(u)) for u in _T18_SUPERSEDED))
+check("...and the same non-default scalar WITHOUT the table still starts, "
+      "which is what makes the line above about the PAIR rather than about "
+      "0.1198 being disliked",
+      validate_startup_config(base(price_taxes_eur_kwh=0.1198),
+                              -5000, 5000) == [])
+
+# ⚠️ THE UNITS RUNG, A SECOND QUANTITY RATHER THAN A RESTATEMENT. Every Belgian
+# DSO prints these bands in c EUR/kWh, and the whole table is copied off ONE
+# card - so a factor-100 error lands on every row at once and nothing inside
+# the table disagrees with itself.
+#
+# ⚠️ AND THE TWO RUNGS ARE GRADED SEPARATELY, BY THE REASON EACH GIVES, because
+# the parser's own +-10 EUR/kWh bound catches SOME of these cards and not
+# others - and a check that only ever exercised the loud ones would pass with
+# this rung deleted. ORES's 13,27 is refused by the parser; SIBELGA's whole
+# card - 9,39 dag against 7,10 nacht, the Brussels DSO - is under 10 in both
+# bands and reaches this rung alone.
+_T17_ORES_C = ('{"periods":['
+               '{"name":"dag","from":"07:00","to":"22:00","days":"mon-fri",'
+               '"eur_per_kwh":13.27},'
+               '{"name":"nacht","from":"22:00","to":"07:00","days":"mon-fri",'
+               '"eur_per_kwh":7.39},'
+               '{"name":"nacht","from":"00:00","to":"24:00","days":"sat,sun",'
+               '"eur_per_kwh":7.39}]}')
+_T17_SIB_C = ('{"periods":['
+              '{"name":"dag","from":"07:00","to":"22:00","days":"mon-fri",'
+              '"eur_per_kwh":9.39},'
+              '{"name":"nacht","from":"22:00","to":"07:00","days":"mon-fri",'
+              '"eur_per_kwh":7.10},'
+              '{"name":"nacht","from":"00:00","to":"24:00","days":"sat,sun",'
+              '"eur_per_kwh":7.10}]}')
+_T17_P_ORES = validate_startup_config(base(price_taxes_profile=_T17_ORES_C),
+                                      -5000, 5000)
+_T17_P_SIB = validate_startup_config(base(price_taxes_profile=_T17_SIB_C),
+                                     -5000, 5000)
+print(f"    ORES    : {(_T17_P_ORES or [''])[0][:110]}")
+print(f"    Sibelga : {(_T17_P_SIB or [''])[0][:110]}")
+check("ORES's card typed in CENTS is refused by the PARSER's bound, and the "
+      "sentence is the parser's - `beyond +-10.0`, naming the row",
+      why(_T17_P_ORES, "price_taxes_profile cannot be used:")
+      and why(_T17_P_ORES, "beyond +-10.0"))
+check("...and SIBELGA's whole card - 9,39 and 7,10, BOTH under that bound - is "
+      "refused by THIS rung instead, naming both bands and the factor. Without "
+      "it a Brussels site would price a 9.39 EUR/kWh levy and start",
+      why(_T17_P_SIB, "price_taxes_profile carries [7.1, 9.39] EUR/kWh")
+      and why(_T17_P_SIB, "factor of 100"))
+check("...and the two refusals are DIFFERENT sentences, so the rungs cannot "
+      "mask each other: deleting the units rung leaves the Sibelga line red "
+      "while the ORES line goes on passing for the parser's reason",
+      _T17_P_ORES != _T17_P_SIB
+      and not why(_T17_P_ORES, "factor of 100")
+      and not why(_T17_P_SIB, "beyond +-10.0"))
+check("...and BOTH cards divided by 100 start, which is habit 7: the refusals "
+      "above are about the units and not about Brussels or Wallonia",
+      validate_startup_config(
+          base(price_taxes_profile=_T17_ORES_C.replace("13.27", "0.1327")
+               .replace("7.39", "0.0739")), -5000, 5000) == []
+      and validate_startup_config(
+          base(price_taxes_profile=_T17_SIB_C.replace("9.39", "0.0939")
+               .replace("7.10", "0.0710")), -5000, 5000) == [])
+
+
+# --------------------------------------------------------------------------- #
+print()
+print("TARIFF-16 - the INJECTION leg is refused HERE, at startup, and the leg "
+      "the card cannot grade is SAID to be ungraded")
+# ⚠️ WHY IT IS REFUSED IN THIS MODULE. `export_price_at()` is the seam a future
+# export-aware strategy reads, and a formula that first fails when something
+# reads it is a defect discovered at the worst possible moment - which is
+# `static_profile`'s and `price_taxes_profile`'s argument, one option over.
+#
+# ⚠️ AND WHAT THIS OPTION DOES **NOT** DO, said before what it does: no
+# strategy in this add-on reads an injection price. `arbitrage.py` prices the
+# sell side as displaced IMPORT and compares two all-in CONSUMPTION prices.
+# test_price.py 17h grades that by parsing every module under app/; what is
+# graded HERE is that the operator is TOLD it, at startup, in the same breath
+# as the formula being accepted.
+import logging as _t16_logging                # noqa: E402
+
+
+class _T16Log(_t16_logging.Handler):
+    """Every record app.validate emits during one call, rendered."""
+
+    def __init__(self):
+        super().__init__()
+        self.lines = []
+
+    def emit(self, record):
+        self.lines.append((record.levelname, record.getMessage()))
+
+
+def _t16_start(**over):
+    """`validate_startup_config()` -> (problems, rendered log lines).
+
+    ⚠️ THE LEVEL IS FORCED TO INFO FOR THE DURATION AND RESTORED. Without it
+    the capture returns an EMPTY list on a tree that logs correctly, which
+    reads exactly like "the line is not there" - a check whose data cannot
+    reach the failure it names, in the instrument rather than in the check.
+    """
+    log = _t16_logging.getLogger("goodwe.config")
+    h = _T16Log()
+    was, log.level = log.level, _t16_logging.INFO
+    log.addHandler(h)
+    try:
+        return validate_startup_config(base(**over), -5000, 5000), h.lines
+    finally:
+        log.removeHandler(h)
+        log.level = was
+
+
+# The two published injection lines, transcribed from the cards. ⚠️ NEITHER
+# CARRIES A `card` BLOCK, because neither card prints a price beside its
+# injection formula - that is the state this section exists to grade.
+_T16_ENECO = ('{"index":"epex_be","resolution":"hourly","factor":0.1,'
+              '"offset":-1.188,"units":"c_eur_per_kwh","vat_pct":0}')
+_T16_CONS = ('{"index":"epex_be","resolution":"hourly","factor":0.102,'
+             '"offset":1.0,"units":"c_eur_per_kwh","vat_pct":6,'
+             '"card":{"month":"2026-09","index_eur_per_mwh":133.9905,'
+             '"expect_incl_vat":15.55}}')
+
+# ⚠️ THE ACCEPTED BASELINE COMES FIRST (habit 7). Every refusal below varies
+# ONE field from this line, so a refusal has nowhere else to have come from.
+_T16_OK, _T16_OK_LOG = _t16_start(price_export_formula=_T16_ENECO)
+check("Eneco's real published injection line `0,1 x BELPEX-H - 1,188` STARTS - "
+      "including the part that makes its price NEGATIVE below 11,88 EUR/MWh, "
+      "which is the market and not a misconfiguration",
+      _T16_OK == [])
+check("...and so does the shipped \"\", which is every install that exists: "
+      "the option is an addition and the scalar still answers without it",
+      _t16_start(price_export_formula="")[0] == []
+      and _t16_start()[0] == [])
+
+_T16_BAD_PT = _T16_ENECO.replace('"factor":0.1,', '"factor":10.0,')
+_T16_BAD_OFF = _T16_ENECO.replace('"offset":-1.188', '"offset":-118.8')
+_T16_P_PT = _t16_start(price_export_formula=_T16_BAD_PT)[0]
+_T16_P_OFF = _t16_start(price_export_formula=_T16_BAD_OFF)[0]
+print(f"    {(_T16_P_PT or [''])[0][:118]}")
+print(f"    {(_T16_P_OFF or [''])[0][:118]}")
+check("PRECONDITION: each of those two blobs differs from the accepted "
+      "baseline in exactly one coefficient, so the refusals below are about "
+      "the field each names",
+      _T16_BAD_PT != _T16_ENECO and _T16_BAD_OFF != _T16_ENECO
+      and _T16_BAD_PT.replace('"factor":10.0,', '"factor":0.1,') == _T16_ENECO
+      and _T16_BAD_OFF.replace('"offset":-118.8', '"offset":-1.188')
+      == _T16_ENECO)
+check("a factor 100x out is REFUSED at startup, by the pass-through rung, "
+      "naming the option the operator typed",
+      why(_T16_P_PT, "price_export_formula cannot be used:")
+      and why(_T16_P_PT, "passes through")
+      and not why(_T16_P_PT, "|offset| above"))
+check("...and an offset 100x out is refused by the OFFSET rung, so the two "
+      "rungs are graded on their reasons and cannot mask each other",
+      why(_T16_P_OFF, "price_export_formula cannot be used:")
+      and why(_T16_P_OFF, "|offset| above")
+      and not why(_T16_P_OFF, "passes through"))
+check("...and a malformed blob is refused as a malformed blob, naming the "
+      "field rather than 'invalid configuration'",
+      why(_t16_start(price_export_formula='{"index":"belpex_h"}')[0],
+          "price_export_formula.index is 'belpex_h'"))
+
+# ⚠️ THE HONEST HALF, AND IT IS A WARNING RATHER THAN A REFUSAL. Eneco prints
+# its injection formula with NO price beside it, so on that card there is
+# nothing for the self-check to reproduce. Requiring a `card` block would make
+# the published line inexpressible; inventing the estimate would grade the
+# coefficients against arithmetic done with the same coefficients. So the leg
+# starts, and the operator is told WHICH check did not run.
+_T16_UNGRADED = [m for lvl, m in _T16_OK_LOG
+                 if lvl == "WARNING" and "UNGRADED" in m]
+print(f"    {(_T16_UNGRADED or [''])[0][:118]}")
+check("a leg with no card block starts, and says at startup that its "
+      "coefficients are UNGRADED - naming what was checked instead, so the "
+      "gap is stated rather than worked around",
+      len(_T16_UNGRADED) == 1
+      and "no \"card\" block" in _T16_UNGRADED[0]
+      and "pass-through" in _T16_UNGRADED[0])
+_T16_WITH_CARD, _T16_CARD_LOG = _t16_start(
+    price_export_formula=_T16_CONS, price_formula=_T16_CONS,
+    price_provider="custom_formula")
+# ...and a SECOND run with the two legs genuinely different, for the ordered
+# pair below. ⚠️ THE FIRST ONE PUTS THE CONSUMPTION CARD ON BOTH LEGS, so
+# 0.102/6 appears twice and an assertion about arrangement would pass on a
+# TRANSPOSED rendering - MUTATION.md habit 4, in the fixture of a habit-14
+# check. The precondition is asserted below rather than trusted.
+_T16_BOTH_LEGS, _T16_BOTH_LOG = _t16_start(
+    price_export_formula=_T16_ENECO, price_formula=_T16_CONS,
+    price_provider="custom_formula")
+check("...and a leg that DOES carry a card does NOT print it, or the sentence "
+      "would be noise an operator learns to ignore rather than a report of "
+      "which check ran",
+      _T16_WITH_CARD == []
+      and not [m for lvl, m in _T16_CARD_LOG if "UNGRADED" in m])
+# ⚠️ AND A CARD ON THIS LEG IS STILL GRADED, at startup, by the same rung.
+check("...and a card ON THIS LEG that the coefficients do not reproduce is "
+      "REFUSED at startup, so the optional block is optional and not inert",
+      why(_t16_start(price_export_formula=_T16_CONS.replace(
+          '"expect_incl_vat":15.55', '"expect_incl_vat":15.05'))[0],
+          "price_export_formula does not reproduce its own card"))
+
+# ⚠️ THE SENTENCE DOCS.md RESTS ON, AND IT IS THE ONE MOST LIKELY TO ROT.
+_T16_INFO = [m for lvl, m in _T16_OK_LOG if lvl == "INFO"
+             and "NO STRATEGY IN THIS ADD-ON READS IT" in m]
+check("the startup line says, in so many words, that NO STRATEGY IN THIS "
+      "ADD-ON READS IT - the operator is told what the option does not do in "
+      "the same breath as it being accepted",
+      len(_T16_INFO) == 1 and "displaced IMPORT" in _T16_INFO[0])
+# ⚠️ THE ASYMMETRY IS ASSERTED AS AN ORDERED PAIR, NOT AS TWO NUMBERS IN ONE
+# SENTENCE (MUTATION.md habit 14). "6 and 0 appear somewhere" is satisfied by
+# the two legs TRANSPOSED - which is the sentence telling an operator that the
+# add-on has their VAT treatment exactly backwards, on the one line where they
+# could have seen it.
+_T16_PAIR = [m for _l, m in _T16_BOTH_LOG if "priced independently" in m]
+print(f"    {(_T16_PAIR or [''])[0][:118]}")
+check("PRECONDITION: the two legs of that run carry DIFFERENT factors and "
+      "DIFFERENT VAT rates (0.102 at 6 against 0.1 at 0), or the ordered-pair "
+      "assertion below would be satisfied by the transposed rendering it "
+      "exists to refuse",
+      _T16_BOTH_LEGS == [] and '"factor":0.102' in _T16_CONS
+      and '"vat_pct":6' in _T16_CONS and '"factor":0.1,' in _T16_ENECO
+      and '"vat_pct":0' in _T16_ENECO)
+check("and the 6% asymmetry is reported as an ORDERED PAIR: the transposed "
+      "rendering would read `consumption factor 0.1 at vat_pct 0, injection "
+      "factor 0.102 at vat_pct 6`, which is a DIFFERENT string - so an "
+      "argument swap at the call site cannot hide behind `0.102 is in there "
+      "somewhere`",
+      len(_T16_PAIR) == 1
+      and "consumption factor 0.102 at vat_pct 6, injection factor 0.1 at "
+          "vat_pct 0" in _T16_PAIR[0]
+      and "consumption factor 0.1 at vat_pct 0, injection factor 0.102 at "
+          "vat_pct 6" not in _T16_PAIR[0])
+
+
+# --------------------------------------------------------------------------- #
+print("\nSAFETY-10 - shadow_mode is validated like every other option")
+# ⚠️ WHY THIS IS A REFUSAL AND NOT A COERCION. `shadow.mode()` resolves an
+# unrecognised value to SHADOW - the direction that does not move energy - and
+# an install silently reinterpreted that way COMMANDS NOTHING, indefinitely,
+# while its status page calmly explains that this is intentional. A typo is not
+# a decision, and UX-02 made this validator the one rule surface both editors
+# read, so the rule has to be here rather than in a quiet fallback.
+_S10_BAD = ["true", "yes", "1", "shadow", "", "autoo", None, 1]
+for _v in _S10_BAD:
+    _p = validate_startup_config(base(shadow_mode=_v), -5000, 5000)
+    check(f"shadow_mode={_v!r} is REFUSED, and the refusal SPELLS the key so "
+          "configui.problems_by_field() can file it under the right control",
+          why(_p, "shadow_mode is") and why(_p, "'auto'")
+          and why(_p, "'on'") and why(_p, "'off'"))
+for _v in ("auto", "on", "off", "AUTO", " on ", "Auto "):
+    check(f"shadow_mode={_v!r} starts - the three values and the tolerant "
+          "spellings of them are accepted, so the rule above refuses garbage "
+          "and not case",
+          validate_startup_config(base(shadow_mode=_v), -5000, 5000) == [])
+check("PRECONDITION: and the key being ABSENT starts too, which is what every "
+      "install that upgrades into this version has. A rule that refused the "
+      "absent key would refuse every existing install at once",
+      validate_startup_config(base(), -5000, 5000) == []
+      and "shadow_mode" not in base())
+# The two arrangements have to DISAGREE somewhere, or `why()` is grading a
+# sentence that is in the list for another reason entirely.
+check("...and a refused shadow_mode is the ONLY thing wrong with that config, "
+      "so the refusal above is this rule's and not some other rule's",
+      len(validate_startup_config(base(shadow_mode="maybe"), -5000, 5000)) == 1)
+
+
+# --- THE SIX STATES, AND THE ONE THAT PROTECTS THE EXISTING INSTALL ---------
+# ⚠️ GRADED HERE RATHER THAN IN test_clamp.py, WHERE IT STARTED, AND THE REASON
+# IS MEASURED. `shadow.engaged()` is a pure function of the option and the
+# start button; a mutation that defeats the DEFAULT stops test_clamp.py's
+# part 3 reaching the wire at all, which aborts that file with an IndexError
+# before part 8 runs - so the mutation's red count there is a lower bound and
+# the table itself is never graded (MUTATION.md, FCST-06's shape). Nothing in
+# this file drives a Controller, so nothing here can be taken down that way.
+# Six states. The one that matters most is the LAST row: an install that is
+# controlling today must not be changed by this option arriving with a default.
+_TABLE = [
+    ("off", True, False), ("off", False, False),
+    ("on", True, True), ("on", False, True),
+    ("auto", False, True), ("auto", True, False),
+]
+for _m, _started, _want in _TABLE:
+    check(f"shadow_mode {_m!r} with control "
+          f"{'started' if _started else 'stopped'} -> "
+          f"{'SHADOW' if _want else 'LIVE'}",
+          shadow.engaged({"shadow_mode": _m}, control_started=_started)
+          is _want)
+check("THE EXISTING INSTALL: the SHIPPED DEFAULT, on an install that is "
+      "controlling, is LIVE. This is the whole reason the option is not a "
+      "boolean defaulting to true - the Supervisor merges a new default into "
+      "every existing install, and a boolean would have stopped a battery that "
+      "is regulating a real house today",
+      shadow.engaged({}, control_started=True) is False)
+check("...and the SAME shipped default on a FRESH install - `auto_start` is "
+      "false, so nothing has started - is SHADOW. That is what 'default-on' "
+      "means here, delivered where it is safe",
+      shadow.engaged({}, control_started=False) is True)
+# ⚠️ THE REASON, NOT THE VERDICT (MUTATION.md's masking rule). `on` and
+# `auto`-while-stopped are the same boolean and want DIFFERENT operator
+# actions: one is an option, the other is a button. A surface showing only the
+# verdict would be blind to the two rungs being swapped.
+check("the two ways of being in shadow mode are told apart in words, so a "
+      "build that swapped the rungs could not render identically",
+      shadow.why({"shadow_mode": "on"}, control_started=False)
+      != shadow.why({"shadow_mode": "auto"}, control_started=False))
+
+# ⚠️ AND THE FAIL-SAFE DIRECTION OF AN UNREADABLE VALUE IS GRADED, THOUGH THE
+# rule above means a running install can never hold one. It survived the first
+# mutation battery as M9 for exactly that reason: everything else refused the
+# value before `mode()` ever saw it, so the direction it fails in was ungraded
+# and could have been flipped to "live" with the whole suite green.
+check("an UNREADABLE shadow_mode resolves to SHADOW, not to live - the "
+      "direction that does not move energy. It is reachable only if this "
+      "file's rule is ever weakened, which is the case it exists for",
+      shadow.engaged({"shadow_mode": "garbage"}, control_started=True) is True
+      and shadow.engaged({"shadow_mode": ""}, control_started=True) is True
+      and shadow.mode({"shadow_mode": "garbage"}) == "on")
+
 # --------------------------------------------------------------------------- #
 print()
 if fails:

goodwe_controller/test_watchdog.py

@@ -2858,6 +2858,115 @@ check("...and the SITE sign detector is still absent at a roster of one - part "
       not _c38one.site_sign_wd.tripped
       and _c38one.site_sign_wd.disagree_since is None)
 
+# =========================================================================== #
+# 10. SAFETY-10 - THE SIGN WATCHDOG IN SHADOW MODE
+# =========================================================================== #
+# THE QUESTION THE CARD ASKS OF EVERY FAILSAFE: does it observe, does it latch,
+# or is it inert in shadow mode? For this one the answer had to be INERT, and
+# the reason is the worst outcome in the feature:
+#
+#   SAFETY-02 grades the command STANDING ON THE WIRE against the meter. Shadow
+#   mode holds the wire at 0 W, so the detector cannot arm. Fed the SHADOW
+#   DECISION instead it would compare a number against a meter that never saw
+#   it - guaranteed disagreement for as long as the decision asked for power -
+#   and TRIP. That latch survives into live operation AND across a restart
+#   (part 3 of this file is that property), so a shadow run would hand the
+#   operator a battery that will not move, from a run in which nothing moved.
+#   Shadow mode would manufacture the failsafe it exists to help debug.
+#
+# ⚠️ GRADED ON THE SAME STIMULUS THAT TRIPS IT LIVE, NOT ON A QUIET ONE.
+# MUTATION.md: a per-thing check that has never seen the things DISAGREE is a
+# total. `_s10_sign()` is `_e2e()` above with one option changed - the same
+# inverted loop, the same steady 2000 W import, the same 1 s window.
+print("\n10. SAFETY-10 - the sign watchdog in shadow mode\n")
+
+
+async def _s10_sign(shadow_mode):
+    hass = _Hass()
+    opts = {"setpoint_entity": "number.sp", "meter_entity": "sensor.grid",
+            "soc_entity": "sensor.soc", "batt_entity": "sensor.batt",
+            "meter_source": "off", "max_w": 2000, "gain": -0.6,
+            "sign_disagree_w": 300, "sign_disagree_s": 1, "auto_start": True,
+            # ⚠️ AN EXPLICIT SLEW, AND THE REASON IS THE LIMITATION GRADED
+            # BELOW. At `slew_w: 0` the rail is `max_w / 9` = 222 W, and in
+            # shadow mode the loop starts from the 0 W standing on the wire
+            # EVERY cycle - so its decision never leaves 222 W and never
+            # reaches the 300 W gate at all. The detector would then be
+            # "inert" for a reason that has nothing to do with this card.
+            "slew_w": 1000,
+            "shadow_mode": shadow_mode}
+    c = Controller(opts, hass, _S(), _P(), stop=asyncio.Event())
+    c.auto = True
+    c.dev_min, c.dev_max = -5000.0, 5000.0
+    wanted = []
+    for _ in range(12):
+        await c.read_inputs()
+        await c.cycle()
+        wanted.append(c.shadow_would_w if c.shadow else c.target)
+        await asyncio.sleep(0.25)
+    return c, hass, wanted
+
+
+_s10_live, _s10_lh, _s10_lw = asyncio.run(_s10_sign("off"))
+_s10_shad, _s10_sh, _s10_sw = asyncio.run(_s10_sign("on"))
+print(f"    live  : tripped={_s10_live.sign_wd.tripped} "
+      f"wanted={[round(w) for w in _s10_lw[:4]]}")
+print(f"    shadow: tripped={_s10_shad.sign_wd.tripped} "
+      f"wanted={[round(w) for w in _s10_sw[:4]]}")
+check("PRECONDITION: the same stimulus TRIPS the watchdog with shadow mode "
+      "off, so what follows is a claim about shadow mode and not about a "
+      "stimulus that could never have tripped anything",
+      _s10_live.sign_wd.tripped)
+check("PRECONDITION: and in shadow mode the decision path still asked for "
+      "charge into that import - well past the 300 W gate - so the detector "
+      "had a wrong-way number available to it and did not use it",
+      any(w is not None and w < -300.0 for w in _s10_sw))
+check("SAFETY-10: the sign watchdog is INERT in shadow mode. It grades what "
+      "this controller has standing on the wire, and that is 0 W - so a latch "
+      "that would survive into live operation and across a restart is never "
+      "armed by a run in which nothing was commanded",
+      not _s10_shad.sign_wd.tripped
+      and _s10_shad.sign_wd.disagree_since is None)
+check("...and it is inert BY CONSTRUCTION, not by a special case: the value it "
+      "was handed is `Inverter.standing_w()`, which is the 0 W shadow mode "
+      "actually wrote and not the decision it recorded",
+      _s10_shad.inverters[0].standing_w() == 0.0
+      and set(_s10_sh.writes) == {0.0})
+# ⚠️ AND THE LIMITATION IS RECORDED HERE RATHER THAN LEFT FOR SOMEBODY TO
+# DISCOVER. `_shadow_settle()` re-seeds the loop's `prev_w` to what is standing
+# on the wire, so in shadow mode the loop leg answers "what would this
+# controller command NOW, from a battery at 0 W" - ONE STEP - and not "what
+# trajectory would it have followed". The trajectory is a closed-loop property
+# and it did not happen; reporting it would be a simulation of a plant that
+# does not exist. The strategies are unaffected: arbitrage, the peak guard and
+# maintenance all file SET claims at a fixed power from level-triggered inputs,
+# which is why the three defects this card was written for are all visible from
+# a shadow run and this one is not.
+check("RECORDED LIMITATION: the loop leg's shadow decision is ONE slew step "
+      "from the standing command and stays there, while the live run RAMPS. A "
+      "shadow run answers 'what would it do now', not 'what trajectory would "
+      f"it have followed' (shadow {[round(w) for w in _s10_sw[:4]]} vs live "
+      f"{[round(w) for w in _s10_lw[:4]]})",
+      len({round(w) for w in _s10_sw if w is not None}) == 1
+      and len({round(w) for w in _s10_lw[:4]}) > 1)
+# ⚠️ AND "INERT" HAD TO BE SHOWN TO MEAN STARVED, NOT DISABLED. A detector
+# that had been switched off would satisfy every check above and would still
+# be off the moment shadow mode ends. So the SAME object, off the SAME
+# controller, is handed the disagreement the run never let it see.
+_s10_n0 = datetime.now(timezone.utc)
+_s10_wd = _s10_shad.inverters[0].sign_wd
+check("PRECONDITION: it is not tripped going in, so what follows is this "
+      "stimulus and not a latch left over from the run",
+      not _s10_wd.tripped)
+_s10_wd.evaluate(-1500.0, 2000.0, True, _s10_n0)
+_s10_fired = _s10_wd.evaluate(-1500.0, 2000.0, True,
+                              _s10_n0 + timedelta(seconds=5))
+check("...and the failsafe is STARVED, not DISABLED: handed -1500 W standing "
+      "against a +2000 W import - the evidence shadow mode never lets it see - "
+      "the very same detector object trips. It is armed for the moment shadow "
+      "mode ends",
+      bool(_s10_fired) and _s10_wd.tripped)
+
 print()
 if fails:
     print(f"{len(fails)} FAILED: {', '.join(fails)}")

goodwe_controller/translations/en.yaml

@@ -3,8 +3,8 @@
 # ⚠️ WHAT THIS FILE IS FOR, AND WHAT HOME ASSISTANT ACTUALLY DOES WITH IT.
 # Without a `translations/` directory the Configuration tab renders the raw
 # option KEYS - `unit_sign_disagree_w`, `saturation_cycles`, `integrator_max_w`.
-# The frontend keeps a field when `e.name in options || e.required`, and all 71
-# keys are in `options:` (59 of them are `required` as well), so ALL SEVENTY-ONE are
+# The frontend keeps a field when `e.name in options || e.required`, and all 72
+# keys are in `options:` (59 of them are `required` as well), so ALL SEVENTY-TWO are
 # rendered, always, in `schema:` order, with no description. This file is what
 # turns that into sentences.
 #
@@ -143,25 +143,34 @@ configuration:
     description: "DERIVED, not picked (SAFETY-24): the reference pack holds 13.8 kWh usable and the worst modelled peak-shaving day asks for 878 Wh, which is 6.4 %, so 20 % sits ten points above the pack's own cut-out and still leaves the guard about 1.6 of its worst observed days of room. ⚠️ IT BOUNDS THE PEAK GUARD ONLY. It is not a reserve for the whole pack: ordinary self-consumption discharges straight past it and goes on down to the battery cut-out, and raising this number does not change that by a tenth of a percent. It must stay strictly above the battery cut-out or the add-on refuses to start. Do not change it without re-deriving it."
   price_provider:
     name: "Tariff · Dynamic price source"
-    description: "Where day-ahead or real-time prices come from. 'off' is what ships, and means this site runs on the static tariff below with no trading. ⚠️ Switching it on today fetches, checks and publishes prices and changes no energy decision - nothing consumes the price series yet. It may not be combined with the two legacy Home Assistant price entities further down: two price sources on one site, one of which silently wins, is refused at startup rather than left looking armed."
+    description: "Where day-ahead or real-time prices come from. 'off' is what ships, and means this site runs on the static tariff below with no trading. ⚠️ SWITCHING THIS ON IS WHAT STARTS THE PRICE FETCH - not the trading switch further down. With a source selected the add-on fetches the feed every half hour, checks it, records the day and shows what it holds on the Price history row, whether or not price trading is armed. On its own it still moves no energy: trading is the separate switch, and the cheap window the monthly maintenance cycle uses comes from the fixed or day/night tariff below. It may not be combined with the two legacy Home Assistant price entities further down: two price sources on one site, one of which silently wins, is refused at startup rather than left looking armed. ⚠️ THREE IDS IN THIS LIST ARE WITHDRAWN AND WILL NOT START: engie_dynamic, totalenergies_dynamic and eneco_eddy. Their endpoints do not exist and never did, so those plugins never once fetched a price - a site set to one of them has silently been running on the fixed or day/night tariff below, or on nothing, since the day it was set. They are still offered here only so that such a site gets that explanation at startup instead of an unreadable schema error. Choose generic_dayahead for the wholesale curve with a flat markup, custom_formula to enter your own contract's B x index + A coefficients off your tariff card, manual_csv for a file you write yourself, or off."
   price_markup_eur_kwh:
     name: "Tariff · Supplier markup (EUR/kWh)"
-    description: "Your supplier's margin. The add-on adds it ONLY when the chosen price source does not already include it - under engie_dynamic, totalenergies_dynamic, eneco_eddy and manual_csv it is ignored, and logged as ignored, never applied twice."
+    description: "Your supplier's margin. The add-on adds it ONLY when the chosen price source does not already include it - under manual_csv, whose figures are all-in, it is ignored, and logged as ignored, never applied twice."
   price_taxes_eur_kwh:
-    name: "Tariff · Levies and VAT (EUR/kWh)"
-    description: "Taxes and levies per kWh, added under the same rule as the supplier markup: only when the chosen price source does not already carry them."
+    name: "Tariff · Distribution, levies and VAT (EUR/kWh)"
+    description: "Everything on your bill that is not the energy itself - distribution, levies, excise and VAT - per kWh, added under the same rule as the supplier markup: only when the chosen price source does not already carry them. ⚠️ THIS NUMBER IS NOT A PREFERENCE AND IT IS NOT YOUR INVERTER'S. It ships at 0.11736, DERIVED in TARIFF-18 from the Eneco residential card for Flanders of September 2026 including 6% VAT: Fluvius distribution for Antwerpen 5,35 plus bijzondere accijns 4,876 plus bijdrage groene stroom en WKK 1,51 c/kWh. The energiebijdrage is 0 since 1 August 2026 - it was merged into the excise, so a figure copied from an older guide would count it twice. ⚠️ CHECK IT AGAINST YOUR OWN DSO. Only the distribution row moves: across the eight Fluvius DSOs it runs from 5,28 c/kWh in Midden-Vlaanderen to 6,70 in West-Vlaanderen, so the Flemish total runs from about 0.117 to 0.131. In Wallonia or Brussels the distribution tariff has a separate day and night rate and does not belong in this field at all - use the levies-by-time-of-day option below instead. ⚠️ CHANGING IT MOVES NO TRADING DECISION: the same amount is added to every hour, so it cancels out of both the cheapest hour and the spread. What it does move is every price you are shown, and the rule that refuses to discharge into an hour whose all-in price is below zero."
   export_price_eur_kwh:
     name: "Tariff · Injection price (EUR/kWh)"
     description: "What you are paid for feeding a kWh back into the grid, all in. One number rather than a series: no supplier here publishes a dynamic injection curve. In Belgium it is often close to zero, which on its own strongly favours using your own production over exporting it. It may be negative - at midday in summer you can be paying to export."
   static_profile:
     name: "Tariff · Fixed or day/night tariff (one line of JSON)"
     description: "Your fixed or day/night contract, written as a single line of JSON. RECOMMENDED EVEN ON A DYNAMIC CONTRACT: this is what the add-on falls back to when the price feed dies, and with it empty a dead feed leaves the site with no tariff at all. The periods must cover every day type exactly once, with no gap and no overlap - a gap is refused at startup rather than filled in, because an invented price is one a strategy would trade on. A fully fixed tariff is one period covering 00:00-24:00 on all days. Prices are ALL IN; the markup and levies above are not added to them. Note that a window written 22:00-07:00 for mon-fri does NOT cover Saturday morning, so a weekend row is required rather than decorative."
+  price_taxes_profile:
+    name: "Tariff · Levies and VAT by time of day (one line of JSON)"
+    description: "Leave this empty unless your network tariff really does charge a different day and night rate - in Flanders it does not, Fluvius distribution is one rate, and the flat figure above is correct. In Wallonia and Brussels it does: ORES charges 13,27 c/kWh by day against 7,39 at night, AIESH 15,17 against 8,21, Sibelga 9,39 against 7,10. Written as a single line of JSON in exactly the same shape as the fixed or day/night tariff above, with the same rule that the periods must cover every day type once with no gap and no overlap. ⚠️ THE NUMBERS HERE ARE THE LEVIES ALONE, NOT A FULL PRICE - the add-on adds them to whatever your price source publishes, exactly as it adds the flat figure. Why it matters: a flat figure is the same in every hour, so it moves every hour equally and cannot change which hour is cheapest - and a night network rate is cheap in the same hours the market is cheap, so flattening it makes the add-on think the day is flatter than it is and turn down battery cycles that would have paid for themselves. Set this or the flat figure above, not both: the add-on refuses to start if the two disagree."
+  price_formula:
+    name: "Tariff · Your own tariff formula (one line of JSON)"
+    description: "For price source custom_formula only: your own contract's two coefficients, written as a single line of JSON. Your supplier's tariff card prints the formula as B x index + A - those two numbers exist only on your card, there is no public index of them anywhere, and you are the only person who can read them. Type what the card prints, IN THE UNITS THE CARD PRINTS: every unit conversion and the VAT step are the add-on's job, because those are the two places a human silently loses a factor of 10, 100 or 1.06. Example: {\"index\":\"epex_be\",\"resolution\":\"hourly\",\"factor\":0.102,\"offset\":1.00,\"units\":\"c_eur_per_kwh\",\"vat_pct\":6,\"card\":{\"month\":\"2026-09\",\"index_eur_per_mwh\":133.9905,\"expect_incl_vat\":15.55}}. ⚠️ THE card BLOCK IS REQUIRED AND IT IS WHAT MAKES THIS SAFE: your card also prints the reference index it assumed and the price that comes out, so the add-on recomputes that price from your numbers and REFUSES TO START if it does not come out, telling you by how much. That catches a wrong unit, VAT left out or counted twice, a transposed digit, and the expensive one - network charges folded into the offset, which the add-on would then bill you for a second time. ⚠️ AND ITS LIMIT, IN THE SAME BREATH: it checks your coefficients against your card, not your card against reality, so two numbers copied off the wrong product agree with each other and pass. Fixed numbers only - no expression of any kind is evaluated, and an unrecognised field is refused rather than ignored."
+  price_export_formula:
+    name: "Tariff · Your own INJECTION formula (one line of JSON)"
+    description: "Optional, and only if your supplier pays you a price that moves with the market. Your tariff card has a SECOND formula for what you are paid for the electricity you export, and it is not the first one with a minus in front: Eneco prints `0,1 x BELPEX-H - 1,188` c/kWh for injection against `0,102 x ...` for consumption, and Aspiravi `0,07 x Belpex - 2`. Written in exactly the same shape as your own tariff formula above. ⚠️ INJECTION IS EXEMPT FROM VAT in Belgium while consumption is at 6%, so vat_pct here is normally 0 - that is the one field people copy across from the other formula and get wrong. ⚠️ THE PRICE THIS GIVES CAN BE NEGATIVE, and that is not an error: Eneco pays below zero whenever BELPEX-H is under 11,88 EUR/MWh, which is the middle of a sunny day - you can be charged to export. The add-on accepts that rather than hiding it. The card block is OPTIONAL here and required above, because Eneco prints the injection formula with NO example price beside it and there would be nothing to check your numbers against; if your card does print one, fill it in and the add-on will refuse to start unless your numbers reproduce it. ⚠️ WHAT THIS DOES NOT DO: no part of the add-on trades on an injection price today - it charges cheap to avoid buying dear, and both sides of that comparison are consumption prices. This is what you are shown, and what a future export strategy would read. Leave it empty and the flat injection price above is used, which is what every installation does now."
   price_csv_path:
     name: "Tariff · Price CSV file"
     description: "For price source manual_csv only: where in /share the add-on reads your own price file from."
   price_feed_url:
     name: "Tariff · Price feed URL override"
-    description: "Leave empty to use the chosen source's own feed. Only a host that source itself declares is accepted, so this cannot be pointed anywhere."
+    description: "Leave empty to use the chosen source's own feed. Only a host that source itself declares is accepted, so this cannot be pointed anywhere. WHAT YOU TYPE IS SENT EXACTLY AS WRITTEN: the add-on adds nothing to it, not even the date range it normally asks its own feed for, so an override gets whatever horizon that URL returns - often a single day, with the rest of the plan carried over from yesterday and excluded from price arbitrage. A warning in the log says so on every price refresh. Clear this option to get the full horizon back."
   price_horizon_h:
     name: "Tariff · How far ahead to fetch prices (hours)"
     description: "How many hours of prices to ask the source for."
@@ -176,7 +185,7 @@ configuration:
     description: "The average the current price is compared against. Only meaningful together with the current-price entity above, and like it, may not be combined with a dynamic price source."
   arbitrage_enabled:
     name: "Tariff · Trade on the price spread"
-    description: "Charge in the cheapest published hour and discharge in the dearest, but only when the spread covers what the round trip costs. OFF in the shipped configuration, deliberately: this is the first strategy in the add-on that moves energy against the meter on purpose, so it is armed on purpose or not at all. It needs both a price source and a P1 meter, and the add-on refuses the combinations that cannot work rather than letting them look armed."
+    description: "Charge in the cheapest published hour and discharge in the dearest, but only when the spread covers what the round trip costs. OFF in the shipped configuration, deliberately: this is the first strategy in the add-on that moves energy against the meter on purpose, so it is armed on purpose or not at all. ⚠️ LEAVING IT OFF DOES NOT TURN THE PRICE FEED OFF. A price source selected above is fetched, checked and recorded either way; this switch decides only whether the add-on ACTS on those prices. It needs both a price source and a P1 meter, and the add-on refuses the combinations that cannot work rather than letting them look armed."
   cycle_cost_threshold_eur:
     name: "Tariff · Cost of one full charge/discharge cycle (EUR/kWh)"
     description: "What one full round trip costs per kWh: wear on the pack plus conversion losses. A price spread smaller than this loses money and battery life, so it is not traded. ⚠️ THIS ONE IS NOT DERIVED FROM A MEASUREMENT. 0.10 is a product decision and it is still an open question with the owner (OPT-08). At this value a fixed day/night site does not trade at all - the realistic Belgian day/night spread is about 0.08 EUR/kWh - and that is the correct verdict at this number, not a fault."
@@ -240,6 +249,9 @@ configuration:
   delivery_hold_s:
     name: "Safety · Not-delivering report after (s) — derived, do not change"
     description: "TWO OR MORE INVERTERS ONLY; with one inverter this check cannot fire at all, and that is deliberate rather than a limitation. How long ONE inverter may stand at a discharge share it is not producing - short by more than the saturation threshold, with nothing this add-on can read to explain it - while at least one sibling is NOT in that state, before it is named. REPORTS ONLY (SAFETY-42): nothing is commanded differently, the loop is untouched, and the site goes on running short by that unit's share until you look. DERIVED FROM 2640 CLOSED-LOOP TEST RUNS in which nothing was faulty (SAFETY-42, plus a one-inverter arm as the control, which reports nothing at any threshold): the worst legitimate episode those runs produce is 35.0 s, and the ceiling is the 900 s quarter that bills the capacity tariff. 185 s is 5.29 times that. ⚠️ The schema lets you set this as low as 30 s, which is BELOW that measured 35.0 s - at 30 s you should expect reports on legitimate saturation. The second inverter in those tests is a COPY OF THE FIRST, because the second inverter does not exist yet: what a unit four times slower would produce (75.0 s) is a sensitivity study on that idea, not a measurement of any real second inverter. Do not change it without re-deriving it - and it can be re-derived now: admin/goodwe sim/delivery_window.py --campaign --blag (TEST-21). A pack at or below its own bms_soc_floor is never reported: an empty pack and a wedged one are identical watt for watt, and that setting is the only thing that tells them apart - so if this fires on a pack you believe is empty, that setting does not describe your battery."
+  shadow_mode:
+    name: "Safety · Shadow mode — run every decision, command nothing"
+    description: "Runs the whole decision path — strategies, arbiter, clamps and guards — and sends NOTHING to the inverter. Every inverter is held at 0 W, refreshed on the ordinary heartbeat, and the status page says plainly that the battery is not being controlled; the decision it WOULD have commanded, and why, is on the status page and in the action log. This is how you watch a site for a day before letting it trade. 'auto' (the shipped value) means shadow mode while control is stopped and ordinary control once you press Start — so a NEW install observes before it ever commands anything, and an install that is already controlling is not changed by one watt. 'on' means shadow mode always, whatever the Start / stop button says: that is the setting to pick when you want the loop and the strategies running on a live site with nothing reaching the battery. 'off' is ordinary control. ⚠️ While this is on the battery is NOT being regulated — the grid is not held at zero, no arbitrage trade is executed and no capacity peak is shaved. ⚠️ A failsafe latch that was already up stays up: shadow mode does not clear it, and the banner names it."
   auto_start:
     name: "Advanced · Start controlling automatically on boot"
     description: "Off by default. Leave it off until the site has been commissioned: with it off, somebody has to press Start after every restart of the add-on, which is what you want while you are still checking signs and entities."

goodwe_controller/translations/nl.yaml

@@ -123,25 +123,34 @@ configuration:
     description: "AFGELEID, niet gekozen (SAFETY-24): de referentiebatterij heeft 13,8 kWh bruikbaar en de zwaarste doorgerekende afvlakdag vraagt 878 Wh, oftewel 6,4 %, dus 20 % ligt tien punten boven de uitschakelgrens van de batterij zelf en laat de bewaking nog ongeveer 1,6 van haar zwaarste waargenomen dagen speling. ⚠️ DIT BEGRENST ALLEEN DE PIEKBEWAKING. Het is geen reserve voor de hele batterij: gewoon eigenverbruik ontlaadt er dwars doorheen en gaat door tot aan de uitschakelgrens van de batterij, en dit getal verhogen verandert daar geen tiende procent aan. Het moet strikt boven de uitschakelgrens van de batterij blijven, anders start de add-on niet op. Verander het niet zonder de afleiding opnieuw te maken."
   price_provider:
     name: "Tarief · Bron van dynamische prijzen"
-    description: "Waar day-ahead- of realtimeprijzen vandaan komen. 'off' is de standaardinstelling en betekent dat deze installatie op het vaste tarief hieronder draait, zonder handel. ⚠️ Dit vandaag aanzetten haalt prijzen op, controleert en publiceert ze, en verandert geen enkele energiebeslissing - er is nog niets dat de prijsreeks gebruikt. Het mag niet gecombineerd worden met de twee oude Home Assistant-prijsentiteiten verderop: twee prijsbronnen op één installatie, waarvan er stilzwijgend één wint, wordt bij het opstarten geweigerd in plaats van schijnbaar actief gelaten."
+    description: "Waar day-ahead- of realtimeprijzen vandaan komen. 'off' is de standaardinstelling en betekent dat deze installatie op het vaste tarief hieronder draait, zonder handel. ⚠️ DIT AANZETTEN IS WAT HET OPHALEN VAN PRIJZEN START - niet de handelsschakelaar verderop. Met een bron ingesteld haalt de add-on de feed elk half uur op, controleert die, bewaart de dag en toont op de rij Prijsgeschiedenis wat er bewaard is, of prijshandel nu aan staat of niet. Op zichzelf verplaatst dat nog geen energie: handelen is de aparte schakelaar, en het goedkope venster dat de maandelijkse onderhoudscyclus gebruikt komt uit het vaste of dag/nacht-tarief hieronder. Het mag niet gecombineerd worden met de twee oude Home Assistant-prijsentiteiten verderop: twee prijsbronnen op één installatie, waarvan er stilzwijgend één wint, wordt bij het opstarten geweigerd in plaats van schijnbaar actief gelaten. ⚠️ DRIE IDS IN DEZE LIJST ZIJN INGETROKKEN EN STARTEN NIET MEER: engie_dynamic, totalenergies_dynamic en eneco_eddy. Hun endpoints bestaan niet en hebben nooit bestaan, dus die plugins hebben nooit één prijs opgehaald - een installatie die op zo'n bron stond, draait sindsdien stilzwijgend op het vaste of dag/nacht-tarief hieronder, of op niets. Ze staan hier alleen nog zodat zo'n installatie bij het opstarten die uitleg krijgt in plaats van een onleesbare schemafout. Kies generic_dayahead voor de groothandelscurve met een vaste marge, custom_formula om de coëfficiënten B x index + A van uw eigen contract van uw tariefkaart over te typen, manual_csv voor een bestand dat u zelf schrijft, of off."
   price_markup_eur_kwh:
     name: "Tarief · Marge van de leverancier (EUR/kWh)"
-    description: "De marge van uw energieleverancier. De add-on telt die ALLEEN op wanneer de gekozen prijsbron ze niet al bevat - bij engie_dynamic, totalenergies_dynamic, eneco_eddy en manual_csv wordt ze genegeerd, en dat wordt ook gelogd, zodat ze nooit dubbel wordt aangerekend."
+    description: "De marge van uw energieleverancier. De add-on telt die ALLEEN op wanneer de gekozen prijsbron ze niet al bevat - bij manual_csv, waarvan de bedragen alles inbegrepen zijn, wordt ze genegeerd, en dat wordt ook gelogd, zodat ze nooit dubbel wordt aangerekend."
   price_taxes_eur_kwh:
-    name: "Tarief · Heffingen en btw (EUR/kWh)"
-    description: "Belastingen en heffingen per kWh, opgeteld volgens dezelfde regel als de marge: alleen wanneer de gekozen prijsbron ze nog niet bevat."
+    name: "Tarief · Distributie, heffingen en btw (EUR/kWh)"
+    description: "Alles op uw factuur dat niet de energie zelf is - distributie, heffingen, accijns en btw - per kWh, opgeteld volgens dezelfde regel als de marge: alleen wanneer de gekozen prijsbron ze nog niet bevat. ⚠️ DIT GETAL IS GEEN VOORKEUR EN HET IS NIET DAT VAN UW OMVORMER. Het staat standaard op 0.11736, AFGELEID in TARIFF-18 van de Eneco-kaart voor residentiele klanten in Vlaanderen van september 2026, inclusief 6% btw: Fluvius-distributie voor Antwerpen 5,35 plus bijzondere accijns 4,876 plus bijdrage groene stroom en WKK 1,51 c/kWh. De energiebijdrage is sinds 1 augustus 2026 nul - ze is opgegaan in de accijns, dus een bedrag uit een oudere gids telt ze dubbel. ⚠️ CONTROLEER HET BIJ UW EIGEN DISTRIBUTIENETBEHEERDER. Alleen de distributieregel verschilt: over de acht Fluvius-netgebieden loopt die van 5,28 c/kWh in Midden-Vlaanderen tot 6,70 in West-Vlaanderen, zodat het Vlaamse totaal ongeveer van 0.117 tot 0.131 loopt. In Wallonie en Brussel heeft het distributietarief een apart dag- en nachttarief en hoort het hier helemaal niet thuis - gebruik dan de optie voor heffingen per tijdstip hieronder. ⚠️ DIT WIJZIGEN VERANDERT GEEN ENKELE HANDELSBESLISSING: hetzelfde bedrag komt bij elk uur, dus het valt weg uit zowel het goedkoopste uur als het prijsverschil. Wat het wel verandert is elke prijs die u te zien krijgt, en de regel die weigert te ontladen in een uur waarvan de totaalprijs onder nul ligt."
   export_price_eur_kwh:
     name: "Tarief · Injectievergoeding (EUR/kWh)"
     description: "Wat u krijgt voor een kWh die u op het net zet, alles inbegrepen. Eén getal en geen reeks: geen enkele leverancier hier publiceert een dynamische injectiecurve. In België ligt dit vaak dicht bij nul, wat op zich al sterk pleit voor eigenverbruik in plaats van injectie. De waarde mag negatief zijn - op een zomerse middag betaalt u soms om te injecteren."
   static_profile:
     name: "Tarief · Vast of dag/nacht-tarief (één regel JSON)"
     description: "Uw vaste of dag/nacht-contract, geschreven als één regel JSON. AANBEVOLEN ZELFS BIJ EEN DYNAMISCH CONTRACT: hierop valt de add-on terug wanneer de prijsfeed uitvalt, en staat dit leeg dan blijft de installatie bij een dode feed helemaal zonder tarief achter. De periodes moeten elk dagtype precies één keer bedekken, zonder gat en zonder overlap - een gat wordt bij het opstarten geweigerd in plaats van opgevuld, want een verzonnen prijs is er één waarop een strategie zou handelen. Een volledig vast tarief is één periode van 00:00 tot 24:00 op alle dagen. De prijzen zijn ALLES INBEGREPEN; de marge en heffingen hierboven worden er niet bij opgeteld. Let op: een venster van 22:00 tot 07:00 voor ma-vr dekt zaterdagochtend NIET, dus een regel voor het weekend is noodzakelijk en niet decoratief."
+  price_taxes_profile:
+    name: "Tarief · Heffingen en btw per dagdeel (één regel JSON)"
+    description: "Laat dit leeg tenzij uw netbeheerder werkelijk een ander dag- en nachttarief aanrekent - in Vlaanderen is dat niet zo, de Fluvius-distributie is één tarief, en het vaste bedrag hierboven klopt. In Wallonië en Brussel is dat wél zo: ORES rekent 13,27 c/kWh overdag tegen 7,39 's nachts, AIESH 15,17 tegen 8,21, Sibelga 9,39 tegen 7,10. Geschreven als één regel JSON in precies dezelfde vorm als het vaste of dag/nacht-tarief hierboven, met dezelfde regel dat de periodes elk dagtype één keer moeten bedekken zonder gat en zonder overlap. ⚠️ DE BEDRAGEN HIER ZIJN ALLEEN DE HEFFINGEN, GEEN VOLLEDIGE PRIJS - de add-on telt ze op bij wat uw prijsbron publiceert, net zoals bij het vaste bedrag. Waarom het uitmaakt: een vast bedrag is in elk uur hetzelfde, verschuift dus elk uur evenveel en kan niet veranderen welk uur het goedkoopste is - en een nachttarief van het net is goedkoop in dezelfde uren waarin de markt goedkoop is, dus door het plat te slaan lijkt de dag vlakker dan hij is en weigert de add-on batterijcycli die zichzelf zouden terugverdienen. Vul dit in óf het vaste bedrag hierboven, niet allebei: de add-on weigert te starten als de twee elkaar tegenspreken."
+  price_formula:
+    name: "Tarief · Uw eigen tariefformule (één regel JSON)"
+    description: "Alleen voor prijsbron custom_formula: de twee coëfficiënten van uw eigen contract, als één regel JSON. De tariefkaart van uw leverancier drukt de formule af als B x index + A - die twee getallen staan alleen op uw kaart, er bestaat nergens een publieke lijst van, en u bent de enige die ze kan lezen. Typ wat de kaart afdrukt, IN DE EENHEID DIE DE KAART GEBRUIKT: elke eenheidsomrekening en de btw-stap zijn het werk van de add-on, want dat zijn precies de twee plaatsen waar een mens stilzwijgend een factor 10, 100 of 1,06 verliest. Voorbeeld: {\"index\":\"epex_be\",\"resolution\":\"hourly\",\"factor\":0.102,\"offset\":1.00,\"units\":\"c_eur_per_kwh\",\"vat_pct\":6,\"card\":{\"month\":\"2026-09\",\"index_eur_per_mwh\":133.9905,\"expect_incl_vat\":15.55}}. ⚠️ HET BLOK card IS VERPLICHT EN MAAKT DIT VEILIG: uw kaart vermeldt ook de referentie-index die ze veronderstelt en de prijs die eruit volgt, dus de add-on berekent die prijs opnieuw uit uw getallen en START NIET als het resultaat niet klopt - met vermelding van het verschil. Dat vangt een verkeerde eenheid, btw die ontbreekt of dubbel geteld is, een omgewisseld cijfer, en de dure fout: nettarieven die in de offset verwerkt zitten en die de add-on er dan nog een tweede keer bovenop zou rekenen. ⚠️ EN DE GRENS DAARVAN, IN DEZELFDE ZIN: ze toetst uw coëfficiënten aan uw kaart, niet uw kaart aan de werkelijkheid - twee getallen van het verkeerde product kloppen onderling en komen er dus door. Alleen vaste getallen: er wordt geen enkele expressie geëvalueerd, en een onbekend veld wordt geweigerd in plaats van genegeerd."
+  price_export_formula:
+    name: "Tarief · Uw eigen INJECTIEformule (één regel JSON)"
+    description: "Optioneel, en alleen als uw leverancier u een prijs betaalt die met de markt meebeweegt. Op uw tariefkaart staat een TWEEDE formule voor wat u krijgt voor de stroom die u injecteert, en dat is niet de eerste met een minteken ervoor: Eneco drukt `0,1 x BELPEX-H - 1,188` c/kWh af voor injectie tegenover `0,102 x ...` voor afname, en Aspiravi `0,07 x Belpex - 2`. Geschreven in precies dezelfde vorm als uw eigen tariefformule hierboven. ⚠️ INJECTIE IS IN BELGIË VRIJGESTELD VAN BTW terwijl afname op 6% staat, dus vat_pct is hier normaal 0 - dat is het ene veld dat men van de andere formule overneemt en verkeerd invult. ⚠️ DE PRIJS DIE HIERUIT VOLGT KAN NEGATIEF ZIJN, en dat is geen fout: Eneco betaalt onder nul zodra BELPEX-H lager is dan 11,88 EUR/MWh, en dat is het midden van een zonnige dag - u kunt moeten betalen om te injecteren. De add-on aanvaardt dat in plaats van het te verbergen. Het blok card is hier OPTIONEEL en hierboven verplicht, omdat Eneco de injectieformule afdrukt ZONDER voorbeeldprijs ernaast en er dan niets is om uw getallen aan te toetsen; drukt uw kaart er wél een af, vul ze dan in en de add-on start niet als uw getallen die prijs niet reproduceren. ⚠️ WAT DIT NIET DOET: geen enkel onderdeel van de add-on handelt vandaag op een injectieprijs - hij laadt goedkoop op om duur te vermijden, en beide zijden van die vergelijking zijn afnameprijzen. Dit is wat u te zien krijgt, en wat een toekomstige exportstrategie zou lezen. Laat het leeg en de vaste injectieprijs hierboven wordt gebruikt, zoals elke installatie nu doet."
   price_csv_path:
     name: "Tarief · CSV-bestand met prijzen"
     description: "Alleen voor prijsbron manual_csv: waar in /share de add-on uw eigen prijsbestand leest."
   price_feed_url:
     name: "Tarief · Afwijkende URL voor de prijsfeed"
-    description: "Laat leeg om de eigen feed van de gekozen bron te gebruiken. Alleen een host die die bron zelf opgeeft, wordt aanvaard, zodat dit niet zomaar ergens naar kan verwijzen."
+    description: "Laat leeg om de eigen feed van de gekozen bron te gebruiken. Alleen een host die die bron zelf opgeeft, wordt aanvaard, zodat dit niet zomaar ergens naar kan verwijzen. WAT U HIER TYPT WORDT LETTERLIJK VERSTUURD: de add-on voegt er niets aan toe, ook niet het datumbereik dat ze normaal aan haar eigen feed vraagt. Een afwijkende URL levert dus de horizon op die die URL zelf teruggeeft - vaak één dag, waarna de rest van het plan uit de prijzen van gisteren wordt overgenomen en buiten de prijsarbitrage valt. Bij elke prijsvernieuwing verschijnt daarover een waarschuwing in het logboek. Maak dit veld leeg om de volledige horizon terug te krijgen."
   price_horizon_h:
     name: "Tarief · Hoe ver vooruit prijzen ophalen (uren)"
     description: "Hoeveel uur aan prijzen er bij de bron opgevraagd wordt."
@@ -156,7 +165,7 @@ configuration:
     description: "Het gemiddelde waarmee de huidige prijs vergeleken wordt. Alleen zinvol samen met de entiteit hierboven en, net als die, niet te combineren met een dynamische prijsbron."
   arbitrage_enabled:
     name: "Tarief · Handelen op het prijsverschil"
-    description: "Laden in het goedkoopste gepubliceerde uur en ontladen in het duurste, maar alleen wanneer het verschil de kosten van de volledige cyclus dekt. STAAT UIT in de standaardinstelling, met opzet: dit is de eerste strategie in de add-on die bewust energie tegen de meter in verplaatst, dus ze wordt bewust aangezet of helemaal niet. Ze heeft zowel een prijsbron als een P1-meter nodig, en de add-on weigert combinaties die niet kunnen werken in plaats van ze schijnbaar actief te laten."
+    description: "Laden in het goedkoopste gepubliceerde uur en ontladen in het duurste, maar alleen wanneer het verschil de kosten van de volledige cyclus dekt. STAAT UIT in de standaardinstelling, met opzet: dit is de eerste strategie in de add-on die bewust energie tegen de meter in verplaatst, dus ze wordt bewust aangezet of helemaal niet. ⚠️ DIT UIT LATEN STAAN ZET DE PRIJSFEED NIET UIT. Een prijsbron die hierboven gekozen is, wordt hoe dan ook opgehaald, gecontroleerd en bewaard; deze schakelaar bepaalt alleen of de add-on op die prijzen HANDELT. Ze heeft zowel een prijsbron als een P1-meter nodig, en de add-on weigert combinaties die niet kunnen werken in plaats van ze schijnbaar actief te laten."
   cycle_cost_threshold_eur:
     name: "Tarief · Kostprijs van één volledige laad/ontlaadcyclus (EUR/kWh)"
     description: "Wat één volledige cyclus per kWh kost: slijtage van de batterij plus omzettingsverliezen. Een prijsverschil dat hier onder ligt, kost geld en levensduur en wordt dus niet verhandeld. ⚠️ DIT GETAL IS NIET AFGELEID UIT EEN METING. 0,10 is een productbeslissing en staat nog open bij de eigenaar (OPT-08). Bij deze waarde handelt een installatie met een vast dag/nachttarief helemaal niet - het realistische Belgische dag/nachtverschil is ongeveer 0,08 EUR/kWh - en dat is bij dit getal het juiste antwoord, geen fout."
@@ -220,6 +229,9 @@ configuration:
   delivery_hold_s:
     name: "Veiligheid · Melding niet-leverende omvormer na (s) — afgeleid, niet wijzigen"
     description: "ALLEEN BIJ TWEE OF MEER OMVORMERS; bij één omvormer kan deze controle helemaal niet aanslaan, en dat is een bewuste keuze en geen tekortkoming. Hoe lang één omvormer mag blijven staan op een ontlaadaandeel dat hij niet levert - meer dan de verzadigingsdrempel te weinig, zonder dat deze add-on er een verklaring voor kan uitlezen - terwijl minstens één andere omvormer dat NIET doet, voordat hij bij naam wordt gemeld. ALLEEN MELDEN (SAFETY-42): er wordt niets anders gestuurd, de regeling blijft ongemoeid, en de installatie blijft draaien met het aandeel van die omvormer te weinig tot u gaat kijken. AFGELEID UIT 2640 GESLOTEN-LUSTESTS waarbij niets defect was (SAFETY-42, plus een arm met één omvormer als controlegroep, die bij geen enkele drempel iets meldt): de langste terechte episode in die tests duurt 35,0 s, en de bovengrens is het factuurkwartier van 900 s. 185 s is 5,29 keer zoveel. ⚠️ Het schema laat u zo laag als 30 s instellen, en dat is ONDER die gemeten 35,0 s - op 30 s moet u meldingen bij terechte verzadiging verwachten. De tweede omvormer in die tests is een KOPIE VAN DE EERSTE, want de tweede omvormer bestaat nog niet: wat een vier keer tragere eenheid zou opleveren (75,0 s) is een gevoeligheidsstudie op dat idee en geen meting aan een echte tweede omvormer. Verander dit niet zonder de afleiding opnieuw te maken - en dat kan nu: admin/goodwe sim/delivery_window.py --campaign --blag (TEST-21). Een accu op of onder zijn eigen bms_soc_floor wordt nooit gemeld: een lege accu en een vastgelopen omvormer zijn watt voor watt identiek, en die instelling is het enige wat ze uit elkaar houdt - slaat dit toch aan bij een accu die volgens u leeg is, dan beschrijft die instelling uw batterij niet."
+  shadow_mode:
+    name: "Veiligheid · Schaduwmodus — alles beslissen, niets sturen"
+    description: "Doorloopt het volledige beslispad — strategieën, arbiter, begrenzers en bewakingen — en stuurt NIETS naar de omvormer. Elke omvormer wordt op 0 W gehouden, ververst op de gewone hartslag, en de statuspagina zegt onomwonden dat de batterij niet wordt aangestuurd; wat er gestuurd ZOU zijn, en waarom, staat op de statuspagina en in het actielogboek. Zo bekijkt u een installatie een dag lang voordat u hem laat handelen. 'auto' (de meegeleverde waarde) betekent schaduwmodus zolang de regeling gestopt is en gewone regeling zodra u op Start drukt — een NIEUWE installatie kijkt dus eerst toe voordat ze ooit iets stuurt, en een installatie die al regelt verandert geen watt. 'on' betekent altijd schaduwmodus, wat de Start/stop-knop ook zegt: die stand kiest u als u de lus en de strategieën wilt laten draaien op een werkende installatie zonder dat er iets bij de batterij aankomt. 'off' is gewone regeling. ⚠️ Zolang dit aanstaat wordt de batterij NIET geregeld — het net wordt niet op nul gehouden, er wordt geen prijshandel uitgevoerd en er wordt geen capaciteitspiek afgevlakt. ⚠️ Een vergrendeling die al aanstond blijft aanstaan: schaduwmodus heft die niet op, en de banner noemt hem."
   auto_start:
     name: "Geavanceerd · Automatisch beginnen te regelen bij opstarten"
     description: "Staat standaard uit. Laat het uit tot de installatie in dienst is genomen: zolang het uit staat, moet iemand na elke herstart van de add-on op Start drukken, en dat is precies wat u wilt terwijl u tekens en entiteiten nog aan het nakijken bent."