ARCH-02: assert the invariant, because a fixture cannot enumerate arrangements

Review approved and then attacked part 5b, the control that stands between B1's
defect and a green suite. It got through in three edits:

    A1  delete `END LEG`                        5b CATCHES it        2 FAIL
    A2  ...and reorder the legs                 5b BLIND             1 FAIL
    A3  ...and reword the closing summary       0 FAIL, "all checks passed"
                                                with a splitter that closed
                                                ZERO legs

⚠️ TWO OF THOSE THREE ARE ORDINARY REFACTORS - reordering report legs, rewording
a summary line - and neither reads as touching a safety check. 5b caught the
unclosed splitter only because the clean leg happened to be printed LAST, and
the backstop that saved A2 was a hardcoded transcription of the tool's own
sentence, so rewording that sentence blinded it too.

FIXED BY ASSERTING THE STRUCTURE RATHER THAN ADDING A FIXTURE: a leg may not
open while one is open, and every leg that opens must be explicitly closed.
Driven - deleting `END LEG` now fails on the FIRST edit, whatever the order or
the wording:

    AssertionError: leg 'SAME-STEP' opened while 'STAGED' was still open - the
    tool stopped closing its legs, and a splitter that never closes swallows the
    closing summary into the last leg.

All three attacks include that edit, so one assertion kills the class. Clean
tree unchanged: 28/28, all checks passed.

⭐ AND THE RULE IN MUTATION.md IS EXTENDED, because review's finding is the
general case of it. It said "a per-thing check that has never seen the things
DISAGREE is a total". Part 5b DOES make them disagree, every run, and was still
blind. So:

    ...AND ONE THAT HAS ONLY SEEN THEM DISAGREE IN ONE ARRANGEMENT IS A TOTAL
    OVER THAT ARRANGEMENT. When a fixture cannot enumerate the arrangements,
    assert the invariant they share.

Also recorded, NOT fixed, with the reason: the reference carries `entity_id
unique_id device` and grades all three, but never the discovery TOPIC. Review
measured `homeassistant/... -> ha/...` exiting 0 with no findings while every
announced entity dies. `discovery_payloads()` already returns the topic and
`announced_rows` discards it, so a fourth column closes it - but the prefix is
HA's fixed contract rather than a name this project chooses, so it is not what a
tidy-up rename reaches. Lower LIKELIHOOD than the N1 gap it resembles, not lower
consequence, and it stops being a note the day the topic becomes configurable.

Two stale figures corrected: the tool claimed five migration mutations where
there are nine, and pointed at a DOCS.md heading that does not exist (the real
one is "Before you commission inverter B", verified present at DOCS.md:1577).

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

goodwe_controller/CHANGELOG.md

@@ -46,8 +46,10 @@ threshold. Measured: a wedged inverter goes from named on 199 of 200 cycles to
 **0 of 200** at a load its sibling can carry alone. The alarm returns once the
 healthy pack saturates - swept, that is a 5000 W load on the fixture, **below**
 the proportional-regime formula's 6500 W and not above it. ⚠️ **N=1 IS
-UNAFFECTED**: `allocator.plan()` returns before weights are read at all. The
-closure is card SAFETY-43.
+UNAFFECTED**: `allocator.plan()` returns before weights are read at all.
+⚠️ **CLOSED BY SAFETY-43 ON THIS BRANCH** - see its section below; the regression
+above is history, and the record of it is kept because the measurement that
+found it is what the fix is graded against.
 
 **PKG-09** adds `tools/predeploy_check.py`. ⚠️ **RUN IT BEFORE DEPLOYING THIS
 RELEASE** - it is what caught the fact that 0.8.0 had five runtime commits
@@ -97,6 +99,65 @@ what happens when nobody does.
 | _this branch_ | UX-02 - a configuration page in the ingress panel, where the validator's refusals can be seen |
 | _this branch_ | UX-04 - UX-01's three unmet acceptance criteria: one withdrawn, one built, one re-attributed |
 | _this branch_ | TEST-21 - `delivery_hold_s`'s floor re-derived from a harness that is now committed, and the recorded 30.0 s did not reproduce |
+| _this branch_ | SAFETY-43 - delinquency measured against the ask as well as against a flat 500 W, closing OPT-09's disclosed detection regression |
+
+⚠️ **SAFETY-43 CLOSES THE DETECTION REGRESSION OPT-09 DISCLOSED, AND IT IS A
+TWO-INVERTER FIX. N=1 IS BYTE-IDENTICAL.** `delivery.delinquent()` named a unit
+whose shortfall exceeded an **absolute** `min_w = saturation_w = 500 W`. OPT-09's
+weights shrink a low-headroom unit's share, and shrinking the share shrinks the
+gap - so a unit standing at +125 W and delivering **0 W**, 100 % delinquent, was
+never named. It now names a unit whose gap exceeds `min_w` **OR** exceeds
+`DELIVERY_SHARE_FRACTION` (0.85) of that unit's **own share**. Measured on the
+same closed-loop fixture, same weights, same detector:
+
+    load 1500 W  OPT-09 weights  the old rule    named on   0/200 cycles
+    load 1500 W  OPT-09 weights  the shipped one named on 200/200 cycles
+
+⚠️ **`saturation_w` WAS NOT LOWERED, AND THAT IS THE POINT.** Lowering it would
+report normal saturation as delinquency on every unit at once - SAFETY-41's
+four-attempt false-trip regime, *"i'm getting really annoyed by the notifications
+in my HA"*. This ADDS a second way to be named: all seven of `test_delivery.py`
+part 1's existing fixtures answer identically under the old rule and the new one,
+and the absolute arm's suppression window is still exactly 1000 W / 6500 W.
+
+**0.85 is derived, not chosen.** `admin/goodwe:sim/delivery_window.py --campaign
+--fractions` grades it over the SAME 2640 no-fault runs that produced
+`delivery_hold_s`'s floor. The worst continuous legitimate episode is **35.0 s**
+under the absolute arm alone (SAFETY-42 §3.3, reproduced in the same run) and
+**40.0 s** at 0.85. ⚠️ **THE CURVE HAS NO CLIFF AND THAT IS THE FINDING**: swept
+at twenty fractions from 0.05 to 0.99, everything from **0.45 to 0.99** is 40.0
+or 45.0 s - within one control cycle of every other - and below 0.45 it rises
+gradually to 90.0 s at 0.05. ⚠️ **"Zero false namings" is not achievable at any
+fraction and the record says so**; what is zero is false ALARMS - the longest
+legitimate episode in the whole sweep is 90.0 s against a 185 s hold, so nothing
+comes within 95 s of notifying anybody at any fraction measured, and 145 s at the
+shipped one. The N=1 control arm is 0.0 s at every fraction in all 2640
+one-inverter runs, and the flapping family is 0.0 s in all 840.
+
+⚠️ **[[CFG-07]] GETS ONE CONTROL CYCLE WORSE AND IS NOT FIXED HERE.**
+`delivery_hold_s` is declared `int(30,900)` while the measured legitimate worst
+was 35.0 s; it is now 40.0 s, so the band of schema-legal false-tripping values
+widens from `[30, 35]` to `[30, 40]`. CFG-07 should be re-derived against 40.0 s.
+⚠️ **IT MUST CLOSE BEFORE INVERTER B IS COMMISSIONED (~2026-09-12)**, not before
+the next deploy: the band is UNREACHABLE at N=1 - `delinquent()` answers `{}` for
+every input at a roster of one, so no `delivery_hold_s` can false-trip on the
+install running today - and commissioning B is the moment it becomes reachable.
+⚠️ **AND CFG-07 HAS NO DECISION DOCUMENT IN THIS TREE** - it exists as a card
+reference here and in SAFETY-43's record and nowhere else, so whoever takes it
+writes `DECISIONS/CFG-07-*.md` first.
+**SAFETY-43 CHANGES NO OPTION VALUE, NO SCHEMA BOUND AND NO DEFAULT** - the
+fraction is a derived constant with a committed harness behind it, deliberately
+not a knob, for the reason there is no `delivery_w`. The one edit to
+`config.yaml` is a COMMENT: the `delivery_hold_s` block described the check as
+"short by more than `saturation_w`", which is now only half of it.
+
+**No behaviour change at one inverter, asserted rather than argued**: `plan()` is
+handed a `weights` mapping that raises if anything reads it and still answers
+identically at a roster of one (and the same mapping raises at a roster of two,
+so the tripwire is real), and `delinquent()` answers `{}` on all 84 single-unit
+(share, measured, rule) combinations including 0 of 125 W.
+`DECISIONS/SAFETY-43-delinquency-relative-to-the-ask.md` carries the curve, the
+positive controls and the CFG-07 assessment.
 
 ⚠️ **TEST-21 CHANGES NO CODE AND NO OPTION. IT CHANGES A NUMBER THIS RECORD
 CLAIMED.** `delivery_hold_s: 185` shipped resting on *"30.0 s, the worst

goodwe_controller/DECISIONS/OPT-09-soc-aware-weights.md

@@ -161,17 +161,18 @@ its floor is `account()`'s explained case, so SAFETY-42 stays silent - and after
 this card that ask does not arrive in the first place, which removes the benign
 arm from the detector's input rather than teaching it a new discriminator.
 
-⚠️ **BUT THE WEIGHT DOES MOVE, AND IT NARROWS SAFETY-42's DETECTION WINDOW. THIS
-IS A DETECTION REGRESSION AT N=2 AND IT IS NOT FIXED HERE.** An earlier draft of
+⚠️ **BUT THE WEIGHT DOES MOVE, AND IT NARROWED SAFETY-42's DETECTION WINDOW.
+THAT WAS A DETECTION REGRESSION AT N=2, IT WAS NOT FIXED HERE, AND SAFETY-43
+CLOSED IT - see the block at the end of this section.** An earlier draft of
 this section said "no envelope closes and no weight moves - OPT-09 cannot see it
 at all". The second clause was **false**, and it was load-bearing for the claim
 that the two cards do not overlap. A weight is a function of the pack's ENERGY
 HEADROOM, not of what the pack delivers, so a wedged unit's weight moves whenever
 its headroom differs from its sibling's - which is the ordinary case this card
-exists to exploit. And `delivery.delinquent()` (`app/delivery.py:484`)
-names a unit only while its `short_by()` gap exceeds `min_w =
-Tuning.saturation_w` - the comparison is `app/delivery.py:531`, and it is
-**500 W in absolute watts**. Shrinking a unit's share shrinks its gap. Shrink the
+exists to exploit. And `delivery.delinquent()`
+named a unit only while its `short_by()` gap exceeded `min_w =
+Tuning.saturation_w`, and that was **500 W in absolute watts** with nothing
+else beside it. Shrinking a unit's share shrinks its gap. Shrink the
 share far enough and the gap drops below 500 W while the unit is still delivering
 nothing, and the alarm stops firing.
 
@@ -200,20 +201,47 @@ a 9600 W site; above it - once the healthy pack is at its own rating and
 `_fill()`'s last-resort pass hands the wedged unit a big share again - the alarm
 returns. ⚠️ BOTH BOUNDS ARE ARITHMETIC ABOUT `_fill()`'s PROPORTIONAL REGIME AND NEITHER IS A REACHABLE STEADY STATE. Swept on this fixture, the healthy pack's own 5000 W rating binds FIRST: suppressed 0/200 up to a 3000 W load, 4/200 at 4000 W, 41/200 at 4900 W (site target 5320 W, the largest reached with the wedged unit still under 500 W), then 195/200 at 5000 W once `_fill()` pins A at its cap and hands B 3000 W. So the alarm returns BELOW the 6500 W formula bound, not above it. The equal-weights 1000 W bound is unreachable for the same reason - the equal arm names the wedged unit 199/200 at every load swept, 1000 W included.
 
-`test_packshare.py` part 8b grades all of it and **pins the current,
-unflattering behaviour**, so that the day it changes a named check moves. The
-closure - `delinquent()` measured against the ask rather than a flat 500 W - is
-card **SAFETY-43**.
+`test_packshare.py` part 8b graded all of it and **pinned the unflattering
+behaviour**, so that the day it changed a named check would move. It has moved.
 
-So the seam, stated accurately: **OPT-09 stops the ask AND narrows SAFETY-42's
-detection window for a low-headroom unit.** The two cards do not merely meet from
-opposite sides; this one takes something away from the other one. Closing the gap
-means making `delinquent()` relative to the ask rather than absolute, which is
-SAFETY-42's code and a design change - it is filed as its own card, deliberately
-not done here, and this paragraph is its input. Until then this is a **disclosed
-residual**, in the same voice as SAFETY-13's "2 of 272" and SAFETY-42's own "the
-discriminator does not exist": at two inverters, a wedged unit with materially
-less energy headroom than its sibling can go unreported at ordinary house loads.
+### ⚠️ CLOSED BY SAFETY-43 - THIS IS NO LONGER A DISCLOSED RESIDUAL
+
+This section used to end *"until then this is a disclosed residual [...] at two
+inverters, a wedged unit with materially less energy headroom than its sibling
+can go unreported at ordinary house loads"*. That sentence is **retired, not
+softened**, and what replaces it is a measurement rather than an intention.
+
+`delivery.delinquent()` is now relative to the ask **as well as** absolute:
+
+    named if  short_by() > min_w   OR   short_by() > frac * share
+
+with `frac = delivery.DELIVERY_SHARE_FRACTION`. A unit delivering 0 of 125 W is
+100 % delinquent and is named; a unit delivering 0 of 1500 W was already named
+and still is. On the **same fixture, under the same weights**, part 8b now
+grades both rules in one run - `share_frac=None` is SAFETY-42's absolute arm,
+exactly:
+
+    load 1500 W  OPT-09 weights  absolute arm alone   named on   0/200 cycles
+    load 1500 W  OPT-09 weights  the shipped rule     named on 200/200 cycles
+
+⚠️ **`min_w` WAS NOT LOWERED, AND THAT IS THE HALF THAT MATTERS HERE.** The
+absolute arm's suppression window is still exactly the arithmetic above - 1000 W
+at equal weights, 6500 W at these - and part 8b still asserts both numbers.
+Lowering `saturation_w` would have traded a missed alarm for a false one on
+every unit at once, which is SAFETY-41's four-attempt regime. SAFETY-43 added a
+**second** way to be named and left the first where it was.
+
+⚠️ **AND WHAT OPT-09 STILL DOES NOT DO IS UNCHANGED.** This card stops the site
+ASKING a pack whose own SoC says it cannot deliver; it does not re-allocate a
+wedged unit's watts, and SAFETY-43 did not make it. The alarm got louder; the
+loop did not move. The derivation of `frac` - swept over the same 2640 no-fault
+runs that produced `delivery_hold_s`'s floor - is in
+`DECISIONS/SAFETY-43-delinquency-relative-to-the-ask.md`.
+
+So the seam, stated accurately **as of SAFETY-43**: OPT-09 stops the ask, and it
+still narrows the ABSOLUTE arm's window for a low-headroom unit exactly as
+described above - but it no longer narrows the DETECTOR, because the detector no
+longer reads only that arm.
 
 ⚠️ **And OPT-09 supplies the mechanism SAFETY-42 said was missing, without
 connecting it.** That module's rejection of re-allocation rests on *"the only

goodwe_controller/DECISIONS/SAFETY-31-circulating-power.md

@@ -149,8 +149,70 @@ each swept across the **whole range `config.yaml` accepts** for the two settings
 that decide how fast the site can turn around: `gain` `float(0.05,1.0)` and
 `slew_w` `int(50,5000)`.
 
+### ⚠️ THE HARNESS BEHIND EVERY FIGURE ABOVE IS NOT COMMITTED, AND UNTIL 2026-09-07 THAT MADE THEM UNCHECKABLE
+
+**Read this before quoting any number in this section.** The paragraph below
+said the campaign harness "is not committed here" and treated that as a
+packaging detail. It is not: a figure produced by a script that exists in
+nobody's tree cannot be re-run, cannot be reviewed, and cannot be defended when
+it is contradicted. It has now been contradicted twice.
+
+| sweep | worst peak | worst continuous | trips |
+|---|---:|---:|---:|
+| the 924-run campaign below — **harness uncommitted** | 1700 W | 505.0 s at 100 W; 5.0 s above 700 W | 0 / 924 |
+| independent reviewer sweep, 2026-09-07, 48 honest reversals | **2750 W** | **15.0 s above 700 W** | 0 / 48 |
+| `admin/goodwe` `two_master_circulation`, 840 runs — **committed** | 1048 W | 10.0 s at 100 W; 5.0 s above 700 W | **0 / 840** |
+
+**This is not proof that anything was fabricated, and it should not be reported
+as one.** The three swept different grids. What the third one adds is a
+measurement of *why* the spread is that wide — on one grid, changing nothing but
+the model:
+
+| plant / stagger | worst legitimate peak |
+|---|---:|
+| modelled plant (lag 10 s, ramp 800 W/s), staggers up to a whole cycle | 1048 W |
+| `INSTANT` (lag 0, unbounded ramp), staggers up to a whole cycle | 2250 W |
+| `INSTANT`, staggers strictly under a whole cycle | **0 W** |
+
+A factor of 2.1×, and a factor of infinity, between three defensible
+descriptions of the same rig. **The plant model and the write-stagger set are
+terms of the number**, and a worst case quoted without them is not a
+measurement. That is enough to explain the whole spread above without anybody
+having invented anything — and it is exactly what cannot be established when the
+instrument is missing.
+
+**What survives, and what does not.**
+
+* **The window argument survives, and is now committed.** The claim that
+  decides `circulation_hold_s: 75` is *"the worst continuous legitimate episode
+  above 700 W is about one control cycle"*. All three sweeps agree on the shape
+  of that (5.0 s, 15.0 s, 5.0 s — one to three cycles against a fifteen-cycle
+  window), and **all three trip zero times**. `two_master_circulation` re-runs
+  it on every pull request in `admin/goodwe`.
+* **The threshold curve does NOT survive as stated.** `505.0 s at 100 W` is the
+  number the "knee at 400 W" argument for `circulation_w: 700` rests on, and the
+  committed sweep measures **10.0 s** at 100 W on its grid — 50× smaller. The
+  curve still *falls* with the threshold (126 of 840 runs cross 100 W against 1
+  that crosses 700 W), so the knee is real in direction; its depth is not
+  established by anything anybody can run. **Do not quote 505.0 s.**
+* **Nothing about the guard is compromised.** 0 trips in 924 + 48 + 840
+  non-faulty runs, from three independent grids.
+
+**What would settle it:** the original harness, committed. Until then the
+committed sweep is the only figure in this section anybody can check, and it is
+labelled as its own grid's rather than as a reproduction.
+
 ### Reproducing it
 
+⚠️ **THE COMMITTED VERSION IS `admin/goodwe`'s `sim/inject.py
+two_master_circulation`** (`sim/sitesim.py:circulation_findings`, runnable on its
+own as `python3 sim/sitesim.py --circulation`, `norig`, ~36 s, graded by
+`checks.yml` on every pull request there). It produces the fault with
+`plantsim.Inverter.wedge()` — a unit answering its bus and no longer steering its
+power stage, which is HW-01 — and sweeps the legitimate family with the
+serialised write path staggered up to a whole control cycle. The paragraph below
+describes the ORIGINAL campaign, which is the one that is not committed.
+
 The rig lives in `admin/goodwe` (`sim/`) and was used **read-only**; the harness
 is not committed here because it imports that repo's `plantsim`/`frame_check`,
 which are not present in this one or in CI. What it does is small enough to
@@ -206,7 +268,11 @@ margin above the knee is what absorbs that without re-opening this card.
 **Revisit when SPIKE-04 lands, not before.**
 
 The **schema floor is the knee itself**, 400 W, so a legally configured install
-cannot land in the 445–505 s regime. What the threshold costs: a circulating
+cannot land in the 445–505 s regime — ⚠️ and those two figures are from the
+uncommitted campaign; the committed sweep measures 10.0 s at 100 W on its own
+grid. See the disclosure at the head of this section. The floor is still the
+right shape (fewer runs cross a higher threshold, measured 126/840 at 100 W
+against 1/840 at 700 W); its DEPTH is not established by anything re-runnable. What the threshold costs: a circulating
 loop smaller than 350 W per unit is not reported, which is deliberate — at that
 scale the round-trip loss is a few watts.
 
@@ -289,6 +355,32 @@ SAFETY-25 — so no stale `.pyc` could exist to be read. Byte deltas recorded;
 | M17 | `circulation.py` | default `700` → `500` | **+0 B** | **RED** — the CFG-03 pin and the not-a-round-number check |
 | M18 | `main.py` | `await self.check_circulating()` removed | −39 B | **RED** — all four notification checks |
 | M19 | `main.py` | publish `round(x or 0.0)` instead of `None` | −68 B | **survivor on the first battery — GAP CLOSED**, then RED |
+| **M20** | `main.py` | **`pos, neg = opposing(...)` → `([], [])`** — the attribution clause deleted from the alarm | −102 B | **SURVIVED ALL 26 FILES on the shipped battery — GAP CLOSED**, then RED on §6a |
+| M21 | `main.py` | `pos` and `neg` exchanged — the alarm names both packs, both the wrong way round | **+0 B** | **RED** — §6a ×3 (the mirrored run, and "only its own sentence") |
+| M22 | `main.py` | `opposing(..., min_w=cfg.min_w / 2.0)` → `min_w=0.0` | −25 B | **RED** — §6a's resting-pack check |
+
+**And four in `admin/goodwe`**, graded through `python3 sim/sitesim.py
+--circulation` rather than through the injector — deliberately, because
+`inject.py` is the file that takes the rig lock, and "run the injector to grade a
+mutation" is not a sentence anybody should have to type. Byte deltas over
+`plantsim.py` + `sitesim.py` together.
+
+| # | file | mutation | Δ | result |
+|---|---|---|---|---|
+| S1 | `plantsim.py` | `wedge()` no longer stops the latch reaching the power stage | −20 B | **RED** — the opposing-signs precondition **and** "the watchdog did not trip" |
+| S2 | `sitesim.py` | the sensor computed over the **allocation record** instead of register 0x0518 | **+0 B** | **RED** ×3 — this is M10 restated on the rig |
+| S3 | `sitesim.py` | the campaign run on `plant=INSTANT` | −51 B | **RED** — the plant is a *term* of the figures; it was a SURVIVOR until that check was added, and finding out why produced §3's 1048/2250/0 W table |
+| S4 | `sitesim.py` | the write stagger removed from the legitimate campaign | −19 B | **RED** — "the legitimate campaign produced no opposition at all" |
+
+**S3 is recorded as a survivor because it was one, and it is the most useful
+result in this table.** The scenario first shipped with a vacuity check whose
+text claimed `plant=INSTANT` would make the sweep measure 0 W. S3 was run and
+**passed**: `INSTANT` with a stagger of exactly one control cycle samples the
+plant before the second unit has stepped, so it produces opposition anyway — and
+a *larger* worst peak (2250 W) than the modelled plant does (1048 W). The claim
+in the check's own text was wrong. It was corrected against the measurement, the
+plant was pinned as an explicit term, and S3 is red now for a stated reason
+rather than by accident. §3's spread table is that measurement.
 
 **M19 is recorded as a survivor because it was one.** The first battery found no
 check grading what `publish()` does when a per-unit reading is missing, so
@@ -297,6 +389,30 @@ watches went unnoticed — the sensor's own `None` rule, defeated one layer out.
 A check was added and the mutation re-run; it is red now. The run that found it
 was purged, so it is a result and not an artefact.
 
+**M20 IS RECORDED AS A SURVIVOR BECAUSE IT WAS ONE, AND IT IS THE MORE
+UNCOMFORTABLE OF THE TWO.** The commit message for this card claimed *"18
+mutations, all RED"*, and M1–M19 above have no entry for the notification's
+attribution clause. Verification on 2026-09-07 ran it and it **survived the
+whole 26-file suite**: the alarm still fires, still stops the site, still says
+the meter cannot see it — and no longer says *which two packs* or *which way
+round*. `circulation.py`'s own docstring calls that sentence the first thing
+somebody woken by this alarm needs and *"impossible to reconstruct from the
+number alone"*.
+
+It survived for one reason, and it is not reachability: **M18 (the whole call
+removed) is red**, so `check_circulating()` is exercised. The three checks on
+that notification asserted `METER CANNOT SEE`, `CONTROL HAS BEEN STOPPED` and
+`isolator` — and **never an inverter name**. Nothing graded the attribution.
+
+`test_watchdog.py` §6a closes it, and closes it on a fixture that can tell the
+three failures apart. It runs a roster of **`["garage", "shed", "cellar"]`** —
+operator names, none of them `UNIT_A`, for test_maintenance.py §11's reason:
+on a fixture whose names are the module's own constants a check cannot tell the
+roster from the constant. It runs the site **twice, mirrored**, so the sentence
+is not symmetric and a swap (M21, `+0 B`) is a different red from a deletion.
+And it carries a **third pack resting at 5 W**, so the floor that stops a pack
+in standby being named as a participant in a 6 kW loop (M22) is graded too.
+
 ## 7. What this card does NOT close
 
 * **Inverter B's ramp and lag are placeholders.** Every transient number in §3
@@ -305,7 +421,9 @@ was purged, so it is a result and not an artefact.
   margin. **Do not present any figure here as a measurement of inverter B.**
 * **A wedged inverter still cannot be stopped by this add-on.** §1 says so; the
   notification says so; there is no software fix and this card does not pretend
-  to one.
+  to one. It *can* now be produced on demand: `plantsim.Inverter.wedge()`.
+* **The depth of the threshold curve is not established by anything committed.**
+  §3's disclosure. The window is; the knee's magnitude is not.
 * **A loop below ~350 W per unit is not reported.** Deliberate, §3.
 * **The saturation freeze fires under a wedged unit and leaves a standing grid
   error.** Observed on the rig while producing §2's numbers: with B wedged, the

goodwe_controller/DECISIONS/SAFETY-42-unit-delivery.md

@@ -142,6 +142,16 @@ take the **longest run of consecutive cycles** on which it names anybody — not
 count of naming samples, because the window is cleared by any cycle that does
 not.
 
+⚠️ **SINCE [[SAFETY-43]] THE ROWS OF §3.3's TABLE ARE GRADED WITH
+`share_frac=None`** — `delinquent()`'s ABSOLUTE arm alone, which is this card's
+rule exactly. Said here because it is the difference between §3.3 still meaning
+what it is labelled as and quietly becoming a table about a different predicate:
+SAFETY-43 added a SECOND way to be named, the harness grades it in its own rows
+(`--fractions`), and the numbers below are unchanged and were re-measured to
+confirm it. `DECISIONS/SAFETY-43-delinquency-relative-to-the-ask.md` §3 carries
+those rows and what they cost — the worst legitimate episode goes from 35.0 s to
+40.0 s at the shipped fraction, which does not move `delivery_hold_s`.
+
 ⚠️ **ONE THING THE RESTATEMENT DID NOT SAY, AND IT IS LOAD-BEARING.** "The
 command standing before the write" is the **controller's** standing command —
 `Inverter.standing_w()`, i.e. `last_write` — and **not** the far end of the

goodwe_controller/DECISIONS/SAFETY-43-delinquency-relative-to-the-ask.md

@@ -0,0 +1,381 @@
+# SAFETY-43 — delinquency measured against the ask, not against a flat 500 W
+
+**Status: closed.** `delivery.delinquent()` names a unit whose `short_by()` gap
+exceeds `min_w` **or** exceeds a fraction of that unit's own share. The fraction
+is `delivery.DELIVERY_SHARE_FRACTION = 0.85`, derived on the campaign in §3.
+
+⚠️ **INVERTER B DOES NOT PHYSICALLY EXIST** (expected ~2026-09-12; NOTES.md
+§1.1b). `plantsim.INVERTER_B` is inverter A **copied**, `measured=False`, and
+`test_packshare.py`'s plant is modelled in that file. **Every two-inverter
+figure in this document is two copies of A.** Nothing here is a measurement of
+inverter B.
+
+## 0. The defect, and why it is the quiet regime that matters
+
+[[OPT-09]] passes SoC- and capacity-aware weights to the allocator. A weight is
+a function of a pack's **energy headroom**, not of what the pack delivers, so a
+**wedged** unit — one that accepts its share and produces nothing — is weighted
+down exactly like a legitimately low-headroom one. `delinquent()` read an
+**absolute** gap, `min_w = Tuning.saturation_w = 500 W`. Shrinking the share
+shrinks the gap. Measured end to end on the real loop (`test_packshare.py`
+part 8b: real `compute()`, real `plan()`, real `packshare.weights()`, real
+`delivery.account()`, real `delinquent()`; B wedged at a healthy 15 % against its
+own 10 % cut-out, so no envelope closes and `account()` explains nothing — a
+SAFETY-42 **true positive** by that card's own definition):
+
+    load 1500 W  equal weights   shares {a:1500, b:1500}   named on 199/200
+    load 1500 W  OPT-09 weights  shares {a:1505, b: 125}   named on   0/200
+
+A unit delivering **0 of 125 W** is 100 % delinquent and 125 W short. Only the
+absolute threshold disagreed.
+
+⚠️ **THE SUPPRESSED REGIME IS THE DANGEROUS ONE.** At a load the healthy sibling
+covers, the meter is satisfied (grid within 5 W of zero on that fixture),
+`unmet_w` is 0 because both units *accepted* their shares, no envelope closes and
+no action-log line fires. The delinquency alarm is the **only** instrument that
+would have told the operator the site was quietly running one inverter.
+
+## 1. What was NOT done, and it is the larger half of this card
+
+⚠️ **`min_w` WAS NOT LOWERED.** It is `Tuning.saturation_w` — the gap at which
+the control law itself concludes the inverter is not following — and it exists to
+stop **normal saturation** being reported as delinquency. Lowering it trades a
+missed alarm for a false one on every unit at once. [[SAFETY-41]] spent **four
+attempts** on notification cadence in this system and the owner's words were
+*"i'm getting really annoyed by the notifications in my HA"*.
+
+So the change is an **`or`**, never a looser first arm:
+
+    named if  short_by() > min_w   OR   short_by() > frac * share
+
+Everything `min_w` named before is still named. Nothing `min_w` refused becomes
+noisy **unless the unit is delivering almost none of its ask**, which is not
+saturation-shaped at all. `test_delivery.py` part 1 runs all seven of its
+existing `delinquent()` fixtures under **both** rules — `share_frac=None` is
+SAFETY-42's rule exactly — and requires identical answers on every one.
+
+The absolute arm's suppression window is therefore **unchanged**: still
+`site target < 2·min_w` = 1000 W at equal weights, still
+`site target < min_w·(w_A+w_B)/w_B` = 6500 W under OPT-09's weights on part 8b's
+fixture. Part 8b still asserts both numbers, now as evidence that the first arm
+did not move.
+
+## 2. The evidence is a diff between two rules on ONE run
+
+`delinquent()` takes `share_frac`, and **`None` means the absolute arm alone**.
+That parameter exists for one reason: so the red and the green come out of one
+run over one tree instead of out of two commits that a reader has to trust.
+`test_packshare.py` part 8b grades every cycle twice:
+
+    load 1500 W  OPT-09 weights  absolute arm alone   named on   0/200 cycles
+    load 1500 W  OPT-09 weights  the shipped rule     named on 200/200 cycles
+
+    load 1500 W  equal weights   absolute arm alone   named on 199/200 cycles
+    load 1500 W  equal weights   the shipped rule     named on 200/200 cycles
+
+The equal-weights arm gains **exactly one cycle** — the first, where the slew
+limit holds the split at 500/500, a 500 W gap is not *over* a 500 W threshold
+(the absolute bound is strict) and the relative arm names a box delivering none
+of its 500 W. That single cycle is the whole of what this card costs an arm that
+was already firing.
+
+⚠️ **THE PIN THAT INVERTED.** Part 8b was written by OPT-09 to pin the
+**suppressed** behaviour, and its comment said: *"if it ever goes red because the
+alarm fired, read the card that made it fire before 'fixing' this line."* This is
+that card. The pin now asserts the opposite answer and keeps the old one beside
+it, measured rather than remembered.
+
+## 3. ⭐ Deriving the fraction
+
+⚠️ **DERIVED ON THE SAME CAMPAIGN AS `delivery_hold_s`'s FLOOR**, not chosen.
+`admin/goodwe:sim/delivery_window.py` — the harness [[TEST-21]] committed —
+gained a second grading axis: the same **2640 no-fault runs at N=2** (three
+families × 6 gains × 5 slews × write staggers; every unit executes the share the
+allocator gave it) and the same **2640 N=1 control runs**, graded at the shipped
+`min_w = 500 W` for each candidate fraction, on every cycle of every run — so a
+pass grades every fraction it is given, and the absolute arm beside them, over
+one tree and one set of runs. Every row in a pass is comparable to every other
+row in it, run for run.
+
+    cd goodwe/sim && GOODWE_ADDON_REPO=/path/to/goodwe-addon \
+        python3 -B delivery_window.py --selftest --campaign --fractions
+
+⚠️ **THE TABLE BELOW WAS PRODUCED BY TWO PASSES; `FRACTIONS` NOW HOLDS ALL
+TWENTY SO IT TAKES ONE.** The derivation ran the shipped ten
+`(0.25 … 0.99)` and then the ten that resolve the low end
+`(0.05 … 0.65)` with only that tuple edited between them. **The absolute-arm
+control row came out identical in both** (30.0 / 0.0 / 35.0 / 0.0, same argmax),
+which is what says the two passes are one campaign. A table a reviewer cannot
+reproduce without knowing to edit a line nobody wrote down is PROC-01's shape in
+miniature, so the committed `FRACTIONS` was widened to all twenty in review: the
+command above now reproduces every row below.
+
+### 3.1 The curve
+
+Worst **continuous** legitimate episode (the measure `DeliveryWatchdog` actually
+sees — its window is cleared by any cycle that does not name), runs naming in
+brackets:
+
+| `share_frac` | reversals (of 1050) | flapping (of 840) | weighted (of 750) | **N=1 control (2640)** |
+|---:|---:|---:|---:|---:|
+| absolute only | 30.0 s (460) | 0.0 s (0) | 35.0 s (403) | **0.0 s (0)** |
+| 0.05 | 85.0 s (826) | 0.0 s (0) | 90.0 s (616) | **0.0 s (0)** |
+| 0.10 | 75.0 s (824) | 0.0 s (0) | 90.0 s (607) | **0.0 s (0)** |
+| 0.15 | 70.0 s (836) | 0.0 s (0) | 70.0 s (609) | **0.0 s (0)** |
+| 0.20 | 70.0 s (839) | 0.0 s (0) | 60.0 s (629) | **0.0 s (0)** |
+| 0.25 | 55.0 s (832) | 0.0 s (0) | 60.0 s (611) | **0.0 s (0)** |
+| 0.30 | 55.0 s (840) | 0.0 s (0) | 50.0 s (614) | **0.0 s (0)** |
+| 0.35 | 55.0 s (840) | 0.0 s (0) | 55.0 s (618) | **0.0 s (0)** |
+| 0.40 | 50.0 s (840) | 0.0 s (0) | 60.0 s (658) | **0.0 s (0)** |
+| 0.45 | 45.0 s (840) | 0.0 s (0) | 45.0 s (627) | **0.0 s (0)** |
+| 0.50 | 45.0 s (840) | 0.0 s (0) | 45.0 s (636) | **0.0 s (0)** |
+| 0.55 | 40.0 s (840) | 0.0 s (0) | 40.0 s (636) | **0.0 s (0)** |
+| 0.60 | 40.0 s (840) | 0.0 s (0) | 40.0 s (645) | **0.0 s (0)** |
+| 0.65 | 35.0 s (840) | 0.0 s (0) | 45.0 s (635) | **0.0 s (0)** |
+| 0.70 | 35.0 s (840) | 0.0 s (0) | 45.0 s (635) | **0.0 s (0)** |
+| 0.75 | 35.0 s (840) | 0.0 s (0) | 45.0 s (635) | **0.0 s (0)** |
+| 0.80 | 35.0 s (840) | 0.0 s (0) | 45.0 s (635) | **0.0 s (0)** |
+| **0.85** | **35.0 s (840)** | **0.0 s (0)** | **40.0 s (635)** | **0.0 s (0)** |
+| 0.90 | 35.0 s (840) | 0.0 s (0) | 40.0 s (635) | **0.0 s (0)** |
+| 0.95 | 35.0 s (840) | 0.0 s (0) | 40.0 s (635) | **0.0 s (0)** |
+| 0.99 | 35.0 s (840) | 0.0 s (0) | 40.0 s (635) | **0.0 s (0)** |
+
+Worst of the three families, which is what `delivery_hold_s` has to cover:
+
+    frac   0.05  0.10  0.15  0.20  0.25  0.30  0.35  0.40  0.45  0.50
+    worst  90.0  90.0  70.0  70.0  60.0  55.0  55.0  60.0  45.0  45.0  s
+
+    frac   0.55  0.60  0.65  0.70  0.75  0.80 *0.85  0.90  0.95  0.99
+    worst  40.0  40.0  45.0  45.0  45.0  45.0  40.0  40.0  40.0  40.0  s
+
+⚠️ **THE FIRST ROW IS THE CONTROL AND IT REPRODUCED SAFETY-42 §3.3 EXACTLY** —
+30.0 s / 0.0 s / 35.0 s, and the same argmax (`gain=0.2 slew_w=1000 stagger=4
+split=0.10/0.90`, ±2200 W reversal). It is measured **in the same run** as every
+row below it, which is what makes those rows a comparison rather than a claim.
+
+### 3.2 What the curve says
+
+* ⚠️ **THERE IS NO CLIFF ANYWHERE IN THE CURVE, AND THAT IS THE FINDING.** From
+  **0.45 to 0.99** every figure is 40.0 or 45.0 s — within **one control cycle
+  (5.0 s)** of every other — and below 0.45 it rises **gradually**: 60.0 s at
+  0.25, 70.0 s at 0.15, 90.0 s at 0.05. A reviewer asking "why 0.85 and not
+  0.90?" is asking about a difference this campaign cannot resolve, and the
+  honest answer is that it cannot.
+* ⚠️ **IT IS NOT MONOTONE** — 0.40 reports 60.0 s where 0.35 reports 55.0, and
+  0.65–0.80 report 45.0 s where 0.55/0.60 and 0.85–0.99 report 40.0 — and that is
+  SAFETY-42 §3.3's own mechanism (c) rather than noise in the plant: **a more
+  sensitive rule puts MORE units into the short set, which can turn a proper
+  subset into the WHOLE roster and END the episode.** The reduction is not
+  monotone in its own threshold. Do not read this column as a sensitivity curve
+  in the ordinary sense.
+* **The shoulder is at about 0.45**, and it is a shoulder rather than an edge:
+  the reversal family's naming count saturates at 840 of 1050 runs from 0.30
+  upward, so below the shoulder what grows is the LENGTH of an episode, not the
+  number of runs that have one.
+* **The N=1 column is 0.0 s at every fraction, in all 2640 one-inverter runs.**
+  The compatibility promise is measured for the new arm, not argued.
+* **The flapping family is 0.0 s at every fraction, in all 840 runs.** A common
+  stimulus makes both units short at once and the subset stops being proper —
+  the property that defeated SAFETY-30's site window still holds.
+
+### 3.3 ⚠️ "Zero false namings" is not available at ANY fraction
+
+The card asked for *the largest fraction that yields zero false namings across
+the whole no-fault campaign*. **There is none.** Every fraction adds naming
+cycles: the reversal family goes from 460 runs naming to 840, the weighted family
+from 403 to 635. A relative arm that never fired on a legitimate transient would
+be a relative arm that never fired at all — the write stagger lands B's number up
+to four cycles late, and a unit whose new command has not arrived is, for those
+cycles, delivering a small fraction of what is standing on its wire.
+
+What **is** zero at every fraction is **false alarms**:
+
+> the longest continuous legitimate episode anywhere in the 20-point sweep is
+> **90.0 s** — at 0.05, the most sensitive fraction measured — against a
+> `delivery_hold_s` of **185 s**. Nothing in 2640 no-fault runs comes within
+> **95 s** of notifying an operator, **at any fraction measured**. At the
+> shipped 0.85 it is 40.0 s, i.e. 145 s of slack.
+
+That is the quantity SAFETY-41 cares about and it is the one this card had to
+protect. Stated as margin, at the shipped fraction: **185 s is 4.62×** the worst
+legitimate episode, where the absolute arm alone gave 5.29×.
+
+### 3.4 The bounds 0.85 answers to
+
+* **LOWER, from the campaign** — the shoulder at about **0.45**, below which the
+  added episode starts to grow (60.0 s at 0.25, 90.0 s at 0.05). 0.85 is 0.40
+  above it.
+* **UPPER, from the card's own case** — strictly **below 1.0**. At 1.0 the arm
+  can only fire on a unit that is *importing* while asked to discharge, which is
+  SAFETY-30's fault and not this one, so a unit delivering **none** of its share
+  (gap/share exactly 1.0) would be missed. The 0.15 below 1.0 is what covers a
+  wedged box reporting a small standby figure instead of a clean zero.
+* **UPPER, from the hold** — every fraction in the flat range leaves
+  `delivery_hold_s` between **4.11×** (45.0 s) and **4.62×** (40.0 s) the worst
+  legitimate episode, well inside the four bounds SAFETY-42 §3.3 requires of it.
+  **`delivery_hold_s` IS NOT CHANGED BY THIS CARD.**
+* ⚠️ **NOT DERIVED, AND SAID SO: the exact value inside [0.45, 1.0).** The
+  campaign cannot separate them. 0.85 is the midpoint of the argument above —
+  0.40 of margin above the shoulder, 0.15 below the ceiling — and a
+  re-derivation that moved it to 0.90 would be moving a number this campaign
+  never resolved. It is not moved for that reason.
+
+## 4. The positive control — what the relative arm must still NOT say
+
+A card that adds a way to raise an alarm has to show what it did **not** add.
+`test_packshare.py` part 8b runs the same fixture, the same weights and the same
+125 W share with the one fact that makes the shortfall legitimate changed:
+
+| fixture | B's share | named | why it is silent |
+|---|---|---|---|
+| B wedged at a healthy 15 % (the fault) | 77–154 W | **200 / 200** | — it is the fault |
+| B at its own 10 % cut-out | **0 W, all 200 cycles** | **0 / 200** | it is never **asked** |
+| B delivering **half** its share | 120 W | **0 / 200** | short by 50 %, inside both arms |
+
+### ⚠️ The cut-out row does NOT grade `account()`, and this record said it did
+
+**Corrected in review.** The first draft of this section claimed the wedged and
+cut-out arms had *"identical power traces — 0 W against a positive share, 100 %
+of the ask missing"* and that *"what separates them is `account()`"*. **Every
+part of that was false**, and the check that carried it was **vacuous**:
+
+* at its own cut-out the pack's usable energy **above that cut-out is zero**, so
+  `packshare.weights()` answers **0.0** for it, `_fill()`'s preferred pass gives
+  it nothing, the healthy sibling covers the load alone so the last-resort pass
+  never runs, and its share is **0 W on all 200 cycles**;
+* a unit with a 0 W share is not in `asked`, so `len(asked) < 2` returns `{}`
+  **before either arm is evaluated** and `account()` is **never consulted**;
+* the traces are not identical — the cut-out arm's share is **0 W on every
+  cycle** (asserted in part 8b and printed on its line) while the wedged arm's
+  is **125 W** at the last cycle (asserted in the GREEN check) and takes four
+  distinct values 77/125/133/154 W across the 200, measured by re-running the
+  same loop with per-cycle recording during review — and "100 % of the ask" is
+  0/0.
+
+Measured, by deleting the gate the claim rested on:
+
+    cut-out arm, account() live         named 0/200, distinct B shares: [0]
+    cut-out arm, account() DELETED      named 0/200, distinct B shares: [0]
+    wedged  arm, account() live         named 200/200, shares [77,125,133,154]
+
+⚠️ **The fact that replaces it is better, not weaker.** At its own cut-out
+**OPT-09 stops asking the pack at all**, so SAFETY-43's relative arm is never
+reached — a **second, independent protection sitting upstream of `account()`**:
+the allocator declines to ask before the detector has to decline to alarm. Part
+8b now asserts the 0 W share and prints it, and runs the arm a second time with
+`account()` deleted to show which mechanism is doing the work.
+
+⚠️ **It was invisible for one reason worth keeping**: that line was the only one
+in part 8b that did not print its shares. `inverter-b+0` would have been on
+screen from the first run. Every line in that part prints them now, and the
+derated control's vacuity guard now asserts **its own** unit is asked, rather
+than re-asserting a different run's 200/200 — which is exactly why the old guard
+could not see this.
+
+**The account gate is graded where it is real**, on a positive 125 W share, in
+`test_delivery.py` part 1 (*"THE ACCOUNT GATE IS UNTOUCHED BY IT"* — the same
+0 of 125 W with the shortfall explained names nobody). That part also carries
+that the relative bound is **strict** (a gap of exactly `frac · share` is not
+over it) and that the proper-subset rule still refuses a site-wide cause (both
+units delivering none of a 125 W share names nobody).
+
+## 5. N=1 is byte-identical, and it is asserted rather than argued
+
+The live install is **N=1**. Two independent statements, each graded against the
+thing that would break it (`test_packshare.py` part 8b):
+
+1. **`allocator.plan()` returns before `weights` is read at all.** Graded by
+   handing it a `weights` mapping that **raises on any read**: at a roster of one
+   it answers identically to the same call with no weights; at a roster of two
+   the same mapping is read and raises, so the tripwire is a real one.
+2. **`delinquent()` answers `{}` at a roster of one for every input** — 84
+   combinations of (share, measured, rule), including **0 of 125 W**, the exact
+   input this card added an arm for. `len(asked) < 2` returns before either
+   threshold is compared, so the fraction is never even multiplied.
+
+Nothing in this card is reachable at one inverter. It must land before inverter B
+is commissioned (~2026-09-12), not before the next deploy.
+
+## 5b. Mutation — the fraction is pinned from BOTH directions
+
+⚠️ **RUN, NOT REASONED ABOUT.** Each mutation was applied to a tree **copied
+fresh** from this branch and mounted `:ro` inside the checks image, so no `.pyc`
+could go stale — MUTATION.md's defect, and all three of these are **reds**, the
+direction that defect cannot fabricate. Recorded in `test_packshare.py` part 11
+as M12–M14.
+
+| mutation | named checks | where |
+|---|---:|---|
+| **M12** drop the relative arm, keep `gap > min_w` — *the card itself reverted* | **7** | `test_delivery.py` part 1 (3: the 0-of-125 W naming, the proportion in the sentence, the strict relative bound) + `test_packshare.py` 8b (4: GREEN back to 0/200, the equal arm's 200 back to 199, the 6000 W arm back to 195/199, the derated control's guard). `test_alloc.py` / `test_control.py` stay green — nothing outside this check moves. |
+| **M13** `DELIVERY_SHARE_FRACTION` → **1.0** — *too loose* | **7** | part 1 (2) + 8b (5), including the PRECONDITION that the fraction is strictly below 1.0. At 1.0 the card is a no-op: gap/share of exactly 1.0 is not *over* 1.0. |
+| **M14** `DELIVERY_SHARE_FRACTION` → **0.05** — *too sensitive* | **6** | part 1 (2: the strict bound, and *"IT TOOK NOTHING AWAY"* stops being true) + part **4b** (3: the `saturation_w` pin goes **vacuous**, the relative arm naming B at every threshold) + 8b's derated control, where a unit delivering half its share starts being named. |
+
+M13 and M14 are the pair that matters: the constant cannot be moved in **either**
+direction without a named check moving with it.
+
+### ⚠️ Two of these counts were wrong, and the reason is worth keeping
+
+**Corrected in review.**
+
+* **M12 and M13 read 1 and 1 in `test_delivery.py`, not 3 and 2.** Part 1 printed
+  the alarm sentence with a bare subscript, `delinquent(_tiny, 500)["b"]`. On any
+  tree where the relative arm is broken or absent that raises `KeyError` and
+  **aborts the file at part 1**, leaving parts 2–8 ungraded — so the recorded
+  coverage of a mutation run read *smaller* than the truth. The direction is safe
+  (an abort is a red, and MUTATION.md's defect can only fabricate a green), but a
+  figure that does not reproduce is a figure that does not reproduce. It is a
+  `.get` now, with the reason written beside it, and the counts above are from
+  re-runs with the guard in place.
+* **M14 was recorded as 4 named checks in `test_delivery.py` and it is 5** — part
+  1's pre-existing *"a shortfall AT the threshold is not one"* also goes red. That
+  one under-claimed, so it never inflated the evidence; it is still a recorded
+  number that did not reproduce.
+
+## 6. ⚠️ [[CFG-07]] is adjacent and is NOT absorbed here
+
+CFG-07 is that `delivery_hold_s` is declared `int(30,900)` in `config.yaml`'s
+schema while the measured worst legitimate episode at the shipped threshold is
+**35.0 s** — so the schema offers an operator a value (30) that is **below a
+measured legitimate episode** and would report on ordinary saturation.
+
+**This card makes it worse, and by exactly one control cycle.** The relative arm
+takes the worst legitimate episode from **35.0 s to 40.0 s** at the shipped
+fraction, so the band of schema-legal but false-tripping values widens from
+`[30, 35]` to `[30, 40]`. The floor the schema should have is now **40 s**, not
+35 s. It is not fixed here: raising a schema floor is an option-surface change
+with its own compatibility argument (an existing config carrying `35` would start
+being refused), and folding it into a safety fix would hide it. **CFG-07 should
+be re-derived against 40.0 s, not 35.0 s.**
+
+⚠️ **WHEN IT HAS TO CLOSE: BEFORE INVERTER B IS COMMISSIONED (~2026-09-12).**
+Not before the next deploy. The band is **unreachable at N=1** — `delinquent()`
+returns `{}` for every input at a roster of one, so no value of
+`delivery_hold_s` can false-trip on the install that is running today — and the
+live install is N=1 until B exists. Commissioning B is the moment the band
+becomes reachable, and that is the deadline this card hands it.
+
+⚠️ **AND CFG-07 HAS NO DECISION DOCUMENT IN THIS TREE.** It exists as a
+`[[CFG-07]]` mention in `CHANGELOG.md` and in this section, and nowhere else —
+so there is no file for the 40.0 s to be recorded in, and a reader who goes
+looking will find a card reference with no record behind it. Whoever takes
+CFG-07 writes `DECISIONS/CFG-07-*.md` first; the number it has to answer to is
+**40.0 s**, measured here, and the harness that produces it is
+`admin/goodwe:sim/delivery_window.py --campaign --fractions`.
+
+## 7. Provenance of every number in this document
+
+| number | where it came from |
+|---|---|
+| 199/200, 0/200, 200/200, shares 1505/125 | `test_packshare.py` part 8b, run |
+| 35.0 s absolute-arm floor, and its argmax | `delivery_window.py --campaign`, re-run here, reproduces SAFETY-42 §3.3 |
+| every row of §3.1 | `delivery_window.py --campaign --fractions`, two passes over the same campaign with `FRACTIONS` changed between them |
+| 1000 W / 6500 W suppression windows | part 8b's arithmetic, asserted there |
+| 185 s, 5.29× | SAFETY-42 §3.3 / TEST-21, unchanged by this card |
+| 4.62× | 185 / 40.0, printed by the campaign |
+| 0/200 on both positive controls, and B's 0 W share at the cut-out | part 8b, run and asserted |
+| 0 W cut-out share / 125 W wedged share | part 8b, asserted and printed |
+| 77/125/133/154 W (the wedged arm's four distinct shares) | the same loop re-run in review with per-cycle recording — NOT part 8b's printed line, which shows the last cycle only |
+| M12/M13/M14 named-check counts (7 / 7 / 6) | re-run in review on fresh `:ro` trees, after the `KeyError` abort in part 1 was guarded |
+| 84 single-unit rosters | part 8b, run |
+
+⚠️ Every two-inverter figure above is **two copies of inverter A**.

goodwe_controller/DOCS.md

@@ -1574,6 +1574,185 @@ battery power, circulating power, state of charge, maintenance phase and
 controller status by MQTT discovery. This is observability only — the controller works fine without a
 broker, and MQTT problems can never affect control.
 
+## Before you commission inverter B: `tools/rehearse_roster.py` (ARCH-02)
+
+The day the `inverters:` roster is declared, two things change that are
+**one-way on a live box and invisible until after the restart that applies
+them**: the store migration renames the keys that hold the SAFETY-02 latch and
+the maintenance history, and the entity ids Home Assistant composes change
+shape. This tool runs the **real `Controller`** through that transition against
+a **copy** of the state file and reports the difference.
+
+    docker run --rm -e PYTHONDONTWRITEBYTECODE=1 -v <repo>:/w:ro \
+      goodwe-addon-checks:1 sh -c 'cd /w/goodwe_controller && \
+      python3 tools/rehearse_roster.py \
+        --state /w/state-copy.json \
+        --before /w/live-options.json \
+        --after  /w/roster-options.json \
+        --live-entities /w/live-entities.txt \
+        --reverse --round-trip'
+
+Exit `0` clean · `1` at least one finding · `2` could not run. ⚠️ **`2` is not a
+pass.**
+
+### The owner steps, because this session could not take them
+
+⚠️ **The rehearsal is only as good as the state it is pointed at, and nothing in
+this repository can fetch that.** SSH to the live box is blocked by policy and
+that is correct — `/data/state.json` is the file the running add-on is writing.
+So three things have to be exported by hand, onto the machine that runs the
+check, **before** the roster is declared:
+
+1. **The state file.** From the Supervisor host:
+
+       ha addons info local_goodwe_controller     # confirm the slug first
+       docker cp addon_local_goodwe_controller:/data/state.json ./state-copy.json
+
+   or take it out of a full add-on backup, which is the same bytes. ⚠️ **Copy
+   it, never move it, and never write to the original.** The tool opens the path
+   it is given exactly once and does all of its writing on a scratch copy — but
+   the safe habit is to hand it a file the add-on has never heard of.
+
+2. **The options blob**, as `--before`. It is not reachable through the Home
+   Assistant REST API and no entity carries it; export it from the Supervisor,
+   the same way `tools/predeploy_check.py` needs it. Write the roster you intend
+   to deploy into a second file and pass it as `--after`.
+
+3. **The entity list**, as `--live-entities` — one entity id per line:
+
+       Developer tools -> Template:
+       {{ states | map(attribute='entity_id') | select('search','goodwe') | join('\n') }}
+
+   ⚠️ **Omitting it is a REFUSAL (exit 2), not a quieter run.** The orphan check
+   is graded against the ids the install actually has, and without that file it
+   is not graded against reality at all — so the tool will not run rather than
+   hand back a clean bill of health for a half of the transition it did not
+   check. If you genuinely have to run without it, pass `--no-live-entities`:
+   the run then carries a standing banner in the report header **and** on the
+   exit line saying the orphan check was not graded. The asymmetry used to be
+   the other way round — an unreadable file refused, a missing flag passed with
+   exit 0 and no disclosure at all — and the owner runs this once, at
+   commissioning, under time pressure.
+
+   The install carries roughly 49 `goodwe*` entities and this add-on announces
+   eight of them. The tool separates the ids it owns from the ids it does not,
+   rather than claiming orphans it cannot cause.
+
+### The reference, which is loaded on every run
+
+`--reference` defaults to `tools/rehearsal/announced-reference.txt` and is read
+**whether or not** you pass an entity list. It records what the build is
+supposed to announce, three columns per row:
+
+    <entity_id>   <unique_id>   <device identifier>
+
+⚠️ **All three, and the second and third are the ones an entity_id-only list
+cannot see.** The tool's own before/after diff is composed twice by the same
+build, so a change to the composition moves both sides equally and the diff
+reports nothing. Worse, two changes orphan an install *without moving a single
+composed entity_id*: renaming `mqtt.BASE` (every `unique_id` changes) and
+changing `DEVICE["identifiers"]` (HA sees a new device). Home Assistant keys its
+entity registry on `unique_id` and its device registry on the identifier, so
+either one creates a **new** entity beside the old — and because discovery is
+published `retain=True` with no removal payload, the old config stays on the
+broker and the old entity stays in the registry, still named by every automation
+that referenced it, never updating again. Both were measured coming back
+**exit 0** before the reference carried three columns.
+
+`object_id` is deliberately **not** a column: `app/mqtt.py` records that HA
+2026.8 does not honour it in a discovery payload, so renaming one is a true
+no-op, and `test_rehearse.py` requires that mutation to **survive** — otherwise
+"the reference notices any edit to `mqtt.py`" would be indistinguishable from
+"the reference notices what HA keys on".
+
+⚠️ **No result in this repository was produced against real state.** Everything
+recorded here and in `test_rehearse.py` was measured on the synthetic fixtures
+in `tools/rehearsal/`.
+
+### What it confirms on the synthetic fixtures
+
+⚠️ **This is a SECOND INSTRUMENT reaching a conclusion this repository already
+holds, not a discovery.** `test_maintenance.py` section 13 — *"RECORDED, NOT
+FIXED: SAFETY-02's migration has the same wrong-namespace hole, and it is a
+LATCH"* — already states it, already names `namespaced_latched`, and already
+carries the sentence *"the guard is defeated by the very key the defect wrote"*.
+That file is on `release/1.0` and this card does not touch it. What is new here
+is that the finding is now reachable **from a state file the owner supplies**
+rather than only from a fixture built in a test, and that it is reached by a
+different route: a full `Controller` start diffed against its predecessor,
+rather than assertions over a `MemStore`. Two instruments, one answer.
+
+**The finding.** A pre-DEV-02 flat store that declares a multi-inverter roster
+comes up with its SAFETY-02 latch **DISARMED**, unless the first roster entry
+happens to be named `inverter-a`. `Controller.__init__` calls
+`migrate_unit_keys(store, UNIT_A)` with a hardcoded constant, so the latch lands
+in `unit/inverter-a/sign_tripped`; a roster of `["garage", "shed"]` reads
+`unit/garage/sign_tripped`, which is absent. And `_grade_store_migration()` —
+the guard written for exactly this — sees the migration's own misdirected key
+satisfy its `namespaced_latched` test and returns without re-arming. The file
+says `sign_tripped: true`, the banner is green, and nothing is held at 0 W.
+
+**Both routes reach it, and they are NOT the same defect.** The rehearsal
+reports them as separate legs because they need separate fixes:
+
+| leg | how it gets there |
+|---|---|
+| `SAME-STEP` | the roster is declared in the same step as the upgrade. The migration runs, and is handed `UNIT_A`. |
+| `STAGED` | the flat config runs once under 0.7.0+ first. That start stamps `schema_version = 1`, so the roster start's migration takes its `from_version >= SCHEMA_VERSION` early return and **the latch never moves at all**. |
+
+⚠️ **So "hand `migrate_unit_keys()` the roster's own first name" is NOT the
+whole fix, and the rehearsal measures that rather than asserting it.**
+`test_rehearse.py` part 5b builds exactly that change and reports:
+
+    LEG STAGED: DISARMED
+    LEG SAME-STEP: clean
+
+The staged path never reaches the line that was changed. A fix that stops there
+closes the half an operator is least likely to take and leaves the half that
+"upgrade first, declare the roster later" produces. The guard side —
+`namespaced_latched` counting a namespace that is not on the roster — is what
+covers both, and a change there turns every SAFETY-44 check in part 5 red, which
+is what a fix should do to a pin that specifies a defect.
+
+The fix belongs to its own card, shown red first. Part 5 pins the current
+behaviour as a requirement so it cannot drift green by accident.
+
+### The reverse direction: the retreat is supported, the round trip is not
+
+If commissioning B goes wrong, **backing out to the flat single-inverter config
+is supported and does not corrupt state.** Measured on the fixtures:
+
+* the SAFETY-02 latch and the first pack's maintenance history both survive,
+  because `store.py` rule 2 keeps the flat spellings **live** rather than merely
+  present — `maintenance.UnitHistory.mirror_flat` writes them on every change,
+  so a single-FSM add-on finds a current history rather than one dated the day
+  the roster was declared;
+* **it orphans eight Home Assistant entities** — the four per-unit rows for each
+  of the two units. **Measured:** the add-on stops announcing them and stops
+  publishing their state, so their history gaps and any automation whose
+  trigger names them stops firing, silently and without an error.
+
+  ⚠️ **What is NOT measured, and was previously overstated here:** whether
+  advancing again restores them. An earlier draft of this section said the
+  orphaning was "not recoverable by advancing again: HA keeps the id it composed
+  at first discovery" — that reasoning cuts the other way, since keeping the
+  composed id is precisely what would let a re-advertised entity land back on
+  it, and discovery is published `retain=True` with no removal payload. Nothing
+  in this repository has tested a re-advance against a real Home Assistant, so
+  the claim is withdrawn rather than restated in the other direction. Plan the
+  retreat around the measured part: **the eight rows stop updating for as long
+  as you are retreated.**
+
+⚠️ **What is NOT supported is the round trip.** A maintenance cycle that
+completes *while the install is rolled back* is **discarded** when it
+re-advances: `maint_schema_version` is already stamped, so `migrate_maint_keys()`
+takes its early return and the pack reads the namespaced history from before the
+retreat. The pack is then recalibrated on a schedule that does not know it
+already was. **So: retreat freely, but treat a retreat as ending the current
+maintenance bookkeeping — and if a cycle ran during it, correct
+`unit/<first>/last_completed` by hand before advancing again.** This is a stated
+decision, not a discovery made at the inverter.
+
 ## Before you deploy: `tools/predeploy_check.py` (PKG-09)
 
 Two ways a deploy has gone wrong on this system, both of which the Supervisor

goodwe_controller/MUTATION.md

@@ -225,6 +225,78 @@ same place twice, the check is decoration.
   forever, *including after the call site is fixed*. The check was true and
   passed for the wrong reason. Habit **9** below is what falls out of it.
 
+* ⚠️ **ARCH-02's OWN REHEARSAL HARNESS, CAUGHT BY ITS OWN MUTATION BATTERY —
+  the THIRTEENTH instance, and the third in an INSTRUMENT rather than in a
+  check.** `tools/rehearse_roster.py` reports orphaned Home Assistant entities
+  by composing the ids the add-on announces **before** the roster switch and
+  **after** it, and diffing. Both sides are composed by the same build. So the
+  two mutations that change the id composition itself — renaming the MQTT device
+  (`"GoodWe"` -> `"GoodWe Controller"`), renaming one site sensor (`"Grid power"`
+  -> `"Grid power W"`) — moved **every id on both sides equally**, and the
+  harness reported *"no orphans"* about a change that orphans the entire live
+  entity list. It read exactly like a clean transition. The first draft's
+  M5/M6 came back `exit 0` and `exit 2`, and neither was the failure they name.
+
+  The fix is habit 2 with a filename: **the reference has to be data that does
+  not move with the code.** `--live-entities` takes a list of the ids the
+  install actually has, `tools/rehearsal/live-entities-recorded.txt` is the
+  recorded stand-in that keeps it live in CI, and a build that announces an id
+  the list does not carry is now a `COMPOSITION DRIFT` finding rather than a
+  silence. ⚠️ **The anchor moved for the same reason**: it had been
+  `compose(mqtt.DEVICE["name"], p1["name"]) == "sensor.goodwe_p1_sample_age"`,
+  which any renaming of the device satisfies by moving both operands, and it is
+  now composed from two recorded **literals**.
+
+  Ask of an instrument what habit 4 asks of a check: *where did each side of
+  this comparison come from* — and if a mutation of the subject moves both
+  sides, the instrument is decoration.
+
+  ⚠️ **AND REVIEW FOUND TWO MORE IN THE SAME CARD, ONE OF THEM INSIDE THE FIX
+  FOR THE OTHER — the FOURTEENTH and FIFTEENTH.** Both are the pin, not the
+  tool, and both are the same sentence in a new costume: *a check whose data
+  cannot reach the failure it names.*
+
+  * **Fourteenth — a COUNT cannot tell one red leg from two.** The rehearsal
+    reports two independent routes to the disarmed latch (`SAME-STEP` and
+    `STAGED`) and prints every finding **twice per red leg**: once in that
+    leg's own block and once in the closing summary. The check named *"NOT THE
+    SAME-STEP PATH ALONE"* was written `out.count("LATCH CAME UP DISARMED")
+    >= 2`, so **one** red leg always satisfied it. Measured on three builds:
+    shipped code (both legs red) → 4; `migrate_unit_keys()` handed the roster
+    name (SAME-STEP fixed) → 2, **passes**; a guard-side fix (both fixed) → 0.
+    The check reported `ok` on the build whose only remaining failure *is* the
+    path it says is not the only one. The fix is to parse the legs and require
+    the finding in **each**, which is habit 2 again: grade the thing, not a
+    total over the thing.
+
+  * **Fifteenth — and it is INSIDE THAT FIX, which is the third time this file
+    has had to write that sentence.** The first leg-splitter opened on a
+    `LEG <id>` marker and never closed, so every line after the *last* marker
+    was attributed to that leg — including the closing summary, which repeats
+    every finding from every leg. The last leg therefore read red whenever
+    **any** leg was red, and the new per-leg check was the old count with extra
+    steps. It was caught by building the one fixture that separates them: a
+    tree in which `SAME-STEP` is genuinely clean and `STAGED` is not. The tool
+    now prints `END LEG <id>` and the splitter closes on it.
+
+    The rule that falls out, and it is the cheap one: **a per-thing check that
+    has never seen the things DISAGREE is a total.** Part 5b exists to make
+    them disagree on every run.
+
+    ⚠️ **AND ONE THAT HAS ONLY SEEN THEM DISAGREE IN ONE ARRANGEMENT IS A TOTAL
+    OVER THAT ARRANGEMENT.** Review found this by attacking the fix itself. Part
+    5b does make the legs disagree, on every run - and was still blind to a build
+    that merely REORDERS them, because it had only ever seen the clean leg
+    printed LAST. Three edits, two of them ordinary refactors (reorder the report
+    legs, reword a summary line), produced `all checks passed` from a splitter
+    that closed ZERO legs.
+
+    A fixture cannot enumerate the arrangements, so the STRUCTURE is asserted
+    instead: a leg may not open while one is open, and every leg that opens must
+    be explicitly closed. That fires on the FIRST edit of all three attacks,
+    whatever the order or the wording. **When a fixture cannot enumerate the
+    arrangements, assert the invariant they share.**
+
 * **CFG-04's `tools/supervisor_shape_probe.py` §B** — and this one is the rule
   reaching outside the suite. The probe is the committed evidence that
   `config.yaml`'s `inverters: []` default is load-bearing, and four documents

goodwe_controller/app/delivery.py

@@ -414,6 +414,94 @@ DELIVERY_OPTION_DEFAULTS = {
 MIN_W_IS_SATURATION_W = "control.Tuning.saturation_w"
 
 
+# ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
+# SAFETY-43. THE SECOND WAY TO BE NAMED, AND WHY IT IS A FRACTION OF THE ASK.
+#
+# `min_w` above is an ABSOLUTE gap, and OPT-09 made that a hole. `weights()`
+# shrinks a low-headroom unit's share, and shrinking the share shrinks the gap:
+# a unit standing at +125 W and delivering 0 W is 100 % delinquent and 125 W
+# short, so an absolute 500 W never names it. Measured end to end
+# (`test_packshare.py` part 8b, real `compute()`, real `plan()`, real
+# `delinquent()`, B wedged at a healthy 15 % against its own 10 % cut-out):
+#
+#     load 1500 W, equal weights    the wedged unit named on 199/200 cycles
+#     load 1500 W, OPT-09 weights   named on   0/200 cycles
+#
+# ⚠️ AND THE SUPPRESSED REGIME IS THE QUIET ONE. At a load the healthy sibling
+# covers, the meter is satisfied, `unmet_w` is 0 and no action-log line fires,
+# so this alarm is the ONLY instrument that would have told the operator.
+#
+# ⚠️ THE FIX IS NOT A SMALLER `min_w`, AND THAT IS THE WHOLE SHAPE OF THIS
+# CARD. `min_w` is `Tuning.saturation_w` and it exists to stop NORMAL
+# SATURATION being reported as delinquency - the crying-wolf failure the whole
+# module is written against, and the one SAFETY-41 spent four attempts on
+# ("i'm getting really annoyed by the notifications in my HA"). Lowering it
+# trades a missed alarm for a false one on every unit at once. A fraction of
+# the unit's OWN SHARE is a SECOND way to be named that leaves the first
+# exactly where it was: `gap > min_w OR gap > frac * share`. Nothing that was
+# silent before this card becomes noisy unless the unit is delivering almost
+# none of what it was asked for, which is not saturation-shaped at all.
+#
+# WHERE 0.85 COMES FROM - MEASURED ON THE SAME CAMPAIGN AS `delivery_hold_s`.
+# `admin/goodwe:sim/delivery_window.py --campaign --fractions` grades this
+# constant over the SAME 2640 no-fault runs (three families x 6 gains x 5 slews
+# x the write staggers, every unit executing the share it was given) that
+# produced the 35.0 s worst legitimate episode, at the shipped `min_w`, and
+# reports what the relative arm ADDS. Worst continuous legitimate episode,
+# worst of the three families:
+#
+#   frac   0.05  0.10  0.15  0.20  0.25  0.30  0.35  0.40  0.45  0.50
+#   worst  90.0  90.0  70.0  70.0  60.0  55.0  55.0  60.0  45.0  45.0  s
+#
+#   frac   0.55  0.60  0.65  0.70  0.75  0.80 *0.85  0.90  0.95  0.99
+#   worst  40.0  40.0  45.0  45.0  45.0  45.0  40.0  40.0  40.0  40.0  s
+#
+#   absolute arm alone: 35.0 s - SAFETY-42 §3.3's figure, re-measured in the
+#   SAME runs, which is what makes every row above a comparison and not a claim.
+#   N=1 control: 0.0 s at EVERY fraction, in all 2640 one-inverter runs.
+#   Flapping family: 0.0 s at EVERY fraction, in all 840 runs.
+#
+# ⚠️ READ THE CURVE, NOT THE ROW. THERE IS NO CLIFF ANYWHERE IN IT. From 0.45
+# to 0.99 every figure is 40.0 or 45.0 s - within ONE CONTROL CYCLE (5.0 s) of
+# every other - and below 0.45 it rises gradually to 90.0 s at 0.05. It is not
+# monotone either (0.40 reports 60.0 s where 0.35 reports 55.0), which is
+# §3.3's own mechanism (c) rather than noise in the plant: a more sensitive rule
+# puts MORE units into the short set, which can turn a proper subset into the
+# WHOLE roster and END the episode. So this constant is INSENSITIVE over the
+# whole usable range, and that is the finding rather than a caveat on it. 0.85
+# sits in the flat part, 0.40 above the shoulder at ~0.45 and 0.15 below 1.0.
+#
+# ⚠️ AND "ZERO FALSE NAMINGS" IS NOT AVAILABLE AT ANY FRACTION - said here
+# because the card asked for exactly that. Every fraction adds naming CYCLES to
+# the no-fault campaign; a relative arm that never fired on a legitimate
+# transient would be one that never fired at all, because the modelled write
+# stagger lands B's number up to four cycles late and a unit whose new command
+# has not arrived IS delivering a small fraction of what is standing on its
+# wire. What is zero at every fraction is false ALARMS: the longest legitimate
+# episode anywhere in the 20-point sweep is 90.0 s - at 0.05, the most sensitive
+# fraction measured and far below anything this card would ship - against a
+# `delivery_hold_s` of 185 s, so NOTHING in 2640 no-fault runs comes within 95 s
+# of notifying an operator at any fraction measured. At 0.85 the hold is 4.62x
+# the worst legitimate episode where the absolute arm alone gave 5.29x. That is
+# the price, in full.
+#
+# ⚠️ THE DIRECTION IS THE OPPOSITE OF `min_w`'s AND IT IS EASY TO GET BACKWARDS.
+# A SMALLER fraction names MORE units - it is the more sensitive setting and the
+# more dangerous one - so the campaign puts a LOWER bound on this number, not an
+# upper one. It is bounded ABOVE by the card's own case: at 1.0 the arm can only
+# fire on a unit that is IMPORTING while asked to discharge, which is
+# SAFETY-30's fault and not this one, so a unit delivering NONE of its share
+# (gap/share exactly 1.0) would be missed. The 0.15 below 1.0 is what covers a
+# wedged box reporting a small standby figure rather than a clean zero.
+#
+# ⚠️ AND IT IS NOT AN OPTION, FOR `delivery_w`'s REASON ONE PARAGRAPH UP. An
+# operator has no instrument to derive it with, a knob here is a knob on how
+# loud this add-on is, and SAFETY-41 is the record of what that costs. It is a
+# derived constant with a committed harness behind it, and the way to move it
+# is to re-run the campaign.
+DELIVERY_SHARE_FRACTION = 0.85
+
+
 @dataclass(frozen=True)
 class DeliveryConfig:
     """Defaults, not constants - config.yaml carries both. See CFG-03 above."""
@@ -532,12 +620,30 @@ def account(*, live: bool, parked: bool, soc, bms_floor) -> str | None:
     return None
 
 
-def delinquent(units, min_w: float) -> dict:
+def delinquent(units, min_w: float,
+               share_frac: float = DELIVERY_SHARE_FRACTION) -> dict:
     """Which units are short with NO ACCOUNT, when the roster disagrees with them.
 
-    `units`  one `UnitDelivery` per inverter, in roster order.
-    `min_w`  the shortfall that counts - `control.Tuning.saturation_w`. See
-             `MIN_W_IS_SATURATION_W`.
+    `units`       one `UnitDelivery` per inverter, in roster order.
+    `min_w`       the ABSOLUTE shortfall that counts - `control.Tuning.
+                  saturation_w`. See `MIN_W_IS_SATURATION_W`.
+    `share_frac`  SAFETY-43. The RELATIVE shortfall that counts, as a fraction
+                  of that unit's own share. See `DELIVERY_SHARE_FRACTION`; it
+                  is a parameter rather than a read of the constant so the
+                  campaign that derived it can sweep it over the shipped code.
+                  ⚠️ `None` MEANS THE ABSOLUTE ARM ALONE - SAFETY-42's rule,
+                  exactly - and it exists for ONE caller: the campaign in
+                  `admin/goodwe:sim/delivery_window.py`, which has to be able
+                  to measure what this card ADDS against what it replaced, run
+                  for run, over ONE tree. Nothing in the add-on passes it, and
+                  `main.py` passes nothing at all.
+
+    ⚠️ THE TWO ARMS ARE AN `or` AND THE ORDER OF THAT SENTENCE MATTERS. The
+    absolute arm is untouched by SAFETY-43: everything `min_w` named before it
+    is still named, and nothing `min_w` refused becomes noisy unless the unit
+    is delivering almost NONE of its ask. Lowering `min_w` would have been the
+    other change - the one that reports normal saturation on every unit at once
+    - and `DELIVERY_SHARE_FRACTION` says at length why it was refused.
 
     Returns `{name: sentence}`, empty when there is nothing to say. The sentence
     is the operator's first line and it carries the peer clause, because "B is
@@ -579,7 +685,13 @@ def delinquent(units, min_w: float) -> dict:
     gaps = {}
     for u in asked:
         gap = short_by(u.share_w, u.measured_w)
-        if gap is not None and gap > float(min_w):
+        if gap is None:
+            continue
+        # SAFETY-43: absolute OR relative. `share_w` is > 0 for every member
+        # of `asked`, so the second comparison is always well formed.
+        if gap > float(min_w) or (share_frac is not None
+                                  and gap > float(share_frac)
+                                  * float(u.share_w)):
             gaps[u.name] = gap
 
     unaccounted = {u.name: gaps[u.name] for u in asked
@@ -595,7 +707,13 @@ def delinquent(units, min_w: float) -> dict:
         out[u.name] = (
             f"{REASON_CODE}: {u.name} is standing at {float(u.share_w):+.0f} W "
             f"and delivering {float(u.measured_w):+.0f} W - "
-            f"{unaccounted[u.name]:.0f} W of its share is not arriving - while "
+            f"{unaccounted[u.name]:.0f} W of its share "
+            # SAFETY-43. The PROPORTION is in the sentence because the watts
+            # alone stopped being the whole story the moment a unit could be
+            # named on the relative arm: "125 W is not arriving" reads like a
+            # rounding error, and "125 W (100 % of its share)" is the fault.
+            f"({100.0 * unaccounted[u.name] / float(u.share_w):.0f} % of it) "
+            f"is not arriving - while "
             f"{', '.join(peers)} {'is' if len(peers) == 1 else 'are'} not in "
             f"that state. Nothing this add-on reads explains it")
     return out

goodwe_controller/app/packshare.py

@@ -57,8 +57,8 @@ deliver DOES NOT SHIFT TO ITS SIBLING by any mechanism in this add-on.
     never rises. That module DETECTS it; this one cannot fix it, and saying so
     is worth more than a weighting scheme that looks like it might.
 
-⚠️ AND IT IS WORSE THAN "CANNOT FIX IT": THESE WEIGHTS NARROW SAFETY-42's
-DETECTION WINDOW, WHICH IS A DETECTION REGRESSION AT N=2
+⚠️ AND IT WAS WORSE THAN "CANNOT FIX IT": THESE WEIGHTS NARROWED SAFETY-42's
+DETECTION WINDOW - A DETECTION REGRESSION AT N=2, NOW CLOSED BY SAFETY-43
 =======================================================================
 This module used to say - and `DECISIONS/OPT-09-soc-aware-weights.md` §5 said
 with it - that a wedged unit's weight does not move, so OPT-09 cannot see the
@@ -68,27 +68,40 @@ pack's ENERGY HEADROOM, not of what the pack delivers, so a wedged unit's weight
 moves whenever its headroom differs from its sibling's - the ordinary case this
 module exists to exploit.
 
-`delivery.delinquent()` names a unit only while its `short_by()` gap exceeds
+`delivery.delinquent()` named a unit only while its `short_by()` gap exceeded
 `min_w` (`Tuning.saturation_w`, 500 W) in ABSOLUTE WATTS. Shrinking a unit's
 share shrinks its gap. Measured end to end (`test_packshare.py` part 8b: real
 `compute()`, real `plan()`, real `delinquent()`, B wedged at 15 % against its
-own 10 % floor, so `envelope()` does not close and `account()` explains
-nothing): at a 1500 W load the healthy pack can carry alone, equal weights name
-the wedged unit on 199 of 200 cycles and these weights name it on NONE. The
-suppression window widens from `site target < 2 * min_w` = 1000 W to
-`site target < min_w * (w_A + w_B) / w_B` = 6500 W on that fixture - and it has
+own 10 % cut-out, so `envelope()` does not close and `account()` explains
+nothing): at a 1500 W load the healthy pack can carry alone, equal weights named
+the wedged unit on 199 of 200 cycles and these weights named it on NONE. The
+suppression window widened from `site target < 2 * min_w` = 1000 W to
+`site target < min_w * (w_A + w_B) / w_B` = 6500 W on that fixture - and it had
 an upper edge: past the healthy pack's own rating, `_fill()`'s last-resort pass
-hands the wedged unit a big share again and the alarm returns.
+hands the wedged unit a big share again and the absolute arm names it.
 
-    ⚠️ BOTH BOUNDS ARE ARITHMETIC ABOUT `_fill()`'s PROPORTIONAL REGIME AND NEITHER IS A REACHABLE STEADY STATE. Swept on this fixture, the healthy pack's own 5000 W rating binds FIRST: suppressed 0/200 up to a 3000 W load, 4/200 at 4000 W, 41/200 at 4900 W (site target 5320 W, the largest reached with the wedged unit still under 500 W), then 195/200 at 5000 W once `_fill()` pins A at its cap and hands B 3000 W. So the alarm returns BELOW the 6500 W formula bound, not above it. The equal-weights 1000 W bound is unreachable for the same reason - the equal arm names the wedged unit 199/200 at every load swept, 1000 W included.
+    ⚠️ BOTH BOUNDS ARE ARITHMETIC ABOUT `_fill()`'s PROPORTIONAL REGIME AND NEITHER IS A REACHABLE STEADY STATE - KEPT HERE BECAUSE IT IS A MEASUREMENT, EVEN THOUGH SAFETY-43 HAS SINCE MADE THE WINDOW IRRELEVANT TO THE DETECTOR. Swept on this fixture with the ABSOLUTE arm alone, the healthy pack's own 5000 W rating binds FIRST: suppressed 0/200 up to a 3000 W load, 4/200 at 4000 W, 41/200 at 4900 W (site target 5320 W, the largest reached with the wedged unit still under 500 W), then 195/200 at 5000 W once `_fill()` pins A at its cap and hands B 3000 W. So the alarm returned BELOW the 6500 W formula bound, not above it. The equal-weights 1000 W bound is unreachable for the same reason - the equal arm named the wedged unit 199/200 at every load swept, 1000 W included.
 
-    ⚠️ SO THE SEAM IS NOT "OPT-09 CANNOT SEE IT". IT IS: OPT-09 STOPS THE ASK
-    **AND** NARROWS SAFETY-42's DETECTION WINDOW FOR A LOW-HEADROOM UNIT. That
-    is a disclosed residual, not a fixed thing. Closing it means making
-    `delinquent()` relative to the ask rather than absolute - SAFETY-42's code
-    and a design change, filed as its own card and deliberately NOT done here.
-    Do not "fix" part 8b by making it assert the alarm still fires; it does not,
-    and a green check that says otherwise would be worse than the gap.
+    ⚠️ THAT IS NO LONGER A RESIDUAL. SAFETY-43 made `delinquent()` relative to
+    the ask AS WELL AS absolute - `gap > min_w OR gap > frac * share`, and a
+    unit delivering 0 of 125 W is as delinquent as one delivering 0 of 1500 W.
+    On the SAME fixture, under the SAME weights, the wedged unit is now named
+    on 200 of 200 cycles. Part 8b grades both rules on one run:
+    `share_frac=None` is SAFETY-42's absolute arm alone and still says nothing,
+    which is what keeps the paragraph above honest rather than nostalgic.
+
+    ⚠️ AND `min_w` WAS NOT LOWERED. The absolute arm's suppression window is
+    still exactly the arithmetic above - 1000 W at equal weights, 6500 W at
+    these - because a lower `saturation_w` would report NORMAL SATURATION as
+    delinquency on every unit at once, which is the false-trip regime SAFETY-41
+    spent four attempts in. What changed is that there is a SECOND way to be
+    named; nothing that was quiet before became noisy.
+
+    ⚠️ WHAT THIS MODULE STILL CANNOT DO IS UNCHANGED. OPT-09 stops the site
+    ASKING a pack whose own SoC says it cannot deliver; it does not, and will
+    not, re-allocate a wedged unit's watts to its sibling - `delivery.py`'s
+    "IT REPORTS. IT DOES NOT ACT" block is the measurement behind that, and
+    SAFETY-43 did not touch it. The alarm is louder; the loop is identical.
 
 WHY ENERGY AND NOT POWER
 ========================

goodwe_controller/config.yaml

@@ -548,8 +548,10 @@ options:
   # only ever ran at 500 could not tell this wiring from a hard-coded number.
   #
   # How long ONE inverter may stand at a discharge share it is not producing -
-  # short by more than `saturation_w` - while at least one sibling is NOT in
-  # that state, before the add-on names it. It REPORTS: nothing is commanded
+  # short by more than `saturation_w`, OR short by more than a fixed FRACTION
+  # of its own share (SAFETY-43; the fraction is derived and is not an option,
+  # see app/delivery.py) - while at least one sibling is NOT in that state,
+  # before the add-on names it. It REPORTS: nothing is commanded
   # differently, the loop is untouched, and the site goes on running short by
   # that unit's share until somebody looks. app/delivery.py carries why, with
   # the rig measurements on both sides of the decision.

goodwe_controller/test_delivery.py

@@ -33,8 +33,9 @@ from datetime import datetime, timedelta, timezone
 
 from app.control import Tuning
 from app.delivery import (
-    DELIVERY_OPTION_DEFAULTS, REASON_CODE, DeliveryConfig, DeliveryWatchdog,
-    UnitDelivery, account, delinquent, short_by,
+    DELIVERY_OPTION_DEFAULTS, DELIVERY_SHARE_FRACTION, REASON_CODE,
+    DeliveryConfig, DeliveryWatchdog, UnitDelivery, account, delinquent,
+    short_by,
 )
 from app.inverter import LINK_STALE_S
 from app.main import Controller
@@ -151,6 +152,77 @@ check("a unit given no share is not asked and cannot be named, and it is not "
       "a peer either - with only one unit asked there is nothing to compare",
       delinquent([U("a", 0, 0), U("b", 2000, 0)], 500) == {})
 
+print()
+print("   SAFETY-43: THE RELATIVE ARM - short OF ITS OWN ASK, not just short")
+
+# ⚠️ `share_frac=None` IS SAFETY-42's RULE EXACTLY, and every check in this part
+# above this line is run under BOTH rules below to show the card took nothing
+# away. What it ADDS is one thing: a unit can now be named for delivering almost
+# none of a SMALL share. OPT-09's weights make small shares ordinary - a
+# low-headroom unit is weighted down to 125 W of a 1630 W site target - so
+# before this card a wedged unit could be 100 % delinquent and 125 W short, and
+# 125 W is under a 500 W threshold. test_packshare.py part 8b measures that end
+# to end on the real loop; what is graded here is the predicate.
+_ABS = None                                    # SAFETY-42's rule
+
+_tiny = [U("a", 1505, 1505), U("b", 125, 0)]
+check("A UNIT DELIVERING 0 OF 125 W IS NAMED, AND UNDER THE OLD RULE IT WAS "
+      "NOT. Same three units, same `min_w`, one input changed: the absolute arm "
+      "alone answers {} because 125 W < 500 W, and the shipped rule names it "
+      "because 100 % of its ask is not arriving",
+      delinquent(_tiny, 500, _ABS) == {}
+      and list(delinquent(_tiny, 500)) == ["b"])
+# ⚠️ `.get`, NOT `["b"]`, AND THAT IS NOT STYLE. A bare subscript here raises
+# KeyError on any tree where the relative arm is broken or absent, which ABORTS
+# THE FILE at part 1 and leaves parts 2-8 UNGRADED. The direction is safe - an
+# abort is a red, and MUTATION.md's defect can only fabricate a green - but the
+# recorded coverage of a mutation run then reads larger than it was, which is
+# the shape M11's entry in test_packshare.py part 11 already discloses. Found
+# in review of this card, on M12 and M13.
+_tiny_said = delinquent(_tiny, 500).get("b", "(not named - see the check above)")
+print(f"       {_tiny_said}")
+check("...and the sentence carries the PROPORTION as well as the watts, because "
+      "'125 W is not arriving' reads like a rounding error and '125 W (100 % of "
+      "it)' is the fault",
+      "125 W of its share (100 % of it) is not arriving" in _tiny_said)
+
+check("THE ACCOUNT GATE IS UNTOUCHED BY IT - the same 0 of 125 W with the "
+      "shortfall EXPLAINED names nobody. A relative criterion that could talk "
+      "its way past `account()` would report every pack sitting at its own "
+      "cut-out on a small share, which is the crying-wolf failure this module "
+      "exists to avoid",
+      delinquent([U("a", 1505, 1505), U("b", 125, 0, "its pack is empty")],
+                 500) == {})
+check("...and so is the PROPER-SUBSET rule: both units delivering none of a "
+      "small share is a SITE condition and is still nobody's fault to name",
+      delinquent([U("a", 125, 0), U("b", 125, 0)], 500) == {})
+check("...and the relative bound is STRICT, like the absolute one. A gap of "
+      "EXACTLY the fraction of the share is not over it; one watt more is",
+      delinquent([U("a", 2000, 2000),
+                  U("b", 1000, 1000 * (1.0 - DELIVERY_SHARE_FRACTION))],
+                 5000) == {}
+      and list(delinquent([U("a", 2000, 2000),
+                           U("b", 1000,
+                             1000 * (1.0 - DELIVERY_SHARE_FRACTION) - 1)],
+                          5000)) == ["b"])
+
+_both_rules = [(delinquent(u, w, _ABS), delinquent(u, w)) for u, w in (
+    ([U("a", 2000, 2000), U("b", 2000, 0)], 500),
+    ([U("a", 2000, 2000), U("b", 2000, 0, "its pack is empty")], 500),
+    ([U("a", 2000, 0), U("b", 2000, 0)], 500),
+    ([U("a", 2000, 2000), U("b", 2000, 0), U("c", 2000, 0)], 500),
+    ([U("a", 2000, 0, "at its floor"), U("b", 2000, 0)], 500),
+    ([U("a", 2000, 2000), U("b", 2000, 1500)], 500),
+    ([U("a", 0, 0), U("b", 2000, 0)], 500),
+)]
+check(f"⚠️ AND IT TOOK NOTHING AWAY: all {len(_both_rules)} fixtures above this "
+      f"block answer IDENTICALLY under SAFETY-42's rule and the shipped one. "
+      f"The relative arm is an `or`, so it can only ever ADD a naming - and on "
+      f"every case this part already graded it adds none. That is the "
+      f"difference between adding a second way to be named and lowering "
+      f"`min_w`, which would have moved all seven",
+      all(a == b for a, b in _both_rules))
+
 print()
 print("   AC 5: AT ONE INVERTER IT IS INERT, AND BY ALGEBRA RATHER THAN BY A")
 print("   ROSTER GUARD - `len(asked) < 2` is unreachable-by-construction there")
@@ -323,9 +395,14 @@ class _DeliveryHass:
     same in both.
     """
 
-    def __init__(self, load_w=_LOAD_W, b_soc=50.0):
+    def __init__(self, load_w=_LOAD_W, b_soc=50.0, b_frac=0.0):
         self.load_w = float(load_w)
         self.b_soc = float(b_soc)
+        # SAFETY-43. What fraction of its command B actually delivers. 0.0 is a
+        # WEDGED unit and is every arm in this file but part 4b(a) - see there
+        # for why that one arm needs a unit that is short WITHOUT being 100 %
+        # short.
+        self.b_frac = float(b_frac)
         self.writes = []
         self.calls = []
         self.ctrl = None
@@ -343,8 +420,11 @@ class _DeliveryHass:
         # A obeys. B produces NOTHING, whatever it is told - and whether that is
         # a wedged power stage or an empty pack is not a question its power
         # register can answer.
+        b = self.ctrl.inverters[1]
+        b_cmd = float((b.last_write if b.last_write is not None else b.target)
+                      or 0.0)
         return [float((a.last_write if a.last_write is not None else a.target)
-                      or 0.0), 0.0]
+                      or 0.0), self.b_frac * b_cmd]
 
     async def number(self, entity, invert=False):
         m = self.measured()
@@ -630,15 +710,27 @@ print("       schema. Same load, same wedged unit, two configured thresholds.")
 # load is what puts B's shortfall BETWEEN the two: above the shipped threshold,
 # below the raised one. The gap itself is printed by the run that produces it
 # and is never written down here; what is asserted is the ORDERING.
+#
+# ⚠️ AND B IS DERATED HERE RATHER THAN WEDGED, WHICH SAFETY-43 MADE NECESSARY.
+# `delinquent()` now names a unit whose gap exceeds `min_w` OR a fraction of its
+# own share, so a unit delivering NONE of its ask is named at every `min_w`
+# there is - which is the whole point of that card, and which would make the
+# raised arm below fire for a reason that has nothing to do with the watts. A
+# unit delivering HALF of what it is asked for is short in absolute watts and
+# comfortably inside the fraction, so it is the fixture that still isolates
+# `saturation_w`. `_SAT_B_FRAC` is asserted below to be inside the relative
+# arm's silence, so a future change to the fraction turns this red rather than
+# quietly turning the pin vacuous.
 _SAT_RAISED = 1800
 _SAT_LOAD_W = 1600.0
+_SAT_B_FRAC = 0.5
 _SAT_SHIPPED = int(read_option("saturation_w"))
 _sat_lo, _sat_hi = (int(x) for x in re.match(
     r"int\((\d+),(\d+)\)", read_option("saturation_w", "schema")).groups())
 
 
-async def _at_saturation_w(sat):
-    hass = _DeliveryHass(load_w=_SAT_LOAD_W)
+async def _at_saturation_w(sat, b_frac=_SAT_B_FRAC):
+    hass = _DeliveryHass(load_w=_SAT_LOAD_W, b_frac=b_frac)
     c = _ctrl(hass, saturation_w=sat)
     return c, await _drive(c, watch=_sample)
 
@@ -674,6 +766,17 @@ check("the raised arm REACHED the comparison: B was asked for a discharge "
       and not _b_up.sign_wd.tripped
       and account(live=True, parked=False, soc=_b_up.soc,
                   bms_floor=_b_up.bms_soc_floor) is None)
+check("...and SAFETY-43's RELATIVE arm is silent on both arms of this fixture, "
+      "which is what leaves the watts as the only moving part. B delivers half "
+      "of what it is asked for, so its gap is half its share and that is "
+      "inside `DELIVERY_SHARE_FRACTION`. ⚠️ A FIXTURE WHERE THE RELATIVE ARM "
+      "FIRED WOULD NAME B AT EVERY `saturation_w` AND THIS PIN WOULD BE "
+      "VACUOUS, so it is asserted rather than assumed",
+      _gap_up / float(_b_up.standing_w()) <= DELIVERY_SHARE_FRACTION
+      and _gap_ship / float(_b_ship.standing_w()) <= DELIVERY_SHARE_FRACTION
+      and delinquent([U("a", 1000, 1000),
+                      U("b", float(_b_up.standing_w()), _b_up.batt)],
+                     _SAT_RAISED) == {})
 check("...and its shortfall lands STRICTLY BETWEEN the two configured "
       "thresholds, which is the one place the two answers can differ. Part 4's "
       "fixtures are all above both, which is exactly why they cannot see this",

goodwe_controller/test_packshare.py

@@ -41,7 +41,9 @@ from app.arbiter import (
     ACTUATOR_SITE, CLAIM_SCOPE, P_LOOP, P_SAFETY, SCOPE_UNIT, Claim, resolve,
 )
 from app.control import Tuning, compute
-from app.delivery import UnitDelivery, account, delinquent
+from app.delivery import (
+    DELIVERY_SHARE_FRACTION, UnitDelivery, account, delinquent,
+)
 from app.peakguard import discharge_permitted
 
 fails = []
@@ -605,67 +607,87 @@ check("...and SAFETY-42 is where the case this card CANNOT reach is handled. A "
       "site ASKING a pack whose own SoC says it cannot deliver; SAFETY-42 "
       "alarms when a pack that said it could does not. ⚠️ THE WEIGHT, HOWEVER, "
       "DOES MOVE - this check used to say it did not - and part 8b grades what "
-      "that costs the alarm",
+      "that cost the alarm, and what SAFETY-43 did about it",
       not packshare.envelope(PE(Bee, 55.0, B_KWH)).binding)
 
 
 # ==============================================================================
 print()
-print("8b. ⚠️ AND WHAT THE WEIGHTS DO TO SAFETY-42's DETECTION WINDOW, WHICH IS "
-      "A REGRESSION AND IS PINNED HERE AS ONE")
+print("8b. ⚠️ WHAT THE WEIGHTS DID TO SAFETY-42's DETECTION WINDOW, AND WHAT "
+      "SAFETY-43 DID ABOUT IT - GRADED UNDER BOTH RULES, ON ONE FIXTURE")
 
-# ⚠️ READ THIS BEFORE READING THE CHECKS: THEY ASSERT THE UNFLATTERING ANSWER ON
-# PURPOSE. An earlier draft of §5 of the decision said a wedged unit's weight
-# does not move, so OPT-09 "cannot see it at all". The first clause is about the
-# ENVELOPE and is true; the second is FALSE. A wedged unit's weight moves
-# whenever its energy headroom differs from its sibling's - it is a pack fact,
-# not a delivery fact - and `delivery.delinquent()` names a unit only while its
-# `short_by()` gap exceeds `min_w` (`Tuning.saturation_w`, 500 W) IN ABSOLUTE
-# WATTS. Shrinking a unit's share shrinks its gap. Shrink it below 500 W and the
-# alarm stops firing on a unit that is still delivering nothing.
+# ⚠️ THIS PART USED TO PIN THE UNFLATTERING ANSWER ON PURPOSE, AND SAFETY-43 IS
+# THE CARD THAT INVERTED IT. What it said - and it was true when it was written
+# - was: a wedged unit's weight MOVES whenever its energy headroom differs from
+# its sibling's (it is a pack fact, not a delivery fact), `delivery.delinquent()`
+# named a unit only while its `short_by()` gap exceeded `min_w`
+# (`Tuning.saturation_w`, 500 W) IN ABSOLUTE WATTS, and shrinking a unit's share
+# shrinks its gap. Shrink it below 500 W and the alarm stopped firing on a unit
+# that was still delivering nothing. The old text ended "if it ever goes red
+# because the alarm fired, read the card that made it fire before 'fixing' this
+# line". SAFETY-43 is that card, this is that red, and the checks below are the
+# same three measurements with their answers the other way round.
 #
-# So the seam is not "OPT-09 cannot see it". It is: OPT-09 stops the ask AND
-# narrows SAFETY-42's detection window on the same unit. At equal weights the
-# window is `site target < 2 * min_w` = 1000 W; at OPT-09's weights it is
-# `site target < min_w * (w_A + w_B) / w_B`, which on this fixture is 6500 W.
+# ⚠️ AND THE EVIDENCE IS THE DIFF BETWEEN TWO RULES ON ONE RUN, NOT A NUMBER
+# THAT CHANGED IN A COMMIT. `delinquent()` takes `share_frac`, and
+# `share_frac=None` is SAFETY-42's rule EXACTLY - the absolute arm alone. So
+# `wedged_loop` grades every cycle twice, once under each rule, and the red and
+# the green sit side by side in one output:
 #
-# ⚠️ BOTH BOUNDS ARE ARITHMETIC ABOUT `_fill()`'s PROPORTIONAL REGIME AND NEITHER IS A REACHABLE STEADY STATE. Swept on this fixture, the healthy pack's own 5000 W rating binds FIRST: suppressed 0/200 up to a 3000 W load, 4/200 at 4000 W, 41/200 at 4900 W (site target 5320 W, the largest reached with the wedged unit still under 500 W), then 195/200 at 5000 W once `_fill()` pins A at its cap and hands B 3000 W. So the alarm returns BELOW the 6500 W formula bound, not above it. The equal-weights 1000 W bound is unreachable for the same reason - the equal arm names the wedged unit 199/200 at every load swept, 1000 W included.
+#     load 1500 W, OPT-09 weights, absolute arm only   named on   0/200 cycles
+#     load 1500 W, OPT-09 weights, the shipped rule    named on 200/200 cycles
 #
-# ⚠️ THIS IS A DETECTION REGRESSION AT N=2 AND IT IS NOT FIXED HERE. Making
-# `delinquent()` relative to the ask rather than absolute is SAFETY-42's code and
-# a design change; it is filed as card SAFETY-43. What this part does is GRADE THE
-# CURRENT BEHAVIOUR so that the day it changes, a named check moves.
+# A future reader who wants to know what this card did runs this file.
+#
+# ⚠️ WHAT SAFETY-43 DID NOT DO IS LOWER `min_w`, and the check on the window
+# arithmetic below is what holds that open: the ABSOLUTE arm's suppression
+# window is still 500 W wide and still widens to 6500 W under these weights.
+# Nothing that was quiet became noisy; a SECOND way to be named was added, and
+# it is a fraction of the unit's OWN ask, so it fires on a unit delivering none
+# of 125 W exactly as it fires on one delivering none of 1500 W.
 #
 # ⚠️ AND THE FIXTURE IS A SAFETY-42 TRUE POSITIVE BY THAT CARD'S OWN DEFINITION,
 # checked below before anything is concluded from it: B is WEDGED - it accepts
 # its share and produces nothing - at a HEALTHY 15 % against its own 10 % floor,
 # so `envelope()` does not close and `account()` explains nothing. This is
 # exactly the case §5 says the envelope cannot reach, which is why it is the
-# case where the weights' side effect matters.
+# case where the weights' side effect mattered.
 #
 # ⚠️ TWO COPIES OF A. Inverter B does not exist; the plant below is modelled in
 # this file the way part 8's is, and B's ratings are datasheet.
 
 WEDGED_A_SOC, WEDGED_B_SOC = 90.0, 15.0   # both healthy, both above their floor
 MIN_W = Tuning().saturation_w             # what `delinquent()` is handed
+ABSOLUTE_ONLY = None                      # `share_frac=None` - SAFETY-42's rule
 
 
-def wedged_loop(load_w, weighted, cycles=200):
+def wedged_loop(load_w, weighted, cycles=200, share_frac=DELIVERY_SHARE_FRACTION,
+                b_delivers=0.0, b_soc=WEDGED_B_SOC, no_account=False):
     """The closed loop with unit B WEDGED at a healthy SoC. Real everything.
 
     Real `compute()`, real `plan()`, real `packshare.weights()`, real
     `delivery.account()` and real `delivery.delinquent()`. The only model is the
-    plant: A obeys within one cycle inside its rating, B accepts whatever it is
-    told and delivers 0 W - which is the wedged box, and is what makes this a
+    plant: A obeys within one cycle inside its rating, B delivers `b_delivers`
+    of whatever it is told - 0.0 is the wedged box, and is what makes this a
     SAFETY-42 case rather than an OPT-09 one.
 
     `weighted=False` is equal weights - what shipped. Envelopes are left OPEN in
     both arms deliberately: neither pack's SoC closes one here, so filing them
     would change nothing and would blur which half of the card is being graded.
 
+    `share_frac` is SAFETY-43's relative arm. `ABSOLUTE_ONLY` grades the same
+    cycles under SAFETY-42's rule, which is how the red and the green below come
+    out of ONE run over ONE tree instead of out of two commits.
+
+    `no_account=True` DELETES the account gate - every unit is handed
+    `accounted=None` - and it exists to answer "would this arm still be silent
+    if `account()` did nothing at all?". A control that answers the same way
+    with the gate removed is not grading the gate, and the cut-out arm below is
+    exactly that case. See it there; it is the point of that block.
+
     Returns `(cycles on which delinquent() named somebody, last cycle)`.
     """
-    packs = [PE(A, WEDGED_A_SOC, A_KWH), PE(Bee, WEDGED_B_SOC, B_KWH)]
+    packs = [PE(A, WEDGED_A_SOC, A_KWH), PE(Bee, b_soc, B_KWH)]
     tuning = Tuning(gain=1.0, slew_w=1000.0, max_w=A_W + B_W)
     prev, i_w, sat = 0.0, None, 0
     power = [0.0, 0.0]
@@ -678,13 +700,15 @@ def wedged_loop(load_w, weighted, cycles=200):
         r = plan(d.target_w, {A: _B(-A_W, A_W), Bee: _B(-B_W, B_W)}, weights=w)
         assert r.ok, r.refused
         # THE MODELLED PLANT: A within one cycle inside its rating; B WEDGED.
-        power = [max(-A_W, min(A_W, float(r.shares[A]))), 0.0]
+        power = [max(-A_W, min(A_W, float(r.shares[A]))),
+                 b_delivers * max(-B_W, min(B_W, float(r.shares[Bee])))]
         grid = load_w - sum(power)
         who = delinquent(
             [UnitDelivery(p.name, r.shares[p.name], m,
+                          None if no_account else
                           account(live=True, parked=False, soc=p.soc,
                                   bms_floor=p.bms_floor))
-             for p, m in zip(packs, power)], MIN_W)
+             for p, m in zip(packs, power)], MIN_W, share_frac)
         named += bool(who)
         last = (d.target_w, dict(r.shares), grid, who)
     return named, last
@@ -698,75 +722,271 @@ check("PRECONDITION: the wedged unit is a SAFETY-42 TRUE POSITIVE and NOT an "
       not packshare.envelope(_WEDGED_PACK).binding
       and account(live=True, parked=False, soc=WEDGED_B_SOC,
                   bms_floor=FLOOR) is None)
+check("PRECONDITION: the shipped fraction is a fraction, and it is STRICTLY "
+      "below 1.0 - at 1.0 the relative arm could only fire on a unit IMPORTING "
+      "while asked to discharge, which is SAFETY-30's fault and not this one, "
+      "and this card's own case (a unit delivering NONE of its share, gap over "
+      "share exactly 1.0) would be missed",
+      0.0 < DELIVERY_SHARE_FRACTION < 1.0)
 
 _wedge = {}
 for _load in (1500.0, 6000.0):
     for _weighted in (False, True):
-        _n, _t = wedged_loop(_load, _weighted)
-        _wedge[(_load, _weighted)] = (_n, _t)
-        print(f"    load {_load:.0f} W, B wedged at 15 %, "
-              f"{'OPT-09 weights' if _weighted else 'equal weights ':<14} "
-              f"named on {_n:3d}/200 cycles, site target {_t[0]:+.0f} W, shares "
-              + ", ".join(f"{u}{v:+d}" for u, v in sorted(_t[1].items()))
-              + f", grid {_t[2]:+.0f} W, named="
-              + (str(sorted(_t[3])) if _t[3] else "(nobody)"))
+        for _frac in (ABSOLUTE_ONLY, DELIVERY_SHARE_FRACTION):
+            _n, _t = wedged_loop(_load, _weighted, share_frac=_frac)
+            _wedge[(_load, _weighted, _frac)] = (_n, _t)
+            print(f"    load {_load:.0f} W, B wedged at 15 %, "
+                  f"{'OPT-09 weights' if _weighted else 'equal weights ':<14} "
+                  + ("absolute arm only" if _frac is ABSOLUTE_ONLY
+                     else f"frac {_frac:.2f}         ")
+                  + f", named on {_n:3d}/200 cycles, site target {_t[0]:+.0f} W,"
+                  + " shares "
+                  + ", ".join(f"{u}{v:+d}" for u, v in sorted(_t[1].items()))
+                  + f", grid {_t[2]:+.0f} W, named="
+                  + (str(sorted(_t[3])) if _t[3] else "(nobody)"))
 
-check("AT EQUAL WEIGHTS - WHAT SHIPPED - the wedged unit is named on every "
-      "cycle but the first, at a load its sibling can carry on its own. The "
-      "loop winds the site target to twice the load, the 50/50 split stands "
-      "+1500 W on a box producing nothing, and 1500 W > 500 W is what "
-      "`delinquent()` reads",
-      _wedge[(1500.0, False)][0] == 199
-      and sorted(_wedge[(1500.0, False)][1][3]) == [Bee]
-      and _wedge[(1500.0, False)][1][1] == {A: 1500, Bee: 1500})
+check("⚠️ THE CARD, RED: UNDER SAFETY-42's RULE AND OPT-09's WEIGHTS THE WEDGED "
+      "UNIT IS NAMED ON NONE OF THE 200. Same wedged box, same healthy SoC, "
+      "same load, same detector: the split moves to 1505/125, the gap on the "
+      "wedged unit falls to 125 W, and 125 W < 500 W so the absolute arm "
+      "returns {}. This is the defect SAFETY-43 was filed for, and it is "
+      "measured here rather than remembered",
+      _wedge[(1500.0, True, ABSOLUTE_ONLY)][0] == 0
+      and _wedge[(1500.0, True, ABSOLUTE_ONLY)][1][3] == {}
+      and _wedge[(1500.0, True, ABSOLUTE_ONLY)][1][1] == {A: 1505, Bee: 125})
 
-check("⚠️ AND WITH OPT-09's WEIGHTS IT IS NAMED ON NONE OF THE 200. Same wedged "
-      "box, same healthy SoC, same load, same detector: the split moves to "
-      "1505/125, the gap on the wedged unit falls to 125 W, and 125 W < 500 W "
-      "so `delinquent()` returns {}. THIS CHECK PINS A REGRESSION - it asserts "
-      "what the code DOES, not what anyone wants, and if it ever goes red "
-      "because the alarm fired, read the card that made it fire before "
-      "'fixing' this line",
-      _wedge[(1500.0, True)][0] == 0
-      and _wedge[(1500.0, True)][1][3] == {}
-      and _wedge[(1500.0, True)][1][1] == {A: 1505, Bee: 125})
+check("⚠️ THE CARD, GREEN: THE SHIPPED RULE NAMES IT ON ALL 200, ON THE SAME "
+      "RUN. The unit is standing at +125 W and delivering 0 W - 100 % of its "
+      "ask is not arriving - and `gap > frac * share` does not care that 125 W "
+      "is a small number. The ONLY input that moved between this check and the "
+      "one above is `share_frac`",
+      _wedge[(1500.0, True, DELIVERY_SHARE_FRACTION)][0] == 200
+      and sorted(_wedge[(1500.0, True, DELIVERY_SHARE_FRACTION)][1][3]) == [Bee]
+      and _wedge[(1500.0, True, DELIVERY_SHARE_FRACTION)][1][1] \
+          == {A: 1505, Bee: 125})
+
+check("AT EQUAL WEIGHTS - WHAT SHIPPED BEFORE OPT-09 - the wedged unit was "
+      "already named under the absolute rule on every cycle but the first, at "
+      "a load its sibling can carry on its own. The loop winds the site target "
+      "to twice the load, the 50/50 split stands +1500 W on a box producing "
+      "nothing, and 1500 W > 500 W is what the absolute arm reads",
+      _wedge[(1500.0, False, ABSOLUTE_ONLY)][0] == 199
+      and sorted(_wedge[(1500.0, False, ABSOLUTE_ONLY)][1][3]) == [Bee]
+      and _wedge[(1500.0, False, ABSOLUTE_ONLY)][1][1] == {A: 1500, Bee: 1500})
+
+check("...and the shipped rule adds exactly the FIRST cycle to that arm and "
+      "nothing else - 199 becomes 200. On cycle one the slew limit holds the "
+      "split at 500/500, a 500 W gap is NOT over a 500 W threshold (the "
+      "absolute bound is strict), and the relative arm names a box delivering "
+      "none of its 500 W. That one cycle is the whole of what this card costs "
+      "an arm that was already firing",
+      _wedge[(1500.0, False, DELIVERY_SHARE_FRACTION)][0] == 200
+      and _wedge[(1500.0, False, DELIVERY_SHARE_FRACTION)][0]
+          - _wedge[(1500.0, False, ABSOLUTE_ONLY)][0] == 1)
 
 check("...and this is the regime where NOTHING ELSE TELLS THE OPERATOR "
       "ANYTHING: the meter is satisfied (grid within 5 W of zero), `unmet_w` is "
       "0 because both units accepted their shares, no envelope closed and no "
-      "action-log line fires. The site is quietly running one inverter and the "
-      "one instrument built to say so has gone quiet with it",
-      abs(_wedge[(1500.0, True)][1][2]) <= 5.0
-      and abs(_wedge[(1500.0, False)][1][2]) <= 5.0)
+      "action-log line fires. The site is quietly running one inverter, and "
+      "before this card the one instrument built to say so had gone quiet with "
+      "it",
+      abs(_wedge[(1500.0, True, DELIVERY_SHARE_FRACTION)][1][2]) <= 5.0
+      and abs(_wedge[(1500.0, False, DELIVERY_SHARE_FRACTION)][1][2]) <= 5.0)
 
 _w = packshare.weights([PE(A, WEDGED_A_SOC, A_KWH), _WEDGED_PACK], 1000.0)
 _window_equal = MIN_W * 2.0
 _window_opt09 = MIN_W * sum(_w.values()) / _w[Bee]
-print(f"    suppression window on this fixture: equal weights, site target "
-      f"< {_window_equal:.0f} W; OPT-09 weights, site target "
-      f"< {_window_opt09:.0f} W of a {A_W + B_W:.0f} W site")
-check("...and the arithmetic behind it, stated as a window rather than as one "
-      "fixture: `delinquent()` reads an ABSOLUTE gap, so a unit weighted to a "
-      "fraction f of the site target is invisible while `f * target < min_w`. "
-      "Equal weights suppress below 1000 W; these weights suppress below "
-      "6500 W of a 9600 W site. ⚠️ BOTH ARE PROPORTIONAL-REGIME BOUNDS AND "
-      "NEITHER IS REACHABLE: the healthy pack's own rating binds first, so the "
-      "alarm returns BELOW 6500 W (swept: 0/200 to a 3000 W load, 41/200 at "
-      "4900 W, 195/200 at 5000 W) and the equal arm never suppresses at all. "
-      "That is the regression, and it is a property "
-      "of the threshold being absolute rather than of any number chosen here",
-      abs(_window_equal - 1000.0) < 1.0 and abs(_window_opt09 - 6500.0) < 1.0)
+print(f"    the ABSOLUTE arm's suppression window is UNCHANGED by SAFETY-43: "
+      f"equal weights, site target < {_window_equal:.0f} W; OPT-09 weights, "
+      f"site target < {_window_opt09:.0f} W of a {A_W + B_W:.0f} W site")
+check("⚠️ AND `min_w` WAS NOT LOWERED, WHICH IS THE HALF OF THIS CARD THAT IS "
+      "EASIEST TO GET WRONG. The absolute arm still suppresses below 1000 W at "
+      "equal weights and below 6500 W at these ones - the same arithmetic this "
+      "part has always printed - because SAFETY-43 ADDED a second way to be "
+      "named rather than loosening the first. Lowering `saturation_w` would "
+      "have reported normal saturation on every unit at once, which is the "
+      "false-trip regime SAFETY-41 spent four attempts in",
+      abs(_window_equal - 1000.0) < 1.0 and abs(_window_opt09 - 6500.0) < 1.0
+      and MIN_W == Tuning().saturation_w == 500.0)
+
+check("⚠️ AND THE ABSOLUTE ARM WAS NEVER SILENT EVERYWHERE - which is what a "
+      "check that only ever ran the quiet load would be pinning. Push the load "
+      "past the healthy pack's OWN RATING and `_fill()`'s last-resort pass "
+      "hands the wedged unit 3000 W anyway, the gap goes back over 500 W, and "
+      "both arms named it under SAFETY-42's rule too. The window was real and "
+      "it had an upper edge; the hole was the quiet regime below that edge, "
+      "and the shipped rule now names the unit on every cycle of all four runs",
+      _wedge[(6000.0, True, ABSOLUTE_ONLY)][0] == 195
+      and _wedge[(6000.0, False, ABSOLUTE_ONLY)][0] == 199
+      and _wedge[(6000.0, True, DELIVERY_SHARE_FRACTION)][0] == 200
+      and _wedge[(6000.0, False, DELIVERY_SHARE_FRACTION)][0] == 200
+      and sorted(_wedge[(6000.0, True, DELIVERY_SHARE_FRACTION)][1][3]) == [Bee])
+
+print()
+print("   THE POSITIVE CONTROL: what the relative arm must STILL NOT say")
+
+# ⚠️ A CARD THAT ADDS A WAY TO RAISE AN ALARM HAS TO SHOW WHAT IT DID NOT ADD,
+# or it has traded a missed alarm for a false one - which in this system is not
+# a rhetorical risk. SAFETY-41 took four attempts on notification cadence and
+# the owner's words were "i'm getting really annoyed by the notifications in my
+# HA". So: the same fixture, the same weights, the same tiny 125 W share, with
+# the ONE fact that makes the shortfall legitimate changed.
+
+# ⚠️ AND THE FIRST DRAFT OF THIS BLOCK WAS VACUOUS, WHICH IS WHY IT NOW PRINTS
+# ITS SHARES. It ran the cut-out arm, saw 0/200, and concluded "`account()`
+# explains it" and "identical trace to the wedged arm". BOTH WERE FALSE. At its
+# own cut-out the pack's usable energy ABOVE that cut-out is zero, so
+# `weights()` gives it 0.0, `_fill()`'s preferred pass gives it nothing, the
+# healthy sibling covers the load alone so the LAST-RESORT pass never runs, and
+# its share is 0 W on ALL 200 CYCLES. A unit with a 0 W share is not in `asked`,
+# so `len(asked) < 2` returns {} BEFORE EITHER ARM IS EVALUATED and `account()`
+# is never consulted - measured below by deleting the gate and getting the same
+# answer. The wedged arm's share is the 125 W printed on its own line above;
+# this one's is 0, printed and asserted below. Nothing was identical and nothing
+# reached the comparison.
+#
+# ⚠️ THE FACT THAT REPLACES IT IS BETTER, NOT WEAKER: at its own cut-out OPT-09
+# STOPS ASKING THE PACK AT ALL, so SAFETY-43's relative arm is never reached.
+# That is a SECOND, INDEPENDENT protection sitting UPSTREAM of `account()` - the
+# allocator declines to ask before the detector has to decline to alarm. The
+# account gate itself is graded where it is REAL, on a positive 125 W share, in
+# `test_delivery.py` part 1 ("THE ACCOUNT GATE IS UNTOUCHED BY IT").
+#
+# ⚠️ AND IT WAS INVISIBLE FOR ONE REASON: this was the only line in part 8b that
+# did not print its shares. `inverter-b+0` would have been on screen from the
+# first run. Every line in this part prints them now.
+_sat_named, _sat_last = wedged_loop(1500.0, True, b_soc=FLOOR)
+_sat_nogate, _sat_nogate_last = wedged_loop(1500.0, True, b_soc=FLOOR,
+                                            no_account=True)
+print(f"    load 1500 W, B AT ITS OWN {FLOOR:.0f} % CUT-OUT, OPT-09 weights, "
+      f"frac {DELIVERY_SHARE_FRACTION:.2f}: named on {_sat_named:3d}/200 "
+      f"cycles, shares "
+      + ", ".join(f"{u}{v:+d}" for u, v in sorted(_sat_last[1].items()))
+      + ", named="
+      + (str(sorted(_sat_last[3])) if _sat_last[3] else "(nobody)")
+      + f"; with account() DELETED: {_sat_nogate:3d}/200")
+# ⚠️ AND THE `no_account=True` SWITCH ITSELF WAS GRADED BY NOTHING. It is used
+# in exactly one place - the fixture above - where it PROVABLY cannot change the
+# answer, because a cut-out pack is never asked and the gate is never reached.
+# Review neutered the switch so it removed nothing: the file stayed GREEN and
+# printed "with account() DELETED: 0/200" while `account()` had not been
+# deleted. A line asserting a mechanism that did not happen - B1's shape, one
+# level down, in the fix for B1.
+#
+# The switch DOES bite, on a fixture already reachable from this helper: at the
+# cut-out with EQUAL weights, `plan()` hands B a 50/50 share, so the gate is the
+# only thing keeping it silent. Measured: gate on 0/200, gate deleted 200/200.
+# That proves the switch removes the gate, AND gives this part the end-to-end
+# account-gate control on a POSITIVE share that it otherwise has to outsource to
+# test_delivery.py part 1.
+_eq_gate, _eq_last = wedged_loop(1500.0, False, b_soc=FLOOR)
+_eq_nogate, _ = wedged_loop(1500.0, False, b_soc=FLOOR, no_account=True)
+print(f"    ...and the SWITCH is real: same cut-out, EQUAL weights so B IS "
+      f"asked ({_eq_last[1][Bee]:+d} W last cycle) - gate on {_eq_gate:3d}/200, "
+      f"gate DELETED {_eq_nogate:3d}/200")
+check("⭐ THE `no_account` SWITCH ACTUALLY REMOVES THE GATE, on a fixture where "
+      "the gate is the only thing keeping the pack silent. Without this the "
+      "line above prints 'with account() DELETED' about a run in which nothing "
+      "was deleted - which is exactly the defect this block was rewritten for",
+      _eq_gate == 0 and _eq_nogate == 200 and _eq_last[1][Bee] > 0)
+
+check("A PACK AT ITS OWN CUT-OUT IS NEVER ASKED, SO THE RELATIVE ARM IS NEVER "
+      "REACHED. Its usable energy above its own cut-out is zero, `weights()` "
+      "answers 0.0 for it, the healthy sibling covers the load so `_fill()`'s "
+      "last-resort pass never runs, and its share is 0 W on every one of the "
+      "200 cycles - so it is not in `asked` and `len(asked) < 2` returns {} "
+      "before either arm is compared. ⚠️ THE SHARE IS ASSERTED, not inferred "
+      "from the silence: a control that cannot say WHY it is quiet is a control "
+      "that cannot fail",
+      _sat_named == 0 and _sat_last[3] == {} and _sat_last[1][Bee] == 0)
+check("⚠️ AND THAT IS A SECOND, INDEPENDENT PROTECTION - NOT THE ACCOUNT GATE, "
+      "WHICH THIS ARM DOES NOT TOUCH. Delete `account()` entirely, hand every "
+      "unit `accounted=None`, and this arm is STILL silent on all 200 cycles, "
+      "because the protection is UPSTREAM of it: the allocator declines to ask "
+      "before the detector has to decline to alarm. ⚠️ SO DO NOT READ THIS "
+      "BLOCK AS EVIDENCE ABOUT `account()` - it is evidence about the ask. The "
+      "account gate on a POSITIVE share is graded in test_delivery.py part 1",
+      _sat_nogate == 0 and _sat_nogate_last[3] == {})
+
+_derate_named, _derate_last = wedged_loop(1500.0, True, b_delivers=0.5)
+print(f"    load 1500 W, B delivering HALF its share, OPT-09 weights, frac "
+      f"{DELIVERY_SHARE_FRACTION:.2f}: named on {_derate_named:3d}/200 cycles, "
+      f"shares "
+      + ", ".join(f"{u}{v:+d}" for u, v in sorted(_derate_last[1].items()))
+      + ", named="
+      + (str(sorted(_derate_last[3])) if _derate_last[3] else "(nobody)"))
+check("...and ORDINARY TRACKING ON A SMALL SHARE IS NOT DELINQUENCY EITHER. "
+      "The same unit at the same weights delivering HALF of what it is asked "
+      "for is short by 50 % - well inside the shipped fraction - and its gap "
+      "in watts is far under `min_w`, so NEITHER arm names it. A relative "
+      "criterion that fired here would be the saturation-shaped alarm this "
+      "whole module is written against",
+      _derate_named == 0 and _derate_last[3] == {})
+
+check("...and the DERATED control is not vacuous, which is asserted on the ONE "
+      "thing that could make it so: unlike the cut-out arm above, its unit IS "
+      "asked - a positive share on every cycle - so it really does reach both "
+      "arms and is turned away by the size of its shortfall. ⚠️ THIS GUARD USED "
+      "TO RE-ASSERT THE WEDGED ARM's 200/200 INSTEAD, WHICH IS WHY IT DID NOT "
+      "CATCH THE CUT-OUT ARM BEING VACUOUS: a check on a DIFFERENT run cannot "
+      "say anything about whether THIS one reached the comparison",
+      _derate_last[1][Bee] > 0
+      and _wedge[(1500.0, True, DELIVERY_SHARE_FRACTION)][0] == 200)
+
+print()
+print("   N=1 IS BYTE-IDENTICAL, AND THAT IS ASSERTED RATHER THAN ARGUED")
+
+# ⚠️ THE LIVE INSTALL IS N=1 AND THIS CARD MUST NOT REACH IT. Two independent
+# statements, and each is checked against the thing that would break it:
+#   1. `plan()` RETURNS BEFORE `weights` IS READ AT ALL, so no weighting - and
+#      no change to how one is derived - can move a one-inverter share. Graded
+#      with a `weights` object that RAISES if anything reads it.
+#   2. `delinquent()` returns {} at a roster of one for every input, including
+#      the input the RELATIVE arm was built for. The proper-subset algebra runs
+#      before either arm, so the fraction is never even multiplied.
+
+
+class _Poison(dict):
+    """A `weights` that cannot be read without saying so. Not a mock: a tripwire."""
+
+    def get(self, *a, **k):
+        raise AssertionError("plan() read weights at a roster of one")
+
+    def __getitem__(self, k):
+        raise AssertionError("plan() read weights at a roster of one")
+
+
+_n1_plain = plan(1234.5, {A: _B(-A_W, A_W)})
+_n1_poison = plan(1234.5, {A: _B(-A_W, A_W)}, weights=_Poison())
+check("`plan()` at a roster of ONE returns the site target unread, and it "
+      "returns it WITHOUT TOUCHING `weights` - handed a mapping that raises on "
+      "any read, it answers identically to the same call with no weights at "
+      "all. The N=1 pass-through is above the weighting, so OPT-09 could not "
+      "move it and SAFETY-43 does not either",
+      _n1_poison.shares == _n1_plain.shares == {A: 1234.5}
+      and _n1_poison.unmet_w == _n1_plain.unmet_w)
+try:
+    plan(1234.5, {A: _B(-A_W, A_W), Bee: _B(-B_W, B_W)}, weights=_Poison())
+except AssertionError:
+    _poison_bites = True
+else:
+    _poison_bites = False
+check("...and the tripwire is a real one: the SAME poisoned mapping at a roster "
+      "of TWO is read and raises. A check that could not fail would be "
+      "measuring nothing",
+      _poison_bites)
+
+_n1_rel = [delinquent([UnitDelivery(A, s, m)], MIN_W, f)
+           for s in (0, 125, 500, 2000, 5000, -2000, None)
+           for m in (0, 60, 125, 2000, -2000, None)
+           for f in (ABSOLUTE_ONLY, DELIVERY_SHARE_FRACTION)]
+check(f"...and `delinquent()` answers {{}} at a roster of one on all "
+      f"{len(_n1_rel)} of (share, measured, rule) - INCLUDING 0 of 125 W, the "
+      f"exact input this card added an arm for. `len(asked) < 2` returns "
+      f"before either threshold is compared, so the one-inverter install this "
+      f"add-on is running today cannot tell that SAFETY-43 happened",
+      all(r == {} for r in _n1_rel))
 
-check("⚠️ AND IT IS NOT THAT THE WEIGHTED ARM NEVER NAMES ANYBODY - which is "
-      "what a check that only ever ran the quiet load would be pinning. Push "
-      "the load past the healthy pack's OWN RATING and `_fill()`'s last-resort "
-      "pass hands the wedged unit 3000 W anyway, the gap goes back over 500 W, "
-      "and BOTH arms name it. The window is real and it has an upper edge; the "
-      "hole is the quiet regime below that edge",
-      _wedge[(6000.0, True)][0] == 195
-      and sorted(_wedge[(6000.0, True)][1][3]) == [Bee]
-      and _wedge[(6000.0, False)][0] == 199
-      and sorted(_wedge[(6000.0, False)][1][3]) == [Bee])
 
 # ==============================================================================
 print()
@@ -978,9 +1198,12 @@ print("        a preference and are honest about being one.")
 print("      * A WEDGED UNIT IS NOT REACHABLE BY THE ENVELOPE. Its SoC reads")
 print("        healthy, so nothing closes, and SAFETY-42 owns the detection.")
 print("        ⚠️ BUT IT IS REACHABLE BY THE WEIGHTS, WHICH MOVE ON ENERGY")
-print("        HEADROOM AND NOT ON DELIVERY - part 8b grades what that does")
-print("        to SAFETY-42's window, and the answer is a REGRESSION that is")
-print("        pinned rather than fixed.")
+print("        HEADROOM AND NOT ON DELIVERY. That narrowed SAFETY-42's")
+print("        detection window - a regression this file PINNED rather than")
+print("        fixed - and SAFETY-43 closed it by making delinquency relative")
+print("        to the ask as well as absolute. Part 8b now grades both rules")
+print("        on one fixture: the absolute arm still says nothing, and the")
+print("        shipped one names the unit on all 200 cycles.")
 
 # ==============================================================================
 print()
@@ -1023,13 +1246,41 @@ MUT = [
      "mutation took it down with a TypeError three lines into part 1"),
     ("M11 weights(): keep the shape, force every weight to 1.0  <- THE PROOF "
      "THAT PART 8b CAN GO RED",
-     "test_packshare 8b, three named checks: the wedged unit goes back to being "
-     "named on 199/200 at 1500 W, the split reverts to 1500/1500 and the "
-     "window collapses from 6500 W to 1000 W. ⚠️ RUN, NOT REASONED ABOUT - a "
-     "check that pins an UNFLATTERING behaviour has to be shown capable of "
-     "failing, or it is indistinguishable from a check that pins nothing. "
+     "test_packshare 8b, FIVE named checks - re-run for SAFETY-43 rather than "
+     "carried across, because the part it grades was rewritten: the split "
+     "reverts to 1500/1500 so the absolute arm names the unit on 199/200 "
+     "(taking the card's RED check down), the shipped rule's 200/200 comes "
+     "from the wrong shares (taking the GREEN one down), the OPT-09 window "
+     "collapses from 6500 W to 1000 W, the 6000 W arm's 195 becomes 199, and "
+     "the derated positive control moves from 0/200 to 3/200. ⚠️ RUN, NOT "
+     "REASONED ABOUT - a check that pins a behaviour has to be shown capable "
+     "of failing, or it is indistinguishable from a check that pins nothing. "
      "(It also takes parts 1, 3, 7 and 8 down, which is M3's territory; 8b is "
      "the part that names the SAFETY-42 interaction)"),
+    # --- SAFETY-43's three, and they pin the new arm from BOTH sides --------
+    ("M12 delinquent(): drop the relative arm, keep `gap > min_w`  <- THE "
+     "CARD ITSELF REVERTED",
+     "SEVEN named checks: test_delivery 1 (THREE - the 0-of-125 W naming, the "
+     "proportion in the sentence, and the strict relative bound) and "
+     "test_packshare 8b (FOUR - the GREEN check goes back to 0/200 under "
+     "OPT-09's weights, the equal arm's 200 back to 199, the 6000 W arm back "
+     "to 195/199, and the derated control's vacuity guard falls with them). "
+     "test_alloc and test_control stay green, which is the point - nothing "
+     "outside this check moves"),
+    ("M13 DELIVERY_SHARE_FRACTION 0.85 -> 1.0  <- THE TOO-LOOSE DIRECTION",
+     "SEVEN named checks: test_delivery 1 (TWO) and test_packshare 8b (FIVE), "
+     "including the PRECONDITION that the fraction is strictly below 1.0. At "
+     "1.0 the arm can only fire on a unit IMPORTING while asked to discharge, "
+     "so the card's own case - 0 of 125 W, gap over share exactly 1.0 - is "
+     "missed and the whole card is a no-op"),
+    ("M14 DELIVERY_SHARE_FRACTION 0.85 -> 0.05  <- THE TOO-SENSITIVE ONE",
+     "SIX named checks: test_delivery 1 (TWO - the strict bound, and 'IT TOOK "
+     "NOTHING AWAY' stops being true) and 4b (THREE - the `saturation_w` pin "
+     "goes VACUOUS, because the relative arm names B at every threshold), plus "
+     "test_packshare 8b's DERATED positive control, where a unit delivering "
+     "half its share starts being named. ⚠️ THIS IS THE ROW THAT MATTERS - the "
+     "fraction is pinned from BOTH directions, so it is a derived number with "
+     "checks around it rather than a literal nobody can move"),
 ]
 for _n, _w in MUT:
     print(f"    caught  {_n}")
@@ -1039,8 +1290,17 @@ check("every mutation in the table above was RUN and every one of them is "
       "M6: the whole defect this card fixes - a parameter nothing passes - is "
       "invisible to every behavioural fixture in this repository, because they "
       "all build their own claim list and call `resolve()` themselves. That is "
-      "why the call site is pinned statically as well",
-      len(MUT) == 11)
+      "why the call site is pinned statically as well. ⚠️ M12-M14 ARE "
+      "SAFETY-43's and were run the same way, on trees copied fresh and "
+      "mounted :ro so no `.pyc` could go stale - MUTATION.md's defect. All "
+      "three are REDS, which is the direction that defect cannot fabricate. "
+      "⚠️ AND THEIR COUNTS WERE RE-RUN IN REVIEW AND TWO OF THEM MOVED: "
+      "test_delivery.py part 1 used to subscript `delinquent(...)['b']` for a "
+      "print, which raised KeyError under M12 and M13 and ABORTED THE FILE at "
+      "part 1, leaving parts 2-8 ungraded and the recorded coverage smaller "
+      "than the truth. It is a `.get` now. M14's count was simply wrong: five "
+      "named checks in test_delivery, not four",
+      len(MUT) == 14)
 
 print()
 if fails:

goodwe_controller/test_rehearse.py

@@ -0,0 +1,743 @@
+"""Runnable check for the roster rehearsal.  `python3 test_rehearse.py`
+
+ARCH-02. `tools/rehearse_roster.py` is the instrument that decides whether the
+flat -> roster switch on 2026-09-12 loses a safety latch, a month of maintenance
+history, or a Home Assistant entity that an automation is watching. This file
+grades the instrument.
+
+⚠️ AN INSTRUMENT THAT HAS NEVER BEEN SEEN TO GO RED IS NOT EVIDENCE. This
+repository's most-repeated defect, `MUTATION.md` habit 4 and now FIFTEEN
+recorded instances, is "a check whose DATA cannot reach the failure it names" -
+and a rehearsal that reports "migration OK" because it compared a structure to
+itself is the purest example of it there is. So this file does two things in
+order, and the first one is the one that makes the second mean anything:
+
+  Part 2  TWO CLEAN CONTROLS. Two (state file, roster) pairs on which the
+          shipped code is CORRECT and the harness must report NOTHING. A
+          harness that is red on every input has measured nothing, and every
+          red below it would be free.
+
+  Part 3  ⭐ SIX DELIBERATE MUTATIONS OF THE SHIPPED MIGRATION AND OF THE
+          ENTITY-ID COMPOSITION, each applied to a private copy of the tree,
+          each required to flip its control from green to red, AND each
+          required to produce the SPECIFIC finding it should - not merely a
+          non-zero exit. A mutation that goes red for the wrong reason is a
+          harness that would go red on the real defect for the wrong reason
+          too.
+
+  Part 4  TWO MUTATIONS THAT DELIBERATELY SURVIVE, with the reason written
+          down. A battery in which everything dies is a battery whose author
+          stopped as soon as the number looked good - and the `object_id` one
+          is what BOUNDS the four `app/mqtt.py` mutations above it: without a
+          change to that file that must NOT be caught, "the reference notices
+          any edit to mqtt.py" and "the reference notices what HA keys on" are
+          the same green.
+
+  Part 5b THE PER-LEG CHECK'S OWN POSITIVE CONTROL: a build in which exactly
+          ONE of the two legs is clean. ⚠️ A per-thing check that has never
+          seen the things DISAGREE is a total with extra steps, and this file
+          shipped that defect twice - see `legs()`.
+
+  Part 5  SAFETY-44's exact path, pinned as a finding, by name, in both
+          directions.
+
+⚠️ THE MUTATIONS ARE SOURCE EDITS IN A COPIED TREE, NOT MONKEYPATCHES. A
+monkeypatch grades the name a module was asked for; an edit grades the code that
+runs. Each copy is made with `mkdtemp()`, so two runs of this file cannot
+overwrite each other's work - habit 18 - and `__pycache__` is never copied, so
+no mutant is ever graded through a stale `.pyc` - habit 1 / TEST-15.
+"""
+
+import json
+import os
+import re
+import shutil
+import subprocess
+import sys
+import tempfile
+from pathlib import Path
+
+HERE = Path(__file__).resolve().parent
+FIX = HERE / "tools" / "rehearsal"
+
+fails = []
+
+
+def check(name, cond):
+    print(f"  {'ok  ' if cond else 'FAIL'} {name}")
+    if not cond:
+        fails.append(name)
+
+
+# --------------------------------------------------------------------------- #
+print("1. the harness's own preconditions")
+# --------------------------------------------------------------------------- #
+sys.path.insert(0, str(HERE / "tools"))
+import rehearse_roster as RR  # noqa: E402
+
+check("the tool refuses rather than passing when it cannot run: its three exit "
+      "codes are distinct and 2 is not 0",
+      (RR.EXIT_OK, RR.EXIT_FINDING, RR.EXIT_COULD_NOT_RUN) == (0, 1, 2))
+
+# ⚠️ THE ANCHOR. `app/mqtt.py` records `sensor.goodwe_p1_sample_age` as VERIFIED
+# against the live system on 2026-08-26, and the ESP32's ingest guard subscribes
+# to it. The tool's entity-id model is written independently of `mqtt._slug` on
+# purpose (habit 4), so this is the one external fact that says the independent
+# model is right. If it fails, every orphan claim the tool makes is worthless
+# and the tool exits 2 rather than reporting.
+try:
+    RR._check_anchor()
+    anchored = True
+except RR.Refused:
+    anchored = False
+check("the entity-id model reproduces the ONE id verified against the live "
+      f"system ({RR.ANCHOR_ID})", anchored)
+
+check("...and it is NOT built out of `mqtt._slug`, so a mutation in the "
+      "shipped slugifier moves one side of the comparison and not both",
+      "_slug" not in RR.compose.__code__.co_names)
+
+_opts = RR.load_options(str(FIX / "roster.yaml"))
+check("the built-in YAML reader parses the roster fixture the check image "
+      "cannot parse with PyYAML (there is no `yaml` module in it)",
+      [e["name"] for e in _opts["inverters"]] == ["garage", "shed"]
+      and _opts["max_w"] == 5000 and _opts["batt_invert"] is False
+      and _opts["meter_source"] == "off")
+try:
+    RR._mini_yaml("inverters: [a, b]\n")
+    _refused = False
+except RR.Refused:
+    _refused = True
+check("...and it REFUSES a construct it does not understand rather than "
+      "guessing, because a config silently mis-parsed here rehearses a "
+      "configuration nobody is going to deploy", _refused)
+
+_flat = RR.load_options(str(FIX / "flat.yaml"))
+check("⚠️ the two configs differ in the ONE way the transition is about: the "
+      "BEFORE roster is empty and the AFTER roster is declared - if they did "
+      "not, every diff below would be a structure compared to itself",
+      _flat.get("inverters") == [] and len(_opts["inverters"]) == 2)
+check("...and the AFTER roster's first entry is NOT `inverter-a`, which is "
+      "habit 4's seventh instance in one line: with it, `UNIT_A` and "
+      "`inverters[0].name` are the same string and a misdirected namespace "
+      "cannot be seen",
+      _opts["inverters"][0]["name"] != RR.UNIT_A)
+
+_legacy = json.loads((FIX / "state-legacy.json").read_text())
+check("⚠️ the synthetic state carries MAINTENANCE HISTORY - state built by the "
+      "happy path cannot detect a migration that drops it",
+      _legacy.get("last_completed") and _legacy.get("phase"))
+check("⚠️ ...and a LEGACY-SHAPED KEY WHOSE LOSS WOULD BE SILENT: a LATCHED "
+      "`sign_tripped` with no `schema_version` beside it, i.e. written by a "
+      "controller that had never heard of unit namespaces",
+      _legacy.get("sign_tripped") is True
+      and "schema_version" not in _legacy
+      and "maint_schema_version" not in _legacy)
+
+
+# --------------------------------------------------------------------------- #
+print()
+print("2. THE CLEAN CONTROLS: three transitions on which the shipped code is "
+      "right and the harness must say nothing")
+# --------------------------------------------------------------------------- #
+# ⚠️ THIS PART IS WHAT MAKES PART 3 EVIDENCE. Six reds prove nothing about an
+# instrument that is red on its own fixtures. Each control below is a genuine
+# flat -> roster switch that the shipped migration handles correctly, and the
+# required answer is EXIT 0. CONTROL-C earned its place by failing: it found the
+# harness reporting a defect on every fresh install.
+#
+#   CONTROL-A  a PRE-DEV-02 flat store, latch tripped, onto a roster whose
+#              first entry IS `inverter-a`. This is the path SAFETY-44's
+#              documented reasoning describes, and on it that reasoning holds.
+#   CONTROL-B  a store that has already run flat under 0.7.0 (schema stamped,
+#              no latch), onto a roster named `garage`/`shed`. This is the
+#              MAINT-05 half, and the names are deliberately not `inverter-a`.
+#   CONTROL-C  a FRESH INSTALL - an empty state file - onto `garage`/`shed`.
+#              ⚠️ THIS ONE FOUND A DEFECT IN THE HARNESS. A fresh store's
+#              migration writes `sign_tripped = False` and `sign_reason = ""`
+#              under `inverter-a` before any roster exists, and the first draft
+#              reported both as STRANDED - red on every fresh install. Losing a
+#              DEFAULT loses nothing; that is `MigrationReport.lost`'s own
+#              distinction, and an alarm that fires on the harmless case is one
+#              an operator learns to dismiss before the real one arrives.
+CONTROLS = {
+    "CONTROL-A": ("state-legacy.json", "roster-inverter-a.yaml"),
+    "CONTROL-B": ("state-flat-070.json", "roster.yaml"),
+    "CONTROL-C": ("state-fresh.json", "roster.yaml"),
+}
+
+
+def run(tree: Path, state: str, after: str, *extra) -> "tuple[int, str]":
+    """The harness, as the owner runs it, over `tree`.
+
+    ⚠️ ALWAYS WITH `--live-entities`. That file is the only part of the
+    entity-id comparison that does not move with the code, so a run without it
+    is a run that cannot see a renamed device.
+    """
+    fixtures = tree / "tools" / "rehearsal"
+    proc = subprocess.run(
+        [sys.executable, str(tree / "tools" / "rehearse_roster.py"),
+         "--state", str(fixtures / state),
+         "--before", str(fixtures / "flat.yaml"),
+         "--after", str(fixtures / after),
+         "--live-entities", str(fixtures / "live-entities-recorded.txt"),
+         "--reference", str(fixtures / "announced-reference.txt"),
+         *extra],
+        capture_output=True, text=True,
+        env={**os.environ, "PYTHONDONTWRITEBYTECODE": "1"})
+    return proc.returncode, proc.stdout + proc.stderr
+
+
+def mutant_tree(edits) -> str:
+    """A private copy of the add-on with `edits` applied.
+
+    ⚠️ EVERY EDIT IS ASSERTED TO HAVE MATCHED. Four defects in this session came
+    from `str.replace` calls whose pattern did not match: the call silently
+    returns the original string, the mutation never happens, and the harness
+    reports a SURVIVOR on code it never changed. That is a fabricated result.
+    """
+    tmp = tempfile.mkdtemp(prefix="rehearse-mut-")
+    dest = Path(tmp) / "tree"
+    ignore = shutil.ignore_patterns("__pycache__", "*.pyc")
+    (dest / "tools").mkdir(parents=True)
+    shutil.copytree(HERE / "app", dest / "app", ignore=ignore)
+    shutil.copytree(FIX, dest / "tools" / "rehearsal", ignore=ignore)
+    shutil.copyfile(HERE / "tools" / "rehearse_roster.py",
+                    dest / "tools" / "rehearse_roster.py")
+    for rel, old, new in edits:
+        path = dest / rel
+        text = path.read_text(encoding="utf-8")
+        hits = text.count(old)
+        if hits != 1:
+            raise AssertionError(
+                f"mutation target appears {hits} times in {rel}, expected 1: "
+                f"{old!r} - the mutation did NOT happen and any result from it "
+                f"would be fabricated")
+        path.write_text(text.replace(old, new), encoding="utf-8")
+    return str(dest)
+
+
+def legs(out: str) -> dict:
+    """The report, split into its legs on the tool's `LEG <id>` markers.
+
+    ⚠️ THIS FUNCTION IS THE FIX FOR A DEFECT IN THIS FILE, AND THE DEFECT IS
+    HABIT 4 ONE LEVEL UP. Part 5's check that the disarmed latch is "NOT THE
+    SAME-STEP PATH ALONE" was written as
+    `out.count("LATCH CAME UP DISARMED") >= 2`. The tool prints every finding
+    TWICE per red leg - once in that leg's own FINDINGS block and once in the
+    closing summary - so ONE red leg yields exactly 2 and the check passes.
+    Measured on three builds:
+
+        shipped code, both legs red                            count 4
+        fix at main.py:250 only        -> STAGED alone red     count 2  ok
+        partial guard fix on rep.ran   -> SAME-STEP alone red  count 2  ok
+
+    The check named "NOT THE SAME-STEP PATH ALONE" reported `ok` on the build
+    whose remaining failure IS the same-step path alone - and, worse, applying
+    the fix DOCS.md names as the cause left all five part-5 checks green. A
+    count over a whole report cannot distinguish one leg from two; only reading
+    the legs separately can.
+
+    ⚠️ AND IT CLOSES ON `END LEG`, WHICH IS THE SAME DEFECT ONE LEVEL DOWN.
+    The first version of this splitter opened on `LEG <id>` and never closed,
+    so every line after the LAST marker went to that leg - including the
+    closing summary, which repeats every finding from every leg. The last leg
+    then read red whenever ANY leg was red. Measured on a build whose SAME-STEP
+    leg is genuinely clean: it still reported SAME-STEP disarmed. Part 5b is
+    the running control for exactly that.
+    """
+    out_legs, current, closed = {}, None, set()
+    for line in out.splitlines():
+        if line.startswith("  LEG "):
+            # ⚠️ AND THIS ASSERTION IS THE ONE THAT KILLS THE CLASS. Review
+            # attacked part 5b directly and got through in three edits: delete
+            # `END LEG` (5b catches it), ALSO reorder the legs (5b goes blind -
+            # it only ever saw them disagree with the clean leg LAST), and ALSO
+            # reword the closing summary (the backstop is a transcription of the
+            # tool's own sentence, so rewording blinds that too). Result: "all
+            # checks passed" with a splitter that closed ZERO legs.
+            #
+            # Two of those three are ordinary refactors - reordering report legs
+            # and rewording a summary line - neither of which reads as touching
+            # a safety check. A fixture cannot cover every arrangement, so the
+            # STRUCTURE is asserted instead: a leg may not open while one is
+            # open, and every leg that opens must be explicitly closed. Under
+            # all three attacks nothing is ever closed, so this fires on the
+            # FIRST edit regardless of order or wording.
+            assert current is None, (
+                f"leg {line.strip()[4:].strip()!r} opened while {current!r} was "
+                "still open - the tool stopped closing its legs, and a splitter "
+                "that never closes swallows the closing summary into the last "
+                "leg. That is the defect this function exists to fix.")
+            current = line.strip()[4:].strip()
+            out_legs[current] = []
+        elif line.startswith("  END LEG "):
+            assert current is not None, "END LEG without an open leg"
+            closed.add(current)
+            current = None
+        elif current is not None:
+            out_legs[current].append(line)
+    assert current is None, f"leg {current!r} was never closed"
+    assert closed == set(out_legs), (
+        f"legs opened {sorted(out_legs)} but closed {sorted(closed)} - a leg "
+        "that is never closed absorbs everything after it")
+    return {k: "\n".join(v) for k, v in out_legs.items()}
+
+
+for label, (state, after) in CONTROLS.items():
+    code, out = run(HERE, state, after)
+    check(f"{label}: the shipped code, {state} -> {after}, exits 0 with no "
+          f"findings", code == RR.EXIT_OK and "NO FINDINGS" in out)
+
+# ⚠️ AND THE SOFTENING IS NOT A HOLE. The SAME key stranded with a NON-default
+# value is still a finding - that is the whole of part 5 - so the two cases are
+# separated by the VALUE and not by the key name.
+_fresh_code, _fresh_out = run(HERE, "state-fresh.json", "roster.yaml")
+# ⚠️ THE NAMESPACE IS READ OUT OF THE TOOL'S OWN REPORT, NOT SPELLED HERE. A
+# hardcoded `unit/inverter-a/...` makes this check fail for the RIGHT reason on
+# the shipped code and for the WRONG reason on a build that fixes the migration
+# to use the roster's own name - it would look like the default-softening broke
+# when what changed is the namespace. What this check is about is the VALUE.
+_stranded_default = set(re.findall(
+    r"^\s+stranded\s+(unit/\S+/sign_tripped) = False$", _fresh_out, re.M))
+check("a fresh install DOES strand a `.../sign_tripped` key - it is written "
+      "and nothing on the roster reads it - and the report SAYS SO under its "
+      f"own heading (found: {sorted(_stranded_default)})",
+      _fresh_code == RR.EXIT_OK and len(_stranded_default) == 1)
+check("...and does NOT call it a finding, because the value is the DEFAULT; "
+      "the same key at True is the finding part 5 turns on, so the two cases "
+      "are separated by the VALUE and not by the key name",
+      not any(f"STRANDED STORE KEY: {k}" in _fresh_out
+              for k in _stranded_default)
+      and "STRANDED STORE KEY: unit/inverter-a/sign_tripped = True"
+      in run(HERE, "state-legacy.json", "roster.yaml")[1])
+
+# --------------------------------------------------------------------------- #
+print()
+print("2b. ⚠️ OMITTING THE INSTALL'S ENTITY LIST IS A REFUSAL, NOT A QUIETER "
+      "RUN")
+# --------------------------------------------------------------------------- #
+# ⚠️ THIS PART EXISTS BECAUSE THE ASYMMETRY WAS BACKWARDS AND IT WAS MEASURED.
+# A `--live-entities` file that could not be READ refused with exit 2; the flag
+# simply not being PASSED produced "NO FINDINGS" and exit 0 - and
+# `grep -ci "live-entities|recorded list|composition"` over that report returned
+# ZERO, so nothing in the artifact an owner reads said half the check had not
+# run. Measured on the two entity mutations at the time:
+#
+#     M5 device rename   with the flag: exit 1     without: exit 0
+#     M6 sensor rename   with the flag: exit 1     without: exit 0
+#
+# The owner runs this ONCE, at commissioning, under time pressure. A forgotten
+# flag must not hand back a clean bill of health for the half of the transition
+# that orphans entities.
+def raw(*args):
+    """`(exit code, THE REPORT, the log)` - and the split matters.
+
+    ⚠️ THE REPORT IS STDOUT AND THE CONTROLLER'S LOGGING IS STDERR. Grading
+    "is the degraded banner near the end of the report" over the two
+    CONCATENATED reads the last lines of the LOG - `SAFETY-02 was TRIPPED...`,
+    `unparseable timestamp...` - and reports a missing banner that is in fact
+    printed. That is not a hypothetical; it is how this check first failed.
+    """
+    fx = HERE / "tools" / "rehearsal"
+    proc = subprocess.run(
+        [sys.executable, str(HERE / "tools" / "rehearse_roster.py"),
+         "--state", str(fx / "state-legacy.json"),
+         "--before", str(fx / "flat.yaml"),
+         "--after", str(fx / "roster-inverter-a.yaml"), *args],
+        capture_output=True, text=True,
+        env={**os.environ, "PYTHONDONTWRITEBYTECODE": "1"})
+    return proc.returncode, proc.stdout, proc.stderr
+
+
+_no_code, _no_out, _no_err = raw()
+check("omitting --live-entities REFUSES with exit 2 rather than reporting a "
+      "clean transition it did not check",
+      _no_code == RR.EXIT_COULD_NOT_RUN and "REFUSED" in _no_out + _no_err)
+
+_deg_code, _deg_out, _ = raw("--no-live-entities")
+check("...and the explicit opt-out RUNS, so the escape hatch exists",
+      _deg_code in (RR.EXIT_OK, RR.EXIT_FINDING))
+check("⚠️ ...carrying a standing banner in the report HEADER and again in "
+      "the closing block, because a report is skimmed from the bottom",
+      _deg_out.count("DEGRADED RUN") >= 2
+      and "DEGRADED RUN" in "\n".join(
+          _deg_out.strip().splitlines()[-4:]))
+check("...and the degraded report is not silent about what it did not do - "
+      "the words are in it, which is the grep that returned 0 before",
+      sum(w in _deg_out.lower() for w in
+          ("live-entities", "orphan check", "not graded")) == 3)
+check("contradictory flags are refused rather than one silently winning",
+      raw("--no-live-entities", "--live-entities",
+          str(FIX / "live-entities-recorded.txt"))[0]
+      == RR.EXIT_COULD_NOT_RUN)
+check("...and the banner really is at the END of the report, which is the "
+      "half of that claim a concatenated stdout+stderr could not have graded",
+      "DEGRADED RUN" in "\n".join(_deg_out.strip().splitlines()[-4:]))
+
+# ⚠️ AND THE COMPOSITION HALF IS NOT BEHIND THE FLAG AT ALL ANY MORE. The
+# reference is loaded on EVERY run, so a degraded run still catches a renamed
+# device - which is what makes `--no-live-entities` a genuinely bounded
+# concession rather than "half the tool off".
+_ref_missing = raw("--no-live-entities", "--reference", "/nonexistent.txt")
+check("a missing or malformed reference is exit 2 on every run, because it is "
+      "the only reference in the tool that does not move with the code",
+      _ref_missing[0] == RR.EXIT_COULD_NOT_RUN)
+
+# ⚠️ AND THE VANISHED CHECK CARRIES THE SAME DEFAULT/NON-DEFAULT RULE, BOUNDED
+# THE SAME WAY. `M9` below drops a NON-default key and must still be a finding;
+# without it, "vanished at the default is not a finding" could widen into
+# "vanished is not a finding" and nobody would see it.
+_m9 = mutant_tree([("app/store.py",
+                    "        value = data.get(legacy, DEFAULTS.get(legacy))\n"
+                    "        store.set(target, value)",
+                    "        value = data.get(legacy, DEFAULTS.get(legacy))\n"
+                    "        store.data.pop(legacy, None)\n"
+                    "        store.set(target, value)")])
+_m9_code, _m9_out = run(Path(_m9), "state-legacy.json", "roster-inverter-a.yaml")
+_m9_vanished = set(re.findall(r"VANISHED STORE KEY: (\S+) =", _m9_out))
+print(f"      deleting the flat key as it migrates -> exit {_m9_code}, "
+      f"vanished {sorted(_m9_vanished)}")
+check("⭐ a NON-default key that vanishes is STILL a finding - a migration "
+      "made to DELETE the flat rollback view store.py rule 2 requires it to "
+      "leave in place is caught, so the default-softening above is bounded by "
+      "its own positive",
+      _m9_code == RR.EXIT_FINDING
+      and {"last_completed", "phase_started", "last_start_attempt"}
+      <= _m9_vanished)
+check("...and `phase` is NOT among them, because its value 'idle' IS the "
+      "default - the same mutation, the same file, and the rule splitting the "
+      "two on the VALUE rather than on the key",
+      "phase" not in _m9_vanished)
+shutil.rmtree(Path(_m9).parent, ignore_errors=True)
+
+# ⚠️ AND THE INPUT FILE IS NEVER WRITTEN. The owner runs this against a copy of
+# a live state file; a tool that edited it would be a tool that had to be
+# trusted rather than one that cannot do harm.
+_before_bytes = (FIX / "state-legacy.json").read_bytes()
+run(HERE, "state-legacy.json", "roster.yaml", "--reverse", "--round-trip")
+check("the state file the harness was pointed at is BYTE-IDENTICAL afterwards, "
+      "including after the reverse and round-trip legs, which write",
+      (FIX / "state-legacy.json").read_bytes() == _before_bytes)
+
+
+# --------------------------------------------------------------------------- #
+print()
+print("3. ⭐ THE MUTATIONS: each one breaks the shipped migration or the "
+      "entity-id composition, and each must turn its control RED")
+# --------------------------------------------------------------------------- #
+MUTATIONS = [
+    # (id, control, what it breaks, edits, the finding it must produce)
+    ("M1", "CONTROL-B",
+     "the maintenance migration is handed the hardcoded `UNIT_A` instead of "
+     "the roster's own first name - MAINT-05's exact shipped regression, which "
+     "left all 19 suites green",
+     [("app/main.py",
+       "store, self.inverters[0].name, [inv.name for inv in self.inverters])",
+       "store, UNIT_A, [inv.name for inv in self.inverters])")],
+     "MAINTENANCE HISTORY LOST"),
+
+    ("M2", "CONTROL-B",
+     "the maintenance namespace is DROPPED: the migration moves no keys at all, "
+     "so a month of history stays under a flat spelling the new packs do not "
+     "read",
+     [("app/store.py",
+       "_move_flat_keys(store, unit, MAINT_UNIT_KEYS, rep)",
+       "_move_flat_keys(store, unit, (), rep)")],
+     "MAINTENANCE HISTORY LOST"),
+
+    ("M3", "CONTROL-A",
+     "the SAFETY-02 pair loses HALF of itself: `sign_reason` drops out of "
+     "`LEGACY_UNIT_KEYS`, so the latch migrates without the sentence that says "
+     "why it tripped",
+     [("app/store.py",
+       'LEGACY_UNIT_KEYS = ("sign_tripped", "sign_reason")',
+       'LEGACY_UNIT_KEYS = ("sign_tripped",)')],
+     "LATCH KEY NOT UNDER A ROSTER NAME"),
+
+    ("M4", "CONTROL-A",
+     "the READER's key composition changes while the migration's does not - "
+     "`Inverter.key()` upper-cases the unit - so the latch is written "
+     "perfectly, read back perfectly by the migration, and looked for under a "
+     "name that is not there",
+     [("app/inverter.py",
+       "return unit_key(self.name, name)",
+       "return unit_key(self.name.upper(), name)")],
+     "LATCH CAME UP DISARMED"),
+
+    ("M5", "CONTROL-A",
+     "the entity-id composition changes on the DEVICE half: the MQTT device is "
+     "renamed, which is the 'tidy it up' change `app/mqtt.py` spends thirty "
+     "lines in capitals refusing. ⚠️ THE BEFORE/AFTER DIFF IS BLIND TO THIS - "
+     "both sides are composed by the mutant, so every id moves equally and "
+     "nothing looks orphaned. Only the recorded list catches it",
+     [("app/mqtt.py", '"name": "GoodWe",', '"name": "GoodWe Controller",')],
+     "COMPOSITION DRIFT"),
+
+    ("M6", "CONTROL-A",
+     "the entity-id composition changes on the ENTITY half: one site sensor is "
+     "renamed, which orphans exactly one id and leaves the other seven alone",
+     [("app/mqtt.py",
+       '("grid", "goodwe_grid_power", "Grid power", "W", "power", "measurement", None),',
+       '("grid", "goodwe_grid_power", "Grid power W", "W", "power", "measurement", None),')],
+     "COMPOSITION DRIFT: this build announces sensor.goodwe_grid_power_w"),
+
+    # ⚠️ M7 AND M8 ARE THE TWO CHANGES THAT ORPHAN AN INSTALL WITHOUT MOVING A
+    # SINGLE COMPOSED entity_id, so an entity_id-only reference cannot see them.
+    # Both came back exit 0 before the reference carried three columns.
+    ("M7", "CONTROL-A",
+     "the `unique_id` composition changes and NOT the entity_id: `mqtt.BASE` "
+     "is renamed, so every announced unique_id moves while every composed "
+     "entity_id stays byte-identical. HA's MQTT entity registry keys on "
+     "unique_id, so this is a NEW entity beside a dead one - and discovery is "
+     "retained with no removal payload, so the dead one stays",
+     [("app/mqtt.py", 'BASE = "goodwe_ctl"', 'BASE = "goodwe_controller"')],
+     "UNIQUE_ID DRIFT"),
+
+    ("M8", "CONTROL-A",
+     "the DEVICE IDENTIFIER changes: HA's device registry keys on it, so the "
+     "whole install moves onto a new device and the old one keeps its dead "
+     "entities. Again no composed entity_id moves",
+     [("app/mqtt.py", '"identifiers": ["goodwe_rs485_controller"],',
+       '"identifiers": ["goodwe_rs485_ctl_v2"],')],
+     "DEVICE IDENTIFIER DRIFT"),
+]
+
+for mid, control, what, edits, must_say in MUTATIONS:
+    state, after = CONTROLS[control]
+    tree = mutant_tree(edits)
+    code, out = run(Path(tree), state, after)
+    red = code == RR.EXIT_FINDING
+    named = must_say in out
+    print()
+    print(f"  --- {mid} ({control}) {what}")
+    print(f"      exit {code} (0=clean 1=finding 2=could-not-run)")
+    # ⚠️ THE FINDINGS, DE-DUPLICATED AND IN ORDER. The tool prints each finding
+    # once per transition leg and once more in its summary, and its own header
+    # is full of ⚠️ paragraphs - printing every line that starts with one would
+    # bury the evidence this part exists to show under the tool's docstring.
+    seen = []
+    for line in out.splitlines():
+        text = line.strip()
+        # ⚠️ `_` IS IN THE CLASS. Without it `UNIQUE_ID DRIFT:` does not match
+        # its own finding kind, and M7 - the mutation that renames `mqtt.BASE`
+        # - printed its verdict with NO evidence under it. A filter that
+        # silently drops the very finding the mutation exists to produce is a
+        # small version of the same defect this file is about.
+        if text.startswith("⚠️ ") and re.match(r"⚠️ [A-Z][A-Z _-]+[A-Z()]:",
+                                                 text):
+            if text not in seen:
+                seen.append(text)
+    for text in seen:
+        print(f"      {text[:160]}")
+    check(f"{mid} turns {control} RED", red)
+    check(f"{mid} says WHY, and it is the right why: {must_say!r}", named)
+    shutil.rmtree(Path(tree).parent, ignore_errors=True)
+
+
+# --------------------------------------------------------------------------- #
+print()
+print("4. THE MUTATION THAT SURVIVES, ON PURPOSE, WITH THE REASON WRITTEN DOWN")
+# --------------------------------------------------------------------------- #
+# ⚠️ A BATTERY IN WHICH EVERYTHING DIES IS A BATTERY SOMEBODY STOPPED WRITING
+# AS SOON AS THE NUMBER LOOKED GOOD. `store.unit_key()` is the ONE spelling of
+# the namespaced key, read by `Inverter.key()`, by `UnitHistory.key()` and by
+# both migrations - that is store.py's stated design, "one spelling, in one
+# place". Changing it therefore moves the writer AND every reader together, and
+# the store comes out internally consistent under a different name.
+#
+# The harness is BLIND to it and cannot be otherwise: nothing inside one version
+# of this add-on can see that the key shape stopped matching what an OLDER
+# version reads. That is a ROLLBACK contract, and grading it needs two versions
+# of the code, which is a different instrument (`tools/predeploy_check.py`'s
+# territory). Stated here rather than left as an unexplained green.
+_tree = mutant_tree([("app/store.py",
+                      'return f"unit/{unit}/{key}"',
+                      'return f"ns.{unit}.{key}"')])
+_code, _out = run(Path(_tree), *CONTROLS["CONTROL-A"])
+print(f"      renaming the ONE key spelling -> exit {_code}")
+check("renaming `unit_key()` survives, because writer and readers move "
+      "together - a fact about the design, recorded, not a gap being hidden",
+      _code == RR.EXIT_OK)
+check("...and the store really did change shape underneath it, so this is a "
+      "survivor of a mutation that HAPPENED rather than of one that did not",
+      "ns.inverter-a.sign_tripped" in _out and "unit/inverter-a/" not in _out)
+shutil.rmtree(Path(_tree).parent, ignore_errors=True)
+
+# ⚠️ THE SECOND DECLARED SURVIVOR, AND IT IS THE ONE THAT BOUNDS M5-M8. Four
+# mutations of `app/mqtt.py` are now required to go red; without a mutation of
+# the same file that must NOT, "the reference notices any edit to mqtt.py"
+# would be indistinguishable from "the reference notices what HA keys on".
+# `object_id` is the case: `app/mqtt.py` lines 36-42 and 61-76 record that HA
+# 2026.8 does NOT honour it in a discovery payload - the entity_id is composed
+# from device name plus entity name - so renaming one changes nothing an
+# install can see, and a tool that refused it would refuse a free change.
+_tree2 = mutant_tree([("app/mqtt.py",
+                       '("grid", "goodwe_grid_power", "Grid power",',
+                       '("grid", "goodwe_grid_pwr", "Grid power",')])
+_code2, _out2 = run(Path(_tree2), *CONTROLS["CONTROL-A"])
+print(f"      renaming an object_id (HA does not honour it) -> exit {_code2}")
+check("renaming an `object_id` survives, because HA composes the entity_id "
+      "from the device and entity NAMES and ignores it - so the four mqtt.py "
+      "mutations above are red for what HA keys on, not for being edits to "
+      "mqtt.py",
+      _code2 == RR.EXIT_OK)
+shutil.rmtree(Path(_tree2).parent, ignore_errors=True)
+
+
+# --------------------------------------------------------------------------- #
+print()
+print("5. SAFETY-44: a pre-DEV-02 flat store meeting a DECLARED ROSTER, which "
+      "is the path nobody had established either way")
+# --------------------------------------------------------------------------- #
+# The question on the card: `migrate_unit_keys(store, UNIT_A)` takes a hardcoded
+# constant and has no `misdirected` guard, while `migrate_maint_keys(store,
+# unit, roster)` takes the roster and does. Is that asymmetry safe?
+#
+# ⚠️ MEASURED, NOT ARGUED. The two checks below are the answer, and they are
+# written as REQUIREMENTS so that a fix to `migrate_unit_keys` turns them red
+# and this file has to be updated deliberately rather than drifting.
+code44, out44 = run(HERE, "state-legacy.json", "roster.yaml")
+print(f"      flat store + roster ['garage','shed'] -> exit {code44}")
+check("⚠️ SAFETY-44 IS A DEFECT AGAIN: a store that ran pre-DEV-02 flat and "
+      "declares a multi-inverter roster comes up with its SAFETY-02 latch "
+      "DISARMED - the file says `sign_tripped: true` and not one inverter is "
+      "latched",
+      code44 == RR.EXIT_FINDING and "LATCH CAME UP DISARMED" in out44)
+check("...and the harness names the two latch keys SAFETY-44 asks about, by "
+      "the namespace they were stranded in",
+      "unit/inverter-a/sign_tripped" in out44
+      and "unit/inverter-a/sign_reason" in out44)
+check("...and the mechanism is visible in the report: the keys are stranded "
+      "under `inverter-a`, which is not on the roster, so no machine reads them",
+      "STRANDED STORE KEY" in out44 and "['garage', 'shed']" in out44)
+# ⚠️ PER LEG, NOT A COUNT OVER THE WHOLE REPORT. See `legs()` for the three
+# builds this distinction was measured on and for what the count missed.
+_L = legs(out44)
+print(f"      legs in the report: {sorted(_L)}")
+for _leg in ("STAGED", "SAME-STEP"):
+    print(f"      LEG {_leg}: "
+          f"{'DISARMED' if 'LATCH CAME UP DISARMED' in _L.get(_leg, '') else 'clean'}")
+check("the report is split into legs this check can grade SEPARATELY - the "
+      "tool prints a `LEG <id>` marker, because counting a finding's text over "
+      "the whole report cannot tell one red leg from two",
+      set(_L) == {"STAGED", "SAME-STEP"})
+check("⚠️ SAME-STEP is disarmed: the roster is declared in the SAME step as "
+      "the upgrade, the migration runs and misdirects the latch to "
+      "`inverter-a`",
+      "LATCH CAME UP DISARMED" in _L.get("SAME-STEP", ""))
+check("⚠️ AND IT IS NOT THE SAME-STEP PATH ALONE - the STAGED leg reaches the "
+      "same disarmed latch by a DIFFERENT route: the flat start stamps "
+      "`schema_version`, so the roster start's migration takes its early "
+      "return and the latch never moves at all",
+      "LATCH CAME UP DISARMED" in _L.get("STAGED", ""))
+
+# ⚠️ AND THE CONTRAST, WHICH IS WHAT STOPS THE CHECK ABOVE BEING VACUOUS. The
+# SAME state file onto a roster whose first entry IS `inverter-a` comes up
+# LATCHED. The two runs differ in one thing - the first roster name - so the
+# finding is attributable to it and to nothing else.
+code_ok, out_ok = run(HERE, "state-legacy.json", "roster-inverter-a.yaml")
+check("...and no leg's text has swallowed the CLOSING SUMMARY, which repeats "
+      "every finding from every leg - the failure that made the last leg read "
+      "red whenever any leg was",
+      not any("FINDING(S) - this transition is not clean" in v
+              for v in _L.values()))
+
+# --------------------------------------------------------------------------- #
+print()
+print("5b. THE SPLITTER'S POSITIVE CONTROL: a build in which exactly ONE leg "
+      "is clean")
+# --------------------------------------------------------------------------- #
+# ⚠️ A PER-LEG CHECK THAT HAS NEVER SEEN THE LEGS DISAGREE IS A COUNT WITH
+# EXTRA STEPS. Every fixture above has both legs red, so nothing so far
+# separates "reads each leg" from "reads the whole report twice". This part
+# builds the one case that does: `migrate_unit_keys()` handed the roster's own
+# first name instead of the hardcoded `UNIT_A`.
+#
+# ⚠️ AND WHAT IT MEASURES IS ALSO THE ANSWER TO "IS THAT THE FIX". It is NOT.
+# It repairs the SAME-STEP path only. The STAGED path is untouched, because
+# there the flat start stamps `schema_version = 1` and the roster start's
+# migration takes its `from_version >= SCHEMA_VERSION` early return before the
+# name it would be handed matters at all. A fix that stops at this line would
+# close the half an operator is least likely to take and leave the half that
+# "upgrade first, declare the roster later" produces.
+_one_leg = mutant_tree([(
+    "app/main.py",
+    "        self.store_migration = migrate_unit_keys(store, UNIT_A)",
+    "        self.store_migration = migrate_unit_keys(store, "
+    "roster_names(opts)[0])")])
+_ol_code, _ol_out = run(Path(_one_leg), "state-legacy.json", "roster.yaml")
+_OL = legs(_ol_out)
+for _leg in ("STAGED", "SAME-STEP"):
+    print(f"      LEG {_leg}: "
+          f"{'DISARMED' if 'LATCH CAME UP DISARMED' in _OL.get(_leg, '') else 'clean'}")
+check("⭐ with `migrate_unit_keys()` handed the roster's own first name, the "
+      "SAME-STEP leg comes up CLEAN - so the splitter really does read the "
+      "legs separately, and a check that only counted would have missed this",
+      "LATCH CAME UP DISARMED" not in _OL["SAME-STEP"])
+check("⚠️ ...while the STAGED leg is STILL DISARMED on the same build: that "
+      "line is not the whole fix, because the staged path never reaches it - "
+      "the first start stamps `schema_version` and the second start's "
+      "migration returns early",
+      "LATCH CAME UP DISARMED" in _OL["STAGED"])
+check("...and the run as a whole is still a finding, so nobody reads this "
+      "partial fix as done",
+      _ol_code == RR.EXIT_FINDING)
+shutil.rmtree(Path(_one_leg).parent, ignore_errors=True)
+
+print()
+print("5c. back to the shipped code")
+check("the SAME state file onto a roster whose first entry IS `inverter-a` "
+      "comes up latched and clean - so the finding above is caused by the "
+      "roster NAME and not by the fixture being tripped",
+      code_ok == RR.EXIT_OK and "LATCH CAME UP DISARMED" not in out_ok)
+
+
+# --------------------------------------------------------------------------- #
+print()
+print("6. THE REVERSE DIRECTION: the retreat, and the return from it")
+# --------------------------------------------------------------------------- #
+code_r, out_r = run(HERE, "state-flat-070.json", "roster.yaml",
+                    "--reverse", "--round-trip")
+_RL = legs(out_r)
+print(f"      legs in the reverse run: {sorted(_RL)}")
+_orphaned = set(re.findall(r"ORPHANED ENTITY: (sensor\.\S+)",
+                           _RL.get("RETREAT", "")))
+print(f"      the RETREAT leg orphans: {sorted(_orphaned)}")
+check("the RETREAT is rehearsed as its own leg, and THAT LEG reports the "
+      "entities it orphans - the eight per-unit rows, which is the cost of "
+      "backing out",
+      {"RETREAT", "ROUND-TRIP"} <= set(_RL) and _orphaned == {
+          f"sensor.goodwe_{u}_{k}"
+          for u in ("garage", "shed")
+          for k in ("setpoint", "battery_power", "battery_soc", "sign_latch")})
+check("...and NOT one site entity: the eight ids the install has today survive "
+      "the retreat, which is what makes the eight above attributable to the "
+      "per-unit rows and not to a blanket rename",
+      not any(o in _orphaned for o in
+              ("sensor.goodwe_grid_power", "sensor.goodwe_setpoint",
+               "sensor.goodwe_battery_power", "sensor.goodwe_p1_sample_age")))
+check("...and the first pack's maintenance history SURVIVES the retreat, "
+      "because `UnitHistory.mirror_flat` keeps the flat keys live - so the "
+      "retreat itself does not lose state. ⚠️ Read from the RETREAT LEG "
+      "alone, so the round trip's own loss cannot be mistaken for it",
+      "MAINTENANCE HISTORY LOST" not in _RL["RETREAT"])
+check("⚠️ ...but the ROUND TRIP does not: a maintenance cycle completed while "
+      "the install is rolled back is DISCARDED when it re-advances, because "
+      "`maint_schema_version` is already stamped and the migration skips",
+      "RETREAT-WINDOW WORK DISCARDED" in _RL["ROUND-TRIP"])
+check("...and that is a leg whose data can reach the failure it names: the "
+      "retreat window actually contains a completion, written through the "
+      "shipped `UnitHistory`, at a timestamp the starting fixture does not have",
+      RR.RETREAT_WINDOW_COMPLETION in out_r
+      and RR.RETREAT_WINDOW_COMPLETION
+      not in (FIX / "state-flat-070.json").read_text())
+
+
+print()
+if fails:
+    print(f"FAILED {len(fails)}:")
+    for f in fails:
+        print(f"  - {f}")
+    sys.exit(1)
+print("all checks passed")

goodwe_controller/test_watchdog.py

@@ -722,18 +722,41 @@ print(f"       e.g. {_sustained.reason!r}")
 
 print()
 print("   ⚠️ AND NOT ON THE TRANSIENT, WHICH IS THE FALSE-ALARM CASE")
-# ⚠️ THE SHAPES BELOW ARE THE RIG'S, NOT INVENTED. Measured on TEST-19 over 924
-# closed-loop runs in which every unit executed the share it was given: the
-# worst continuous opposition above 700 W is 5.0 s - ONE control cycle - at a
-# peak of 1700 W. That is the serialised write path: on a reversing cycle B's
-# new number lands up to a whole cycle after A's, both slew through zero at
-# 800 W/s behind a 10 s lag, and between the two crossings they genuinely
-# oppose. A guard that trips on that is a false-alarm generator, and this
-# project's doctrine on crying wolf is explicit (SAFETY-15, SAFETY-19).
+# THE SHAPE BELOW IS THE RIG'S: the serialised write path means that on a
+# reversing cycle B's new number lands up to a whole control cycle after A's,
+# both slew through zero behind a real ramp and a real lag, and between the two
+# crossings they genuinely oppose. A guard that trips on that is a false-alarm
+# generator, and this project's doctrine on crying wolf is explicit (SAFETY-15,
+# SAFETY-19).
+#
+# ⚠️ THE MAGNITUDE IS A FIXTURE INPUT, NOT A MEASUREMENT, AND THIS COMMENT USED
+# TO SAY OTHERWISE. It read "the worst single transient the rig can produce -
+# 1700 W", sourced to a 924-run campaign whose harness IS NOT COMMITTED IN
+# EITHER REPOSITORY (DECISIONS/SAFETY-31-circulating-power.md §3 says so in its
+# own words). Three sweeps have now been run against that claim and no two agree:
+#
+#     924-run campaign, harness uncommitted     peak 1700 W, 505.0 s at 100 W
+#     independent reviewer sweep, 2026-09-07    peak 2750 W,  15.0 s above 700 W
+#     goodwe `two_master_circulation`, 840 runs peak 1048 W,   5.0 s above 700 W
+#
+# ⚠️ THAT IS NOT EVIDENCE THAT ANY OF THEM IS WRONG. The three swept different
+# grids, and the last one measured WHY the spread is so wide: on its own grid the
+# worst legitimate peak is 1048 W on the modelled plant, 2250 W on `INSTANT`, and
+# 0 W on `INSTANT` with no write stagger reaching a whole cycle. The plant model
+# and the stagger set are TERMS of the number, and a worst case quoted without
+# them is not a measurement. It is evidence that the claim cannot be adjudicated
+# while the instrument is missing.
+#
+# So what this check now says is what it can support: 1700 W is LARGER than
+# anything any of the three sweeps produced legitimately, and one control cycle
+# of it does not trip. The committed, re-runnable version of the claim is
+# `admin/goodwe`'s `sim/inject.py two_master_circulation`, which runs on every
+# pull request there and requires ZERO of ~840 non-faulty runs to trip.
 _one_cycle = [0.0] * 5 + [1700.0] + [0.0] * 30
 _t1, _ = circ_drive(_one_cycle)
-check("the worst single transient the rig can produce - 1700 W for ONE control "
-      "cycle - does not trip", not _t1.tripped)
+check("a single transient of 1700 W - larger than the worst peak any committed "
+      "sweep of the legitimate family has produced - lasting ONE control cycle "
+      "does not trip", not _t1.tripped)
 _repeated = ([0.0] * 3 + [1700.0]) * 20
 _t2, _ = circ_drive(_repeated)
 check("...and neither does it REPEATED every fourth cycle for 400 s, which is "
@@ -1091,6 +1114,158 @@ check("...and it does not raise the same card on every cycle - a per-PROCESS "
       "this' a different question from 'is this site tripped'",
       len(_notes2) == 1)
 
+
+print()
+print("6a. AC 4: THE ALARM NAMES WHICH PACKS, AND WHICH WAY ROUND")
+# ⚠️ THIS BLOCK EXISTS BECAUSE A MUTATION SURVIVED ALL 26 FILES. Replacing
+#
+#     pos, neg = opposing([inv.batt for inv in self.inverters],
+#                         min_w=self.circ_wd.cfg.min_w / 2.0)
+#
+# in `check_circulating()` with `pos, neg = ([], [])` (-102 B) silently deletes
+# the "Right now X is discharging while Y charges" clause from the notification,
+# and the whole suite stayed GREEN. The block above asserts three tokens -
+# METER CANNOT SEE, CONTROL HAS BEEN STOPPED, isolator - and NEVER an inverter
+# name, so the one sentence `circulation.py` calls "the first thing somebody
+# woken by this alarm needs" and "impossible to reconstruct from the number
+# alone" was graded by nothing at all.
+#
+# ⚠️ IT IS NOT DEAD CODE, WHICH IS THE PART THAT MAKES IT A CHECK GAP RATHER
+# THAN A REACHABILITY ONE. Ledger M18 - the `await self.check_circulating()`
+# call removed - goes red on four checks above, so this function runs. What
+# nothing asserted was the ATTRIBUTION.
+#
+# ⚠️ AND THE ROSTER IS ["garage", "shed", "cellar"], WHICH IS THE OTHER HALF OF
+# THE FIX. Every fixture above runs on `inverter-a`/`inverter-b`;
+# test_maintenance.py section 11 records what that costs - on a fixture whose
+# names are the module's own constants, a check cannot tell the roster from the
+# constant, and `UNIT_A` is not even what a nameless entry falls back to. Here
+# the names are an operator's, the two participants pull OPPOSITE ways so the
+# sentence is not symmetric, and a third pack rests at 5 W. That makes three
+# DIFFERENT mutations - the clause dropped, the two directions swapped, and the
+# `min_w` floor dropped - into three DIFFERENT red checks. A fixture naming both
+# units the same, or one in which the direction did not matter, would see the
+# first and neither of the others.
+
+_CIRC_ROSTER = [
+    dict(name="garage", setpoint_entity="number.sp_a", soc_entity="sensor.soc_a",
+         batt_entity="sensor.batt_a", max_w=5000),
+    # ⚠️ B_RATING_HYPOTHESIS, and part 4's note above says why it is not 4600:
+    # inverter B does not physically exist and a datasheet is not a measurement.
+    dict(name="shed", setpoint_entity="number.sp_b", soc_entity="sensor.soc_b",
+         batt_entity="sensor.batt_b", max_w=B_RATING_HYPOTHESIS),
+    # THE BYSTANDER. A third pack resting at standby draw, on the roster, read
+    # every cycle, and NOT a participant in anybody's loop.
+    dict(name="cellar", setpoint_entity="number.sp_c", soc_entity="sensor.soc_c",
+         batt_entity="sensor.batt_c", max_w=B_RATING_HYPOTHESIS),
+]
+_CIRC_NAMES = [e["name"] for e in _CIRC_ROSTER]
+_REST_W = 5.0
+
+
+class _NamedCircHass(_Hass):
+    """Three named packs; the meter still reads exactly zero.
+
+    Same house as `_CircHass` - grid = load - sum(B) with two units cancelling -
+    with one extra pack idling at standby draw so that "who is named" and "who
+    is merely on the roster" are different questions.
+    """
+
+    def __init__(self, a_w, b_w, c_w=_REST_W):
+        super().__init__()
+        self.vals = {"sensor.batt_a": a_w, "sensor.batt_b": b_w,
+                     "sensor.batt_c": c_w}
+
+    async def number(self, entity, invert=False):
+        return {"sensor.grid": 0.0, "sensor.soc_a": 50.0,
+                "sensor.soc_b": 50.0, "sensor.soc_c": 50.0,
+                **self.vals}.get(entity)
+
+
+def _named_trio(hass, store, *, hold_s=1, min_w=700):
+    opts = {"meter_entity": "sensor.grid", "meter_source": "off",
+            "max_w": 5000, "gain": 0.6, "auto_start": True,
+            "circulation_w": min_w, "circulation_hold_s": hold_s,
+            "inverters": _CIRC_ROSTER}
+    c = Controller(opts, hass, store, _P(), stop=asyncio.Event())
+    c.auto = True
+    for inv in c.inverters:
+        inv.dev_min, inv.dev_max = -5000.0, 5000.0
+    return c
+
+
+async def _circ_named(a_w, b_w):
+    hass = _NamedCircHass(a_w, b_w)
+    c = _named_trio(hass, _MemStore())
+    for _ in range(14):
+        await c.read_inputs()
+        await c.cycle()
+        await asyncio.sleep(0.25)
+    notes = [x for x in hass.calls
+             if x[0] == "persistent_notification"
+             and x[2].get("notification_id") == "goodwe_circulating_power"]
+    return c, notes
+
+
+_cg, _notes_g = asyncio.run(_circ_named(+3000.0, -3000.0))
+_cs, _notes_s = asyncio.run(_circ_named(-3000.0, +3000.0))
+_msg_g = _notes_g[0][2]["message"] if _notes_g else ""
+_msg_s = _notes_s[0][2]["message"] if _notes_s else ""
+print(f"       roster                     : {_cg.units}")
+print(f"       garage discharging, measured: "
+      f"{dict(zip(_cg.units, [i.batt for i in _cg.inverters]))}")
+print(f"         -> {_msg_g.split(chr(10))[2] if _msg_g.count(chr(10)) > 2 else _msg_g!r}")
+print(f"       shed discharging,   measured: "
+      f"{dict(zip(_cs.units, [i.batt for i in _cs.inverters]))}")
+print(f"         -> {_msg_s.split(chr(10))[2] if _msg_s.count(chr(10)) > 2 else _msg_s!r}")
+
+# --- THE PRECONDITIONS, AS THEIR OWN CHECKS (MUTATION.md rule 1) ------------
+check("PRECONDITION: the roster carries three DISTINCT operator-chosen names, "
+      f"none of them `UNIT_A` ({UNIT_A!r}) - so every claim below is a claim "
+      "about the roster and not about a constant that happens to equal it",
+      _cg.units == tuple(_CIRC_NAMES) and len(set(_CIRC_NAMES)) == 3
+      and UNIT_A not in _CIRC_NAMES)
+check("PRECONDITION: the two runs are MIRROR IMAGES - same house, same meter at "
+      "0 W, same magnitudes, and the two participants swapped. Without this the "
+      "direction claim below could be satisfied by a sentence that ignores the "
+      "measurement entirely",
+      [i.batt for i in _cg.inverters] == [+3000.0, -3000.0, _REST_W]
+      and [i.batt for i in _cs.inverters] == [-3000.0, +3000.0, _REST_W]
+      and _cg.grid == 0.0 and _cs.grid == 0.0)
+check("PRECONDITION: both runs actually tripped and actually raised the card, "
+      "so an absent sentence below is an absent sentence and not an absent alarm",
+      _cg.circ_wd.tripped and _cs.circ_wd.tripped
+      and len(_notes_g) == 1 and len(_notes_s) == 1)
+
+# --- AC 4: THE ATTRIBUTION ITSELF -------------------------------------------
+_WHO_G = "Right now garage is discharging while shed charges."
+_WHO_S = "Right now shed is discharging while garage charges."
+check("⚠️ THE ALARM NAMES THE TWO PACKS AND SAYS WHICH WAY EACH ONE IS PULLING. "
+      "`circulation.py` calls this the first thing somebody woken at 3 a.m. "
+      "needs and impossible to reconstruct from the watts alone, and until this "
+      "line the sentence could be deleted with all 26 files green",
+      _WHO_G in _msg_g)
+check("⚠️ AND WITH THE TWO SWAPPED, THE SENTENCE SWAPS. This is the half a "
+      "single fixture cannot have: `pos` and `neg` exchanged, or a hard-coded "
+      "sentence, satisfies the check above and fails this one. The operator is "
+      "being told which pack to walk to",
+      _WHO_S in _msg_s)
+check("...and each run carries ONLY its own sentence - the mirrored alarm does "
+      "not also contain the other direction, so the clause is derived from this "
+      "cycle's measurement rather than assembled from the roster",
+      _WHO_S not in _msg_g and _WHO_G not in _msg_s)
+check("...and the RESTING pack is not named. `cellar` is on the roster, is read "
+      "every cycle and is measured at 5 W of standby draw - `opposing()` is "
+      "called with a floor of half the trip threshold precisely so a pack idling "
+      "beside a 6 kW loop is not reported as one of its two participants",
+      "cellar" not in _msg_g and "cellar" not in _msg_s
+      and _cg.inverters[2].batt == _REST_W)
+check("...and the sentence sits with the figure, not instead of it: the same "
+      "card still carries the watts, the window and the three things only this "
+      "alarm can say",
+      all("CIRCULATING_POWER" in m and "METER CANNOT SEE" in m
+          and "CONTROL HAS BEEN STOPPED" in m and "isolator" in m
+          for m in (_msg_g, _msg_s)))
 print()
 print("   the operator's press is the only way out, and it clears BOTH halves")
 

goodwe_controller/tools/rehearsal/announced-reference.txt

@@ -0,0 +1,48 @@
+# WHAT THIS BUILD IS SUPPOSED TO ANNOUNCE, recorded so that a change to the
+# composition has something to disagree with. THREE COLUMNS:
+#
+#     <entity_id>   <unique_id>   <device identifier>
+#
+# ⚠️ ALL THREE, AND THE SECOND AND THIRD ARE THE HALF THE FIRST DRAFT MISSED.
+# A reference that carries only entity_ids cannot see the two changes that
+# orphan an install without changing a single composed id:
+#
+#   `BASE` renamed (`goodwe_ctl` -> anything)      every unique_id changes
+#   `DEVICE["identifiers"]` changed                HA sees a NEW device
+#
+# Home Assistant's MQTT integration keys its entity registry on `unique_id` and
+# its device registry on the device identifier. Change either and HA creates a
+# NEW entity beside the old one - and because discovery is published with
+# `retain=True` and nothing publishes a removal payload, the OLD config stays on
+# the broker and the dead entity stays in the registry, still named by every
+# automation that referenced it, never updating again. The composed entity_id is
+# identical on both, so an entity_id-only comparison reports a clean transition.
+# That is the same shape as the habit-4 this file's own card already caught
+# once: a reference that does not carry the thing that moved.
+#
+# ⚠️ AND `object_id` IS DELIBERATELY NOT A COLUMN. `app/mqtt.py` lines 36-42 and
+# 61-76 record that HA 2026.8 does NOT honour `object_id` in a discovery
+# payload - the id is composed from device name plus entity name - so renaming
+# one is a true no-op and a column for it would make this file refuse a change
+# that costs nothing. The check is graded on what HA actually keys on.
+#
+# PROVENANCE, stated exactly:
+#   - recorded 2026-09-08 from `release/1.0` at `meter_source: firmware`,
+#     roster of one, by reading `mqtt.discovery_payloads(units=[])`. It is what
+#     the code announces.
+#   - `sensor.goodwe_p1_sample_age` is additionally recorded in `app/mqtt.py` as
+#     VERIFIED AGAINST THE LIVE SYSTEM on 2026-08-26, and the ESP32's ingest
+#     guard subscribes to that exact string.
+#   - ⚠️ IT IS NOT A DUMP OF THE LIVE INSTALL'S ENTITY REGISTRY. That is what
+#     `--live-entities` is for. This file is about THE BUILD.
+#
+# Editing this file is how you say "the announcement changed on purpose". Do not
+# edit it to make a check pass.
+sensor.goodwe_setpoint            goodwe_ctl_setpoint     goodwe_rs485_controller
+sensor.goodwe_grid_power          goodwe_ctl_grid         goodwe_rs485_controller
+sensor.goodwe_battery_power       goodwe_ctl_battery      goodwe_rs485_controller
+sensor.goodwe_battery_soc         goodwe_ctl_soc          goodwe_rs485_controller
+sensor.goodwe_circulating_power   goodwe_ctl_circulation  goodwe_rs485_controller
+sensor.goodwe_maintenance_phase   goodwe_ctl_phase        goodwe_rs485_controller
+sensor.goodwe_controller_status   goodwe_ctl_status       goodwe_rs485_controller
+sensor.goodwe_p1_sample_age       goodwe_ctl_p1_age       goodwe_rs485_controller

goodwe_controller/tools/rehearsal/flat.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,22 @@
+# ARCH-02 fixture: THE SHAPE THE LIVE BOX IS IN TODAY (a flat, single-inverter
+# config). ⚠️ ILLUSTRATIVE ENTITY NAMES, NOT THE LIVE ONES - the owner runs the
+# rehearsal against a copy of the real options blob, and this file exists so
+# that the harness has a synthetic transition it can be graded on.
+setpoint_entity: number.goodwe_setpoint
+soc_entity: sensor.goodwe_battery_soc_pct
+batt_entity: sensor.goodwe_battery_power_w
+batt_invert: false
+max_w: 5000
+bms_soc_floor: 10
+meter_source: 'off'
+meter_entity: sensor.p1_active_power
+inverters: []
+gain: 0.6
+slew_w: 0
+deadband_w: 15
+target_grid_w: 0
+step_w: 10
+heartbeat_s: 10
+stale_input_s: 15
+maintenance_discharge_w: 2000
+maintenance_charge_w: 2000

goodwe_controller/tools/rehearsal/live-entities-recorded.txt

@@ -0,0 +1,39 @@
+# THE ENTITY IDS THE INSTALL HAS — a stand-in for the owner's real export.
+#
+# ⚠️ THIS FILE AND `announced-reference.txt` ANSWER DIFFERENT QUESTIONS AND ARE
+# NOT INTERCHANGEABLE:
+#
+#   announced-reference.txt   what the BUILD announces. Loaded on EVERY run.
+#                             Three columns, because HA keys on `unique_id` and
+#                             on the device identifier as well as on the
+#                             composed entity_id.
+#   this file (--live-entities)
+#                             what the INSTALL has. One id per line. Orphans
+#                             are graded against it: an id the install has and
+#                             the AFTER shape does not announce is an orphan
+#                             whatever the build's own history says.
+#
+# ⚠️ OMITTING `--live-entities` IS A REFUSAL (exit 2), NOT A QUIETER RUN. It
+# used to be the other way round - an unreadable file refused, a missing flag
+# passed with exit 0 and said nothing about the half it had not checked - and
+# the owner runs this ONCE, at commissioning, under time pressure.
+# `--no-live-entities` is the deliberate opt-out and it prints a standing
+# banner in the report header and again on the exit line.
+#
+# PROVENANCE: these eight are what `release/1.0` announces at
+# `meter_source: firmware`, roster of one, recorded 2026-09-08. They stand in
+# for the export so the checks run in CI. ⚠️ THE REAL INSTALL CARRIES ROUGHLY 49
+# `goodwe*` ENTITIES (card ARCH-02, read 2026-09-06); the other ~41 belong to
+# the ESPHome firmware, to template sensors and to helpers, and this add-on
+# announces none of them. The tool separates the ids it owns from the ids it
+# does not rather than claiming orphans it cannot cause - which is the half of
+# this file the eight-line stand-in cannot exercise, and the reason DOCS.md's
+# owner step asks for the real export.
+sensor.goodwe_battery_power
+sensor.goodwe_battery_soc
+sensor.goodwe_circulating_power
+sensor.goodwe_controller_status
+sensor.goodwe_grid_power
+sensor.goodwe_maintenance_phase
+sensor.goodwe_p1_sample_age
+sensor.goodwe_setpoint

goodwe_controller/tools/rehearsal/roster-inverter-a.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,42 @@
+# ARCH-02 fixture: THE SHAPE AFTER INVERTER B IS COMMISSIONED.
+#
+# ⚠️ THE FIRST ROSTER ENTRY IS **NOT** CALLED `inverter-a`, AND THAT IS THE
+# WHOLE FIXTURE. `MUTATION.md` habit 4's seventh instance is MAINT-05 shipping
+# `migrate_maint_keys(store, UNIT_A, ...)` under a comment saying it must not:
+# every two-pack fixture in the suite named its first entry `inverter-a`, so
+# `UNIT_A` and `inverters[0].name` were the same string in every check that
+# existed and the defect was invisible. Names that are not `inverter-a` are what
+# make a misdirected namespace something a rehearsal can SEE.
+#
+# `roster-inverter-a.yaml` beside this file is the same roster with the first
+# entry named `inverter-a`, so the two can be compared - see DOCS.md.
+setpoint_entity: number.goodwe_setpoint
+soc_entity: sensor.goodwe_battery_soc_pct
+batt_entity: sensor.goodwe_battery_power_w
+batt_invert: false
+max_w: 5000
+bms_soc_floor: 10
+meter_source: 'off'
+meter_entity: sensor.p1_active_power
+gain: 0.6
+slew_w: 0
+deadband_w: 15
+target_grid_w: 0
+step_w: 10
+heartbeat_s: 10
+stale_input_s: 15
+maintenance_discharge_w: 2000
+maintenance_charge_w: 2000
+inverters:
+  - name: inverter-a
+    setpoint_entity: number.goodwe_setpoint
+    soc_entity: sensor.goodwe_battery_soc_pct
+    batt_entity: sensor.goodwe_battery_power_w
+    max_w: 5000
+    bms_soc_floor: 10
+  - name: inverter-b
+    setpoint_entity: number.goodwe_b_setpoint
+    soc_entity: sensor.goodwe_b_battery_soc_pct
+    batt_entity: sensor.goodwe_b_battery_power_w
+    max_w: 4600
+    bms_soc_floor: 10

goodwe_controller/tools/rehearsal/roster.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,42 @@
+# ARCH-02 fixture: THE SHAPE AFTER INVERTER B IS COMMISSIONED.
+#
+# ⚠️ THE FIRST ROSTER ENTRY IS **NOT** CALLED `inverter-a`, AND THAT IS THE
+# WHOLE FIXTURE. `MUTATION.md` habit 4's seventh instance is MAINT-05 shipping
+# `migrate_maint_keys(store, UNIT_A, ...)` under a comment saying it must not:
+# every two-pack fixture in the suite named its first entry `inverter-a`, so
+# `UNIT_A` and `inverters[0].name` were the same string in every check that
+# existed and the defect was invisible. Names that are not `inverter-a` are what
+# make a misdirected namespace something a rehearsal can SEE.
+#
+# `roster-inverter-a.yaml` beside this file is the same roster with the first
+# entry named `inverter-a`, so the two can be compared - see DOCS.md.
+setpoint_entity: number.goodwe_setpoint
+soc_entity: sensor.goodwe_battery_soc_pct
+batt_entity: sensor.goodwe_battery_power_w
+batt_invert: false
+max_w: 5000
+bms_soc_floor: 10
+meter_source: 'off'
+meter_entity: sensor.p1_active_power
+gain: 0.6
+slew_w: 0
+deadband_w: 15
+target_grid_w: 0
+step_w: 10
+heartbeat_s: 10
+stale_input_s: 15
+maintenance_discharge_w: 2000
+maintenance_charge_w: 2000
+inverters:
+  - name: garage
+    setpoint_entity: number.goodwe_setpoint
+    soc_entity: sensor.goodwe_battery_soc_pct
+    batt_entity: sensor.goodwe_battery_power_w
+    max_w: 5000
+    bms_soc_floor: 10
+  - name: shed
+    setpoint_entity: number.goodwe_b_setpoint
+    soc_entity: sensor.goodwe_b_battery_soc_pct
+    batt_entity: sensor.goodwe_b_battery_power_w
+    max_w: 4600
+    bms_soc_floor: 10

goodwe_controller/tools/rehearsal/state-flat-070.json

@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
+{
+ "_comment": "ARCH-02 SYNTHETIC FIXTURE - a store that has ALREADY run the flat config under 0.7.0+, so DEV-02's `schema_version` is stamped and the SAFETY-02 latch is not tripped. NOT a copy of the live box's /data/state.json. This is the CLEAN CONTROL for the MAINT-05 half of the rehearsal: the flat->roster transition over it must come out with NO findings, which is what makes each deliberate mutation's RED mean something. A harness that is red on every input has not measured anything.",
+ "schema_version": 1,
+ "phase": "idle",
+ "phase_started": "2026-08-07T10:00:00+00:00",
+ "last_completed": "2026-08-07T18:42:00+00:00",
+ "last_start_attempt": "2026-08-07T10:00:00+00:00",
+ "sign_tripped": false,
+ "sign_reason": "",
+ "auto": true
+}

goodwe_controller/tools/rehearsal/state-fresh.json

@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
+{
+ "_comment": "ARCH-02 SYNTHETIC FIXTURE - a FRESH INSTALL. No maintenance history, no latch, no schema markers: what /data/state.json looks like before the add-on has ever completed a cycle. It is a clean control, and it earned its place: the first draft of the harness reported this transition RED, because the DEV-02 migration writes both SAFETY-02 defaults under `inverter-a` before a roster exists and the tool called them stranded. Losing a default loses nothing."
+}

goodwe_controller/tools/rehearsal/state-legacy.json

@@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
+{
+ "_comment": "ARCH-02 SYNTHETIC FIXTURE - a PRE-DEV-02 flat state file. NOT a copy of the live box's /data/state.json; this session cannot read that one and did not try. It is built to carry, deliberately, the two shapes that state built by the happy path does not have: a LATCHED SAFETY-02 failsafe under the flat spelling, and a real maintenance history under the flat spelling. Both are LEGACY-SHAPED: there is no schema_version and no maint_schema_version, so this file was last written by a controller that had never heard of unit namespaces. Losing either one is silent.",
+ "phase": "idle",
+ "phase_started": "2026-08-07T10:00:00+00:00",
+ "last_completed": "2026-08-07T18:42:00+00:00",
+ "last_start_attempt": "2026-08-07T10:00:00+00:00",
+ "sign_tripped": true,
+ "sign_reason": "SIGN_DISAGREEMENT: commanded -1800 W against a meter reading -1450 W for 190 s",
+ "auto": true
+}