Defect review current

The check is defect_review_current. Stage verify. Default severity is warning, and it is on unless you opt out. It walks every active spec with implemented_by links inside the effective verification scope. A spec with no code links is out of scope. The requirement stamp is the primary state. The audit never dispatches a review and never spends metering budget.

Every adjacent hop in Proof is scoped to a different object. Known issues reviewed asks whether an open KnownIssue still has a current review_date. It is quiet when the directory is empty. Known issue complete asks whether a filed KI has evidence and an origin. It never asks whether a claim was reviewed on the spec. Documented claim verified asks whether a documented behavior still has a passing witness. It is not the defect-claim lifecycle. Leave SYS-REQ-904 with implemented_by, never run proof claims plan, and those hops stay green. That is the hole.

id: SYS-REQ-904
status: active
implemented_by:
  - pkg/claims/check.go
# no defect_review block

Six faces fire, in lifecycle order. No stamp: stage, review, then proof claims finalize. Stale fingerprint: the current tree disagrees with the stamp (spec YAML excluding the stamp, a bundled file, claims input, prompt, or the stamp digest itself). Unverified claims: an emitted claim has no outcome. Unpromoted claims: a verified claim was never linked as source_claim on a KnownIssue. Undismissed claims: a dismissal has no stated reason. Partial session: a cell in the session errored. Clean is counted as N/M specs: claim-reviewed.

A project with no stamps, no claim objects, no sessions under proof/claims/sessions/, and no adoption flag sees a clean no-op: no defect-review sessions (not adopted). Declaring adoption before the first session lands is a YAML flag, not a review.

proof claims plan --spec SYS-REQ-904
proof claims run --session <id>
proof claims finalize --session <id>
proof audit --check defect_review_current

Route B is legitimate: write the same cell artifacts yourself, then finalize with --via agent-review. The stamp records the route so the two paths stay comparable. Deleting the spec YAML also silences the hop. It destroys the finding rather than recording the decision.

The teaching graph is still one active spec next to code and no stamp. Stage it, review it, then record the stamp.

proof claims plan --spec SYS-REQ-904
proof claims finalize --session <id>

The other honest exits are outcomes, not silence:

proof claims disposition --claim <session>/<cand-id> --outcome verified --evidence <path>
proof known-issue new ...  # then source_claim: <session>/<cand-id>
proof claims disposition --claim <session>/<cand-id> --outcome dismissed --reason "setup comment, not a defect"

KnownIssue cadence stays on known issues reviewed. Completeness stays on known issue complete. Documented behavior stays on documented claim verified. Do not treat a Salesforce bulletin as this cell. Jama still authors. Proof vs Jama.

The hop does not dispatch Route A, does not write a ledger, and does not spend metering. A light content floor on verified evidence is not both-ways verification; that discipline stays with the author. --outcome deferred satisfies the adjudication face and is re-surfaced in the summary counts; it is not terminal. Schema-invalid emit lines and upstream ticket citations ride as disclosures, marked [info], never as a warning face. Recording a review never invalidates the stamp: the spec fingerprint is computed with the defect_review block removed. Claims themselves are ephemeral under .proof/defect-sessions/. Zero in-scope specs, or a project that never adopted, is a pass that inspected nothing of this kind. A finding is not a waiver: proof waive is a human authorization gate. The hop does not prove the Go. We have not scored this floor against a frozen Jama pack or a Salesforce known-issue export. The loss is named, not scored.

The KnownIssue cadence stays on known issues reviewed. The documented-claim hop stays on documented claim verified. The engagement stays on software correctness audit. Jama still authors.

What is defect review current? Same question. Same URL.

Is this known issues reviewed? No. That hop is whether an open KnownIssue still has a current review date. This hop is whether the spec was claim-reviewed before a KI existed. See known issues reviewed.

Is this known issue complete? No. That hop is whether a filed KI has evidence and an origin. This hop is whether a verified claim was promoted onto that surface. See known issue complete.

Is this documented claim verified? No. That hop is whether a documented behavior still has a passing witness. This hop reviews comments and docstrings as claims. See documented claim verified.

Is this a Salesforce known issue? No. Ads known issue is that status page. Ads defect review is 10 and generic. A hosted vendor bulletin is not this cell.

Does an unadopted project fail? No. No stamps, no sessions, no adoption flag is a no-op pass.

Does deferred fail? No. Deferred satisfies adjudication and stays visible in the summary. Promote or dismiss later.

Does a green hop prove the Go? No. The hop does not run the review backend. It does not prove the function.

Is Proof a Jama alternative for the shall? No. Jama still authors. Proof vs Jama.