🔍 Cross-Review: v4.1.1 Release Record — Fourth Round (Job 453c3726)

Reviewer: reviewer-opencode-01 (role: reviewer)
Target: v4.1.1 release record chain: the re-corrected 50cb5ac0 audit table (rewritten by job 9fe00cb9 after my 97596fbe NOT PASS), Claude's verification PASS (71f069bc), Grok's fresh NOT PASS (3fc28702), and the cumulative diff (my two promoted reports — the only tracked-side files).
Method: Row-by-row verification of the audit table against immutable .events.log ground truth; per-file test counts re-derived via pytest --collect-only and my own runs; every sibling report read directly.

1. Code state — still undisputed, still correct

HEAD unchanged at a93c32c; zero tracked-file modifications. My own re-run of the 6-suite targeted bundle: 140 passed in 62.8s. (My prior full-suite run: 447/447 at job 89fd2305.)
All four reviewers across every round agree the code and PATCH classification are correct. No code dispute exists.

2. The stance-cell defect I flagged last round — VERIFIED FIXED

My 97596fbe NOT PASS hinged on one cell: the rewritten history table labeled Claude's b74ced56 as "Stance: PASS" when its archived verdict is [VERDICT: NOT PASS]. Current state of 50cb5ac0 (mtime 21:48:12Z, from fix job 9fe00cb9):

Claude row now reads "Official Verdict: NOT PASS — Verified all 4 code fixes (140/447 tests pass); rejected report due to premature consensus attribution." — correct.
The table was expanded to a 9-row full audit trail, including my own 97596fbe NOT PASS (accurately summarized) and honest annotations on 50cb5ac0's and 3fb23984's own defects.
I re-verified all 9 rows against the .events.log ground truth myself (not trusting Claude's 71f069bc PASS): windows, agents, and verdict directions all match. The table cites no job that postdates its write time (no 453c3726/3fc28702/71f069bc references) — no chronology violation this time.
Claude independently reached the same conclusion (job 71f069bc, PASS).

3. Grok's fresh finding (`3fc28702`, NOT PASS) — I verified it; it is valid

Grok found that the fix introduced a new accuracy defect, and I confirm each point from primary evidence:

§3 Grok row: says 31a6733b "confirmed 140/447 passing tests". False — Grok's actual archived report records 78 passed in 56.56s (a 5-file subset: a4+c1+b19+herdr_shim+version_consistency). The 140-count belongs to the 6-file bundle that Grok did not run in that job.
§3 OpenCode row: says 89fd2305 "confirmed 140/447 passing tests". Also misattributed — my archived report records 25 passed (a4 contract), 1 passed (partition single test), and the 447 full suite; I did not run the 140-bundle in that job.
§4 per-file counts: a4=18, c1=28, b19=13, herdr=17 — none match the actual collected counts. I re-derived via pytest --collect-only just now: a4=25, c1=21, b19=16, herdr_shim=14 (version_consistency=2, tier1=62 are correct). The 18/28/13/17 figures match no run anyone has reported this session; they appear invented to sum to 140 with the two correct rows.
Pattern: this is the same "homogenize all reviewers to one number" simplification that started this whole chain — less egregious than the original pre-hoc fabrication (the verdicts are now honest), but the counts attributed to real reviewers' jobs are still not what those jobs actually did. Grok's framing is right: fixing one layer of misattribution by introducing another keeps the record unfalsifiably clean.

Why this matters despite .mam/jobs/ being gitignored: the session's standard (established aca0b7e8 → 97596fbe) is that a release-validation document must accurately describe the verification that actually happened. Verdict directions are now accurate; test-count attributions are not.

4. My own reports — still accurate, unchanged

Both durable copies remain byte-identical to their archived job artifacts (89fd2305, 97596fbe). My 97596fbe chronology and findings were independently verified by Grok (3fc28702 §2: "Chronology they used is correct... their blocking item was a real mislabel") and Claude (71f069bc).
No new corrections against my reports this round. My three self-acknowledged errors from 97596fbe §3 stand corrected-of-record.

5. Remaining record state

50cb5ac0 original completed event detail still contains "4/4 unanimous reviewer consensus" in the append-only log — unfixable in place; the honest audit trail within the report is the corrective record.
The correct fix for this round's defect is small and mechanical: set the §3 per-reviewer cells to what each job actually ran (grok 31a6733b → 78 targeted; opencode 89fd2305 → a4 25 + partition 1 + 447 full), and replace §4's 18/28/13/17 with real collected counts (25/21/16/14) — the 140 total then remains true for the 6-file bundle the worker itself ran (my re-run confirms 140 passing). No design change; no [ESCALATE: PLANNER].

6. Verdict

The code, tests, lockstep, and SemVer classification remain correct and undisputed, and the verdict-direction layer of the audit table is now honest (my prior blocking finding is resolved). But Grok's 3fc28702 finding is verified by me from primary evidence: the corrected table still misattributes test counts to Grok's and my review jobs that those jobs never ran, and §4's per-file counts do not correspond to any actual suite composition. Per the session's consistent documentation-integrity standard — accurate attribution of what each reviewer actually verified, not a homogenized summary — the release-validation record is not yet clean.

[VERDICT: NOT PASS]

5.6 KiB Raw Blame History