I read this as an immutable-candidate compliance review for Task 26 - I’ll identify the fixed candidate and conventions, trace every objective and acceptance clause through Tasks 1-25 evidence, then issue a decisive PASS/FAIL and write only the permitted redacted receipt.


I read this as a clause-by-clause Oracle audit, not a checkbox audit - the plan defines the target, and I’m now resolving the authoritative ledger lineage, candidate digest, supersession chain, and canonical Task 22-25 indexes before judging coverage.


I read this as requiring evidence quality, not merely self-declared PASS fields - I’m checking whether Tasks 23-25 actually exercised each prescribed normal-surface transition, whether any “replay” or controller path crossed the direct-action prohibitions, and whether the live wheel is cryptographically tied to the reviewed source lineage.


I read this as likely FAIL unless the remaining lineage records close the gaps already visible - I’m now isolating the exact breakpoints: post-seal source drift, missing Task 22 screenshots, Task 23’s recovery-child substitution for the prescribed activation/check-in walkthrough, and whether the live Task 24 happy path proves regenerate/edit/approve through Telegram rather than only in disposable automation.


I read this as needing a final, auditable FAIL receipt with no speculative findings - I’m validating the superseded-evidence set, digest references, and exact line-level citations now, then I’ll persist the redacted 0600 receipt and report the minimum rerun needed.


I read this as the verification tail of the same audit - the receipt itself is valid and correctly permissioned; I’m correcting an over-broad redaction check (`sk-` matched ordinary text) and rerunning the receipt-only validation without assuming this planning workspace is a Git root.


I read this as requiring the decisive Task 26 Oracle result - I completed the read-only audit and persisted the permitted receipt.

# Verdict: FAIL - NO-GO

## Findings, severity ordered

### CRITICAL

1. **No single immutable candidate binds the reviewed lifecycle.**
   - Exact-candidate evidence is mandatory: `.omo/plans/dualcoach-production-readiness.md:114-118`.
   - Task23’s manifest pins `telegram.py` at `ce35a2...`: `.omo/evidence/dualcoach-task23-expiry-supersession-manifest.json:24-26`.
   - Task24 uses `774071...`: `.omo/evidence/dualcoach-task-24-evidence.json:14-18`.
   - No immutable manifest pins the final Task24 Telegram and lineage-repair sources.

2. **No clean normal-surface lifecycle was completed without recovery shortcuts.**
   - Task22 explicitly declines the global no-shortcut claim and retains authorized replay: `.omo/evidence/dualcoach-task-22.md:7-10,40-60`.
   - Task23 substituted a separately authorized recovery child: `.omo/evidence/dualcoach-task-23.md:6-11`.
   - Live Task24 Regenerate produced an unparented child and `BLOCKED`: `.omo/evidence/task24-live-window-regenerate-block.json:1`.
   - Its repair was explicitly undeployed; Edit was used for forward recovery: `.omo/evidence/dualcoach-task-24-regenerate-lineage-repair.json:61-62`.
   - This fails the completion condition at `.omo/plans/dualcoach-production-readiness.md:1095`.

### HIGH

3. **Task23 lacks required real-surface evidence.** No canonical proof covers the activation notice, all question renders, Q7 controls, restart-preserved answers, final-save generation job, or customer screen required at plan lines `742-746` and checklist line `1032`.

4. **Task24’s canonical PASS index is incomplete.** It excludes both the live Regenerate BLOCKED artifact and the undeployed lineage-repair artifact.

5. **Revised trainer-free acceptance remains tied to superseded evidence.** The plan supersedes Tasks 4, 5, 15, 16, 18, and 21 evidence at lines `142-149`, while ledger entries still describe trainer participation at `.omo/start-work/ledger.jsonl:72,75`.

6. **Task22 required screenshots are explicitly unavailable:** `.omo/evidence/dualcoach-task-22.md:11-12`.

7. **Task25 does not prove canonical-disable-only cleanup.** Its one-use controller directly replaces configuration bytes, recursively removes runtime trees, and unlinks locks at `.omo/evidence/dualcoach-task-25-cleanup-controller.py:191-207,245-270,290-314`, contrary to the canonical-disable requirement at plan line `774`.

## Scoped positives

- Task22 reports trainer authority absent.
- Task24 records owner action, zero delivery on approval, one explicit send, one `sent_audited` receipt, and no restart duplicate.
- Task25 records an empty registry and inactive/dead runtime.
- All 28 path/SHA-256 pairs referenced by the Task22-25 indexes matched.

These scoped results do not overcome candidate drift or the recovery-based lifecycle.

## Required remediation

1. Freeze one terminal manifest and deployable package containing every Task23/24 repair.
2. Rerun affected Tasks18-20 gates against that exact digest.
3. From a clean trainer-free baseline, rerun Tasks21-25 once through Telegram without recovery shortcuts.
4. Capture the missing Task22/23 real-surface evidence.
5. Publish complete indexes, including adverse/superseded artifacts, and use supported canonical cleanup interfaces only.

Receipt: `.omo/evidence/task26/objective-constraint-oracle.redacted.json`
Mode: `0600` · SHA-256: `f0f3c669cb954215f3e650789a143080b79a3c81f6f219167801b17addce0c44`

No code, plan, ledger, profile, service, Telegram, release, or runtime changes were made.


I read this as implementation of a release-blocking clean-run remediation - I’ll first map the current shared provenance/hands-on findings and supported product interfaces, then build and run only offline disposable gates; I will stop at `READY_FOR_ONE_CLEAN_WINDOW` or a precise blocker without touching live Telegram, provider, profile, or service state.


I read this as the implementation phase of the same remediation - the shared reviews expose a new hard blocker in current source (`trainer_handoff` and loaded trainer methods), so I’m tracing that exact runtime closure and the supported clean setup/cleanup APIs before making the smallest trainer-free product/test changes and building a fresh candidate.


I read this as implementation - I’m narrowing the trainer-free runtime closure, then I’ll make only the source/test/package changes needed for an independently verifiable offline candidate and stop before any live window.


The staged authority/onboarding/runtime contracts are now token-free; I’m running the owning gateway suites against that exact disposable package before touching candidate provenance.


The first corrected run exposed stale test fixtures rather than runtime failures: they still emitted removed role fields and v1 readiness receipts. I updated those fixtures to the owner-v1 schema and removed the Task 23 recovery interceptor from normal callbacks; the owning suites are rerunning with their missing test/runtime dependencies isolated under `/tmp`.


WebSocket error


I read this as continuing the Task 26 remediation - the staged package and physique path are now green; I’m checking the configured bootstrap closure before broader gates.


I read this as clearing the next preflight gate - the configured customer bootstrap now matches its constructor and restart behavior, so I’m running the full Gateway suite to expose only remaining contract drift.


I read this as continuing the release-blocking remediation - the diagnostic drift is fixed and full Gateway is green, so I’m advancing through static, type, compile, and reproducible build gates before sealing any candidate.


I read this as completing Task 26 remediation - I sealed and independently verified the fresh candidate, then evaluated window readiness.

## READY_FOR_ONE_CLEAN_WINDOW

- Candidate digest: `81b1b7e1d5ffd89c9287334587833a0762f46d5cc9d123645d38cde77cd56601`
- Manifest SHA-256: `93ec3b2f76d010f33c4ce6059ed20295dc866bd9400860c09fe93d37eb2fe2d4`
- Production wheel SHA-256: `e568d1f6a235ed6c52efb578ac124a673ce080b1b691baad2ce9a805a09bae9f`
- Independent verifier: PASS
- Rebuilt twice from the sealed snapshot: byte-identical
- Permissions, runtime closure, shipped/source equality, trainer-free scans, and redaction checks: PASS

Verification:
- Gateway: `8108 passed, 58 skipped`
- Package source: `636 passed`
- Installed wheel: `636 passed`
- Offline Tasks 18-25: `55 passed`
- Bootstrap: `5 passed`
- Ruff, Ty, compileall, build, and LSP errors: PASS/zero errors
- Pre-existing legacy typing debt remains recorded without suppression.

Receipts:
- Freeze: `ca6a32dfd16a054bde7917c066fc1bfd9e73fca97b3d9bbb3f54b1f2cde96d19`
- Verification: `9eda57cc2330a5919f3702b014abdf8f06b996145fc42a2b3d96d749bae6c078`
- Readiness: `1dbd76b04c08e7a20670b94dea49b8f272caf689b1cbf14bc0e9ab711ec28781`

Earlier v1/v2 candidates remain indexed as invalidated adverse evidence; v3 is the sole terminal candidate. No live profile, service, Telegram, provider, delivery, Git commit, or release action occurred.

Please provide one contiguous Owner/operator plus synthetic-customer window to execute Tasks 21-25 once through supported private Telegram paths.


I read this as Task 26 controller arming - I will authenticate the terminal candidate and receipts first, then build and offline-verify one fail-closed human-driven Telegram window controller without sending or invoking callbacks.


I read this as a stall checkpoint and bounded completion request - I’ll stop retrying the same process probe, verify via systemd/cgroup state, consolidate the exact state, and either seal the controller once or return one blocker.


I read this as a stall checkpoint and bounded completion request - I consolidated state and stopped before further mutation.

## BLOCKED_AT_TASK21_PREFLIGHT

The clean window is **not fully armed**, so there is no launch command.

### Authenticated state

- Candidate verification: **PASS**
- Candidate: `81b1b7e1d5ffd89c9287334587833a0762f46d5cc9d123645d38cde77cd56601`
- Manifest: `93ec3b2f76d010f33c4ce6059ed20295dc866bd9400860c09fe93d37eb2fe2d4`
- Freeze: `ca6a32dfd16a054bde7917c066fc1bfd9e73fca97b3d9bbb3f54b1f2cde96d19`
- Verification: `9eda57cc2330a5919f3702b014abdf8f06b996145fc42a2b3d96d749bae6c078`
- Readiness: `1dbd76b04c08e7a20670b94dea49b8f272caf689b1cbf14bc0e9ab711ec28781`
- Repository remains exactly bound: 449 status entries, SHA-256 `34a6c8be63c121196c05cb0058de66098e2b361835b10e7b8bd71dc923b6ddca`.
- Service: inactive/dead, `MainPID=0`, no cgroup processes.
- Deployed profile package: 80 files, no symlinks, byte-identical to the sealed candidate snapshot; tree digest `79d1b8b78d0de31a96a2a42d8637d0d3ea8d0e6c3ef2e952e72ceb903e847846`.

### Changes made

- No repository files, config, secrets, registry, lifecycle ledgers, or Telegram state changed.
- The live `workspace/checkin_cli` tree was atomically replaced with the sealed candidate package.
- The prior package is retained outside the profile at:
  `/home/cube/.local/state/dualcoach-task26-deployment/backups/20260814T102955Z/checkin_cli`
- No controller file was created.

### Passing controller preflight checks

- Delivery zero: registry 0 customers, bootstrap 0, publication outbox 0, activation notices 0, customer-service states empty.
- Owner route is private and operator card route is private.
- Activation and delivery gates are false.
- Telegram credentials valid; bot is `@dual_coach_pilot_test_bot`; webhook empty; pending updates 0.
- Owner private chat and staff ownership verified.
- Local generation-provider resolution passes.
- No Telegram send, callback, `getUpdates`, service start, customer activation, commit, push, or release occurred.

### Failed checks—the blocker

1. No synthetic-customer Telegram identity is supplied or configured. Therefore Task 21 cannot prove that the participant is a distinct synthetic account, private-DM reachable, and absent from staff authority before issuing a claim.
2. The live profile still contains the unsealed trainer-bearing subtree `workspace/checkin_cli.stale-snapshot-20260730/`. Historical sealed reset archives are retained evidence, but this workspace sibling fails the active-profile trainer-free preflight.

There are consequently no current lifecycle message IDs or buttons to report. Historical IDs, including `153`, remain non-authoritative.