I read this as an independent adversarial verification - I’ll inspect the receipt and full runtime path, reproduce every strict scenario without modifying the worktree, run diagnostics and static gates, then write only the requested evidence JSON.


The receipt’s eight listed runtime hashes match exactly. I’m now tracing the complete authority-to-scheduler path and auditing the focused tests, including the three propagation files and four test files that the receipt does not hash explicitly.


The core green suite passes, but the receipt’s qualification claims are overstated: the exact implementation run contained only one maintenance-negative test, while the required malformed/binding/filesystem matrix was not present. I’m executing that matrix independently now and checking whether the missing coverage hides a runtime defect.


Adversarial execution found a real fail-open filesystem-contract defect: a maintenance lock with the wrong profile group is accepted and the hold is consumed successfully. The strict DoneClaim therefore cannot be confirmed; I’m sealing the evidence with the independent repro, the incomplete receipt/test qualification findings, and cleanup proof.


I read this as verification delivery - I completed the adversarial review and wrote the evidence artifact.

Verdict: **needs-fix**
Confidence: **0.99**
Blockers: **4**

Primary defect: `maintenance.lock` with the wrong GID is accepted and produces `noop_maintenance` instead of failing closed.

Evidence:

`/home/cube/projects/richard/traning coach/.omo/evidence/nutricoach-telegram-checkin-stepper/task-10-r71b-maintenance-runtime-adversarial.json`

SHA-256: `fdaccd2a11618f864e3a8bfbddaed3c379eb4857987f8eadced66474116e0d52`


I read this as a delta-only adversarial re-review - I’ll preserve the previously approved behavior scope, independently retest the four amended blockers and required focused/affected/manual/static gates, then replace only the adversarial evidence with confirmed if every gate is clean.


The amended receipt’s 11 runtime hashes and nine retained/restored test hashes all match disk, and collection confirms 51 parameterized negative cases plus the dedicated wrong-GID regression. I’m now running the exact 61/240 suites and fresh strict analyzers independently.


The exact 61 and 240 suites pass. Whole-file checking of inherited `telegram.py`, `scheduler.py`, and restored legacy tests reproduces their known baseline diagnostics, so I’m separating that from the amended strict set and checking the exact changed strict files plus changed regions, as required by the delta-only scope.


All four delta blockers now close independently: wrong-GID denial is byte-stable and zero-call with a valid same-GID control; 52 deterministic rejects and both 61/240 suites pass; complete hashes match; the exact strict set is clean in fresh basedpyright, ty, and current LSP. I’m replacing the prior needs-fix artifact with the confirmed delta receipt.


I read this as delta re-review completion - all four prior blockers are independently closed.

Verdict: **confirmed**
Confidence: **0.99**
Blockers: **0**

Verification:
- Focused: 61 passed
- Affected: 240 passed
- Wrong-GID denial and same-GID control passed
- All hashes matched
- Exact strict basedpyright, ty, and LSP clean
- Manual two-noop/tomorrow-send behavior passed
- Ruff, compile, import, no-excuse, and cleanup passed

Evidence:

`/home/cube/projects/richard/traning coach/.omo/evidence/nutricoach-telegram-checkin-stepper/task-10-r71b-maintenance-runtime-adversarial.json`

SHA-256: `c9ce2e232186460bbbd376b9af0a0f2c8e6bc3af7369b4cd51755a5a8032c43e`