# Provider comparison — EM-DAT-04

Claude and Grok agree that reserved WM-DAT-007 is the correct assessment aggregate and that reusable rule, metric formula, observation, issue and remediation authorities remain external. Both preserve separate completeness, accuracy, validity, freshness and coverage dimensions; require independent truth for accuracy; require two clocks plus a purpose budget for freshness; forbid ratios with unknown denominators; and require immutable successor evaluations for corrections and retests.

Grok resolves the two explicit questions: CoverageAssessment is a constrained QualityEvaluation kind, not a new independently identified model, and WM-DAT-007 may bind but never own metric formulas. It strengthens the completion rule so every ratio-bearing evaluation cites a versioned frame and explicit denominator state, not only coverage-kind. It also makes frame version part of evaluation identity and requires estimated denominators to disclose method and uncertainty.

The reconciled candidate completes the existing WM-DAT-007 reservation without a new model or runtime ID. Publication remains held because Metric Definition is identifier-unassigned, frame-versioning authority is unnamed, parent/relation assurance is incomplete and the package remains a research candidate.