Verdict. Accept with conditions. Split WM-ACT-001: retire its enterprise-capability semantics and narrow the residual to agent Function, Competence, Proficiency, and Capacity. Do not reuse or profile WM-ACT-001 as Business Capability. Introduce identifier-unassigned candidates for Business Capability, identified by outcome class, and for Capability Realization, which needs independent identity. Profile WM-ACT-034 for Capability Assessment. Capability Level is a scale definition or an assertion, not a root. This is an assessment of the proposal, not a claim of publication readiness.

Strongest evidence. The transfer test. Moving one process from unit U1 to unit U2 must leave capability identity unchanged and change only realization bindings. Identity based on outcome class survives reorganization, process redesign, and system replacement; department names fail that test because they move with the chart. A system can support a binding but cannot alone prove full realization, which matches an evidenced, multi-party binding rather than a system attribute. The required separations — required versus actual, maturity versus performance, capability versus capacity, unknown versus zero — stop one score from standing for four different claims.

Strongest counterexample. If practitioners define the outcome class by the current department or by the current process design, the transfer test fails and the new candidate collapses back into the legacy Function/Capability mix. A second failure mode: treating agent competence (the narrowed WM-ACT-001) as the enterprise capability, so identity moves with skilled people rather than with the outcome class. A third: making Capability Level the root, so a scale position is mistaken for the capability itself and history is overwritten when the score changes.

Identity/mastership. Business Capability is mastered as a stable outcome class: what the enterprise must be able to produce, not who performs it or how. Mastership does not transfer when a process moves from U1 to U2, and it is not held by organizational unit, department, process, system, role, or supplier. Narrowed WM-ACT-001 keeps mastership only of agent Function, Competence, Proficiency, and Capacity. Capability Realization is mastered separately as a temporal evidenced binding. Assessment is an evaluation record, a profile of WM-ACT-034, and does not mint or rename capability identity.

Capability/function/process. Capability, function, and process are distinct. Capability is the outcome class. Function in the narrowed WM-ACT-001 is agent behavior and competence, not a department. Process, including legacy WM-ACT-003, is how work is sequenced; it may realize a capability and must not define it. No 1:1 capability-to-process mapping is required.

Decomposition. Decompose only by outcome specialization: a parent outcome class contains child outcome classes. Decomposition is not an organizational hierarchy, not a process breakdown, and not a maturity ladder. Decomposition depth and Capability Level are different notions and must not share a scale.

Level/maturity/performance. Capability Level is reference scale or an assertion against that scale, never a root that owns the capability. Required level and actual level are distinct assertions on the same scale. Maturity is how far the ability is institutionalized. Performance is measured outcome achievement. Capacity is volume or sustainment, not the ability itself. Collapsing these into one score is rejected.

Assessment/evidence. Profile WM-ACT-034 Assessment/Evaluation; do not create a second assessment root. Evidence is carried by WM-MAT-008 Observation/Measurement Record. An assessment asserts a level at a time against a capability or a realization; it does not redefine the outcome class. Unknown is an explicit state. It is not a default of zero, and absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

Realization/coverage. Capability Realization needs independent identity. Decision: yes. It is a temporal evidenced binding to processes, organizations, roles, systems, resources, or suppliers. A pure link cannot hold validity, supersession, partial coverage, concurrent bindings, or assessment history without mutating the capability or losing history. Coverage is the evidenced portion of the required outcome class in a scope and time; it may be partial, overlapping, or unknown. A system may be a binding participant and still be insufficient to prove full realization.

Organization/time/scenario. Bindings to WM-ORG-002, WM-ORG-003, and WM-ORG-004 sit on the realization and are time-bounded. Those units are participants, not capability owners. WM-KNW-011 goals may set required levels; they do not name capabilities. Scenario variants are different realizations or different assessments, not different capability identities.

Scenario. Transfer process P from U1 to U2. Capability identity stays the outcome class. The realization bound to U1 ends or is superseded; a realization bound to U2 starts, with roles, systems, or suppliers free to differ. Prior evidence stays on the earlier realization. A temporary performance dip does not delete the capability. Neither department name is accepted as the definition. A system that still supports the outcome does not by itself prove full realization after the transfer.

Invariants.
1. Capability identity is fixed by outcome class alone.
2. Reorganization does not change capability identity.
3. Process redesign does not change capability identity.
4. System replacement does not change capability identity.
5. Department or unit names are rejected as capability definitions.
6. Realization bindings may change while capability identity stays stable.
7. A system may support realization but cannot alone prove full realization.
8. Required level and actual level are distinct.
9. Maturity and performance are distinct.
10. Capability and capacity are distinct.
11. Unknown coverage is not zero coverage.
12. Capability Level is a scale definition or assertion, never a root.
13. Assessment does not create or rename the capability.
14. Agent competence, proficiency, and capacity stay outside Business Capability mastership.
15. Multiple realizations of one capability may coexist.
16. Ending a realization does not retire the capability.
17. Capability decomposition is by outcome specialization, not by org chart or process steps.
18. Absence of a realization record is not evidence that the outcome class does not exist.

Minimum model set. Unassigned Business Capability candidate; unassigned Capability Realization candidate with independent identity; Capability Level as scale or assertion only; Capability Assessment as a profile of WM-ACT-034; narrowed WM-ACT-001 for agent Function, Competence, Proficiency, and Capacity; links to organizational unit, team, position, goal, and measurement record; process treated as a legacy realization participant, not as the capability root.

Blockers. Outcome-class naming, equivalence, and deduplication rules are undefined. Realization granularity is undecided: one realization per binding tuple, or one realization with many participants. Scale ownership for Capability Level is undefined. Evidence-sufficiency rules are missing, including how supplier or system support counts. Double-count risk remains until enterprise-capability usage is explicitly retired from WM-ACT-001. No identifier is assigned, and nothing here is publication-ready.