## Verdict

`ACCEPT WITH LIMITS` — held reviewable draft, no publication authority.

## Critical findings

1. **No new aggregate identity, but two identifiers are load-bearing and undeclared in grain.** The baseline package carries its own immutable identity, its own revision series independent of charter and plan (item 3), and is named directly by variance (item 2) and acceptance (item 4). That is aggregate-shaped behaviour. It remains consistent with `newRuntimeId=false` *only* if its identifier is project-scoped inside WM-ACT-005. Item 3's required grain declaration (scope/schedule/cost atomic vs independent) is still open; the "independent" branch would split the package into separate identified series and would break `newRuntimeId=false`.
2. **Item 2's pin/snapshot disjunction is a mastership leak.** "Pins immutable revisions **or** embeds an immutable snapshot" permits WM-ACT-008 plan content to sit inside a WM-ACT-005-mastered package. Unconstrained, this creates a second authority for plan content. Not a contradiction, but it must be bounded as a non-authoritative copy carrying WM-ACT-008 revision provenance.
3. **Criteria-revision mastership is unnamed.** Acceptance pins a criteria revision (item 4) with no item assigning its master (deliverable in 031, charter in 005, or plan in 008). Genuine gap.
4. **Frozen-selection artifact is unmastered.** Item 3 governs the transition "from frozen selection", but neither 005 nor 032 is assigned the selection record.
5. **WM-ACT-031 disagreement is substantively preserved, not collapsed** — Grok's immutability requirement is adopted verbatim in item 2, and its union objection is answered by separating three identities and lifecycles while retaining Claude's single aggregate. The residual collapse path is that the aggregate's revision series and consistency boundary are unstated; a single shared series would re-fuse immutable Acceptance with mutable milestone/deliverable rows.
6. **One negative case is asserted, not derived.** "Task completion inferred as milestone achievement" is rejected without a positive rule requiring independent milestone-achievement authority and evidence.
7. **No contradiction internal to the profile.** Baseline authority (005 holds packages/pointer; 032 authorizes, never performs), plan content (008), change request (032 with 005 projection), and acceptance (031, immutable) are otherwise unambiguous.

## Required holds

- Declare package grain (atomic vs independent) before any identifier decision is treated as final.
- Constrain embedded snapshots to non-authoritative copies with WM-ACT-008 revision provenance; forbid resolution through them.
- Name the master for criteria revisions and for the frozen selection record.
- Declare WM-ACT-031 revision-series and consistency-boundary grain per record type.
- State post-rebaseline re-verification policy for acceptances pinned to a predecessor package.
- State explicitly that BL-2 creation requires a rebaseline-class approved request.
- Add a positive rule separating task completion from milestone achievement.
- Standing holds: base models remain reviewable drafts; relation/source/base corrections outstanding. Publication blocked.

## Scenario result

Passes. BL-1 and historical variance resolve PR-7 under item 2's immutable pins; PR-8 advances only the WM-ACT-008 head; BL-2 adds a package without overwriting BL-1; P1 acceptances retain original object/criteria/package basis; P2 is untouched; T and X keep one external identity each under item 6. Only the pointer moves.

## Identifier decision

Uphold `newRuntimeId=false`. No new runtime or model identifier. Baseline package = project-scoped sub-entity of WM-ACT-005; Acceptance = discriminated record identity within WM-ACT-031. Conditional on hold 1.