msd-core/docs/adr/4910-planning-document-seam.md

ADR-4910: Planning documents are read and written through one parse → mutate → serialize seam [Proposed]

• Status: Proposed — design lock for Phases 1–6 of epic #4906. Ratify to Accepted at Phase 6 closeout, once the phases have demonstrably shipped. No production code lands in this PR.
• Date: 2026-09-20
• Issue: #4910 — Phase 0 of epic #4906
• Subsumes as layers: ADR-1372 (markdown-sectionizer — structure), ADR-2143 (markdown-table, bounded mutation, fail-loud Result<T>). Both remain in force and unchanged; this ADR frames them as the layers a planning document composes, and neither is a rewrite target. Their reciprocal Subsumed by back-links are deliberately not added yet: docs/adr/README.md lifecycle rule 3 states that only an Accepted ADR is owed the back-link, because a Proposed ADR's claim is prospective. They land in the Phase 6 ratification PR, when this ADR becomes Accepted and the index check begins demanding them.
• Relationship to prior work: the third consolidation in this family, after #1372 (read seam) and #2143 (tables, bounded mutation, fail-loud). Sibling: #2121 (phase-id.cts). The node-scoped parse-error contract (§5) applies to documents the Evidence distinction #4631 draws for gates.

Context

Twelve open confirmed-bug issues are one defect: MSD's durable state lives in prose markdown, and every verb brings its own regex to it.

Two seams already exist for this and both are correct. markdown-sectionizer (ADR-1372) owns fenced code, headings, sections and bullets. markdown-table (ADR-2143) owns GFM tables, the bounded withSection mutation primitive, and the fail-loud Result<T> in write-set.cts. What neither owns is the composition: a planning document is frontmatter + a section tree + tables + bold-label fields + checklists, and the verbs that mutate one reach past all three seams to a String.replace.

The result is a repo that ships a strict escaping reader and an unescaped prose writer for the same table.

Four arms, one missing owner

(a) The writer emits what the reader is required to reject. quick.md Step 7c interpolates a raw ${DESCRIPTION} into a pipe row; escapeCell exists at src/markdown-table.cts:716 — and its own doc comment describes a caller-must-re-escape contract, i.e. an obligation the caller may simply not discharge — and is applied per column at :852-862 on the generated path, not this one. A task description containing a Jinja filter permanently ragged the table, and quick-tasks-migrate cannot help because the next /msd-quick re-corrupts it (#4736). A project that migrates is not out of the state. Symmetrically, parseDecisions rejects a second colon in a plain-prose bold lead-in — text discuss-phase itself emits — forcing outcome: "could-not-parse" and hard-blocking check.decision-coverage-plan (#4793).

(b) A structural write replaces a line span and destroys what shares the line. src/phase.cts:3795 (on next) matches /(\*\*Plans:\*\*\s*)[^\n]+/i — one capture group, the rest of the line matched and uncaptured — and :3842 re-emits $1 and a new count and nothing else. On a real close that deleted 174 of the line's 205 characters, a paragraph documenting a design decision, with no warning and a payload reporting success (#4852).

This is the third occurrence of one defect. src/roadmap.cts:1196 — the sibling writer for the same line — already does it correctly, and the gap between the two sites is not subtle. Its planCountPattern carries three capture groups (label, count token, trailing) and :1213-1216 re-emits ${label}${planCountText}${trailing}, under a comment enumerating three arms:

1. $2 present (a real count token) → rewrite the token, preserve $3 verbatim (an annotation a human wrote after a real count; #2853). […] 3. Anything else (freeform prose, TBD / TBD — annotation, a bracketed human note, the first line of a wrapped sentence, an empty value) → leave the whole matched line untouched.

It even distinguishes a fresh-template placeholder from a bracketed human annotation that is structurally identical ([Deferred pending re-scope]), positively, on wording — because treating the two alike was bug #3584 Finding A. That is three arms of accumulated care at one site and none of it at the other.

The pattern arrived in d49a7d0c4 (fix #2853, 2026-07-31) and was tightened in 0f417aa6d (fix #3584, 2026-08-18). Neither touched src/phase.cts. The same shape appears again in state.update "Last Activity", which deletes last_activity_desc and state_head while its own payload lists "Last Activity Description" under preserved (#4862).

The correct implementation existing beside the incorrect one, in the same repo, for the same line, with a comment explaining the rule, is the evidence that a comment is not a mechanism.

(c) Unrecognised grammar returns empty instead of raising. roadmap.analyze returns phases: [] and phase_count: 0 for a checklist-only ROADMAP — a shape templates/roadmap.md itself emits — while the same call builds 26 missing_phase_details tokens and discards them, and while the same tree enumerates 20 phases through init.progress (#4899). adr-parser returns decisions: [] for ## 11. Locked decisions and reports success, from two independent causes: the leading section number is not stripped, and locked decisions is not a synonym (#4900). extractPhaseFieldMultiline folds list items, fences, lowercase labels and inline **mentions** into a field value, and one shape silently marks another phase's requirement complete (#4837).

In each case a caller cannot distinguish "this document records nothing" from "I could not read this document."

(d) The pattern is duplicated, so a fix lands at one copy. #4478's phase-heading anchor fix landed in roadmap-parser.cjs; init.cjs:2229, :2401, :3044 and milestone.cjs:646 keep unanchored gi copies, while init.cjs:116 — in the same file as three of them — is anchored correctly (#4865). The codebase disagrees with itself inside one file. Same shape in #4661 (/msd:undo's unanchored ERE over git log), #4605 / #4606 (pr-branch's STRUCTURAL_RE), and #4499 (frontmatter.set reformatting block sequences it was not asked to touch).

Why a design lock, before any code phase

Three facts make this ADR necessary rather than ceremonial.

1. The composition layer is a genuine gap, not an oversight to patch. ADR-1372 explicitly excluded tables, mutation and fail-loud; ADR-2143 covered those three and scoped itself to ROADMAP.md / STATE.md mutation sites, listing "migrating non-planning markdown" as a non-goal and document-model parsing as out of #3180's scope. A planning document as one object has never had an owner. Six phases will build against whatever this file says.

2. The epic names a drain point that does a different job — and a ratchet the language cannot deliver. Both are corrected in §6 and §7 below. Discovering either mid-Phase-5 would strand the phase.

3. Six of the twelve absorbed issues had open community point-fix PRs, which is the epic's stated non-goal already happening in the contribution queue. All six were closed unmerged, with their issues, rather than landed — see "The point fixes were closed, deliberately" below. That decision is what makes each phase's census reflect the real tree rather than a partially-patched one, and it is the reason this ADR can specify census-to-zero as an acceptance criterion at all.

There is no recorded ADR or Cortex decision governing this composition seam today (recall_decision returns no governing contract; .out-of-scope/ carries no prior denial), so later phases have nothing authoritative to build against.

Decision

Eight decisions, locked. Phases 1–6 execute against them as separate PRs.

1. One PlanningDoc seam, composing the existing layers

A new leaf module parses a planning artifact once into a PlanningDoc: frontmatter, a section tree, and typed field nodes (bold-label line, GFM table, checklist). It is owned by neither phase nor roadmap nor state, because all three need it — the same Conway's-Law reasoning src/plan-document.cts's own docblock records for itself.

The three existing seams are its layers, not its alternatives: markdown-sectionizer for structure (including stripFencedCode / scanInlineCodeSpans, so fence- and code-span-awareness is delegated rather than re-decided), markdown-table for tables, frontmatter.cts for frontmatter, write-set.cts for Result<T> and WriteOutcome. Extend, never mutate — ADR-2143 §2's lock is inherited verbatim. Neither Accepted ADR is reopened by this work.

The seam is registry-scoped to planning artifacts, not to markdown in general. .planning/ artifacts are already enumerated by src/artifacts.cts's isCanonicalPlanningFile; the registry extends that rather than inventing a second notion of what a planning document is.

Naming, recorded as a live risk. src/plan-document.cts already exists and parses one *-PLAN.md body. The ambiguity is resolved by absorption — that module becomes a typed field reader beneath this seam — not by a naming convention every future author must be told. Until that lands, the two names are close enough to confuse, and this note is the warning.

2. A structural write replaces a node. There is no span, because there is no regex.

A field write owns its token and re-emits everything else on its line by construction. The parser decides where a value ends and hands the writer a node carrying a valueSpan; the writer has no expression that can reach past it.

This is the same rule src/roadmap.cts:1196 encodes by hand in a third capture group and a comment. The difference is that $3 stops existing, because capture groups stop existing. A rule that depends on an author reading a comment has now failed three times (#2853, #3584, #4852) at one line in one file.

Mutation is node-addressed, never path-string-addressed. A path string ("phases.3.plans") is a grammar, a grammar needs a parser, and that is how this epic started. A handle returned by the parser cannot address a node the parser did not find.

3. Serialization is byte-stable for untouched regions

serialize splices mutated node spans back into the original buffer. A region the mutation did not touch is the original bytes — not a faithful re-render of them.

"Re-render faithfully" is an unbounded obligation: it must reproduce every whitespace, alignment and quoting choice a human made. #4499 is exactly that obligation being missed, and it closes here without a targeted fix. This is a deliberate Hyrum's Law commitment: every byte of an untouched region is depended on by someone's diff review, and a semantically-equivalent reformat is a real break.

It also closes a round-trip corruption before it exists: an untouched escaped cell (\|) is not re-escaped, because it is not re-rendered.

4. One writer per artifact, sharing its escaping with the reader

For each typed field kind, the escape-or-refuse function is exported by the reader's module and called by the writer. Not a third shared module — that is a second place for the pair to drift, which is the defect. A parity test per field kind asserts the pair.

A value that cannot be represented in the grammar is refused by the writer, with a report. A writer never emits a document its own reader must reject.

Prose-interpolated table rows in shipped workflow markdown are replaced by a msd_run verb that appends through the seam, so the escaping is executed once rather than restated in prose.

4a. accepted ⊇ emittable — the accept-but-never-emit rule

Each grammar is declared accepted (the reader takes it) and, separately, emittable (the writer may produce it). emittable ⊆ accepted, asserted. A grammar may be accept-only.

This is Postel's Law applied at the right level, and it is worth stating why, because the naive reading argues the opposite. Postel's own guidance splits by level: internal system-to-system — stricter on both ends; user-facing input — more liberal. MSD's planning artifacts are both. They are written by the tool and hand-edited by humans — the epic's stated constraint is that they "stay human-readable and hand-editable; that is the constraint, not the problem." So the reader is liberal toward a human's variation (#4793 is a reader being wrong to reject prose a human, or discuss-phase itself, legitimately wrote), the writer is conservative, and neither is ever silent. "Be conservative in what you send" is the uncontroversial half and applies to the writer without qualification.

5. A parse miss is typed, carries its span, and is scoped to the node

[] means none. An unrecognised shape surfaces could-not-parse with the offending span.

The error lives on the node, not the document. This is the sharpest constraint in the epic and the naive reading gets it wrong: making an unrecognised table fail the whole artifact would take out phase list, init.progress and every other consumer of the same file. Instead the document parses, the affected node carries the parse error, a consumer that reads that node gets could-not-parse with the span, and a consumer reading a different node is unaffected.

The document-level Result<PlanningDoc> failure is reserved for a document that is not a planning artifact at all — unreadable, no frontmatter terminator, not the declared kind.

This is an interpretation of #4906's criterion, stated rather than assumed. The epic's "Done when" reads "an unparseable shape surfaces could-not-parse with the offending span" and carries no document-or-node qualifier. This ADR reads it distributively — per unparseable shape, not per file — which is what node-scoping delivers. The reading is recorded here explicitly because the alternative (document-scoped) is also a faithful reading of the same sentence and would produce a materially different Phase 1 and Phase 4: one bad table would fail phase list and init.progress along with roadmap.analyze. If the epic intended the document-scoped reading, §5 and the Phase 1/4 acceptance criteria are what change.

This is ADR-1411's "report provenance rather than fall open silently" and ADR-2143 §5's no-null- swallow rule, at document-node granularity; it is the Evidence distinction #4631 draws for gates, applied to documents. #4899's own bug is the strongest argument for it: the evidence was already computed — 26 missing_phase_details tokens, built and then discarded — and thrown away on the way to reporting phases: [].

6. The ratchet is type-narrowing plus lint — not typechecking alone

The epic states: "the write boundary takes a PlanningDoc mutation, not a string, so a reintroduced content.replace(/…/) against a planning artifact does not typecheck."

The narrowed boundary is adopted. The guarantee, as stated, is not available.

fs.writeFileSync(planningPath, content.replace(/(\*\*Plans:\*\*\s*)[^\n]+/i, …));

typechecks perfectly. fs has never heard of PlanningDoc, and no narrowing of our boundary reaches a call that never goes near it. Publishing the epic's sentence unqualified would hand every later reader a guarantee that one require('node:fs') defeats — and a false guarantee is worse here than none, because it is the thing that stops someone writing the lint.

So enforcement is two mechanisms with stated scopes:

• Type-narrowing at the seam's write boundary — accepts a PlanningDoc mutation, not a string. Makes the correct path the easy path and catches every bypass through the seam.

• local/no-adhoc-markdown-parsing, extended — owns the bypass. It is already the mechanism ADR-1372 §2 and ADR-2143 §7 both chose, and ADR-2143's Phase 4 shipped: the rule today guards src/**/*.cts, tests/**/*.cjs and scripts/**/*.cjs, and already carries tableRegex and adhocReplaceMutation message ids alongside fenceRegex and sectionCollect. This ADR does not ask for that work again.

  What it does not yet catch is specific, and #4852 is the proof. adhocReplaceMutation keys on "a .replace() mutation of a roadmap/state document using a hand-rolled table or section regex". /(\*\*Plans:\*\*\s*)[^\n]+/i is neither: it is a bold-label field regex. So the defect lives in src/phase.cts — a file this rule does lint — and lint:ci is green. That is a behavioural demonstration of the gap, not an inference from reading the rule.

  The extension is therefore one detector, not a new mechanism: a field-shaped .replace() mutation of a registry-recognised planning artifact, and a raw readFileSync → .replace() → writeFileSync triple against one. Paired with an allowlist drain (#4446 pattern) for what exists today, deleted per phase rather than renewed.

Correction to the epic, recorded deliberately. #4906 names scripts/lint-planning-artifact-writer-drift.cjs as "the drain point; extend it." That script exists, but its own module docblock scopes it as a registry-completeness guard: every writer of a .planning/-root file is represented in isCanonicalPlanningFile. It states "No ratchet / no baseline" as a design choice, silently skips any runtime-computed target, and never inspects how a write is performed. It is a correct guard on a different axis and is left untouched. Extending it would have meant teaching a registry checker about regex shapes.

Stated coverage limit. A lint over src/*.cts cannot see #4736's writer, which is prose in msd-core/workflows/quick.md. Decision 4's msd_run verb is what brings that surface inside the fence; the lint does not, and this ADR does not pretend otherwise.

7. Every parser ships a positive control per accepted grammar

A parser declares the grammars it accepts (§4a's accepted set). A lint asserts one positive- control fixture per declared grammar; a parser without one fails the build. Modelled on scripts/lint-table-schema-drift.cjs, which already does this for table schemas and is wired into lint:ci.

This is what stops #4837's four continuation shapes and #4900's two heading forms regressing silently. It is also the guard that would have caught #4900 at authoring time: locked decisions was never a declared synonym, so no control ever existed for it.

Per CONTRIBUTING.md's fixture-provenance rule (#2371), a control may not be derived from the parser's own writer or docstring examples — and §4a makes that mechanical rather than a matter of discipline, because the accept-only grammars are by definition ones the writer cannot produce.

8. Exactly one implementation of a shared pattern, proven by a drift guard

The phase-heading pattern has one owner. Five copies (#4865) collapse to one, proven by the existing drift-guard idiom rather than by review attention. Same rule for /msd:undo's scope selector (#4661) and pr-branch's STRUCTURAL_RE (#4605, #4606): the pattern is a property of the seam's grammar, not a literal each call site owns.

What makes a phase done

A phase is done when a structural property holds, not when N symptoms are gone. This is stated as its own section because it is the single thing most likely to be lost between this file and the implementation, and the epic says so in its own words: "An implementation that does that has not closed this epic, even with every symptom gone and CI green."

Every phase below carries the same three acceptance criteria, in this order:

1. Census → zero. The phase opens by enumerating every instance of its anti-pattern in the tree and publishing that count in its PR. It closes when the count is zero. The number is measured by the phase, not guessed here — but the obligation to measure it, and to drive it to zero rather than to "the reported ones", is locked now.
2. Deletion, not coexistence. The bespoke implementations are removed, not kept in sync beside the seam. The epic's framing is exact: "two copies that agree today are the same defect as two that disagree." A phase that leaves a migrated call site's old code path in place has not finished.
3. Unrepresentable by construction. Each phase ships one property that makes its class impossible rather than currently absent — a property test over generated inputs, a type that does not admit the wrong shape, or a drift guard that fails CI on the next copy. A phase whose only evidence is per-site regression tests has bought symptom coverage, not a seam.

The absorbed issues are regression evidence, never the deliverable. Each is driven fail-first and kept, because a structural change that does not demonstrably fix the reported symptom is unproven. But a phase is not permitted to close on those tests alone, and "the three reported sites are fixed" is not a passing census.

The six absorbed issues whose point-fix PRs were closed are now themselves closed (#4736, #4837, #4661, #4605, #4606, #4499), superseded by this epic. Their phase PRs therefore reference them with Refs #NNNN, never a closing keyword — CONTRIBUTING.md forbids a closing keyword against an already-closed issue. Their regression tests are still owed; closure changes the link form, not the evidence obligation.

Phases

Each phase is one chore(#4906): … — Phase N sub-issue + PR, gated on msd-test, and each carries the three criteria above.

• Phase 0 — this ADR. Design lock. Docs-only. Closes #4910 only; #4906 stays open.

• Phase 1 — the seam exists, and is the only way to express a planning-document write (§1, §2, §3, §5). Net-new module; no call site migrated, so there is nothing for a census to count yet.

  • Unrepresentable: the mutation API is node-addressed, so a caller cannot name a node the parser did not find and cannot reach past a valueSpan. Byte-stability is asserted as a property over generated documents (fast-check), not over the three known sites: for any document and any single node mutation, every byte outside that node's span is identical.
  • Structural: one positive control per grammar the module declares it accepts (§7); the artifact registry derived from isCanonicalPlanningFile rather than a second list.

• Phase 2 — no verb writes a planning-document field with its own regex (§2, §3).

  • Census: every .replace()-based field write against a registry-recognised planning artifact in src/*.cts. Published in the PR; driven to zero.
  • Deletion: the bespoke patterns are removed — including src/roadmap.cts:1196's three-arm planCountPattern, which is correct today and still goes. A correct copy of a rule the seam now owns is exactly the two-copies-that-agree case the epic names; keeping it "because it works" re-creates the divergence this phase exists to end.
  • Unrepresentable: Phase 1's byte-stability property is re-run against the migrated call sites, so the guarantee is a property of the writer rather than three passing examples.
  • Evidence (fail-first, Refs): #4852, #4862, #4499.

• Phase 3 — no artifact has a writer that can emit what its own reader rejects (§4, §4a).

  • Census: every typed field kind in the registry; each must resolve to exactly one escape-or-refuse function, exported by the reader's module.
  • Deletion: quick.md Step 7c's prose interpolation is removed, not corrected in place — replaced by a msd_run verb that appends through the seam. This is the arm no lint over src/*.cts can reach, so deleting the prose is the only mechanism available.
  • Unrepresentable: emittable ⊆ accepted asserted over the registry, so a new field kind inherits the check instead of needing one written for it.
  • Evidence (fail-first; Refs for #4736): #4736, #4793.

• Phase 4 — a caller can always distinguish "records nothing" from "I could not read it" (§5).

  • Census: every planning-artifact read path returning a collection. How many can return [] for an input they failed to parse? Driven to zero.
  • Deletion: the discard sites go. #4899's missing_phase_details evidence is already computed — 26 tokens built and then thrown away on the way to reporting phases: [] — and that discard is the defect, not the parser.
  • Unrepresentable: for a registry-recognised artifact the node type does not admit a silent empty; a collection node carries either values or a parse error with its span, never neither.
  • Evidence (fail-first; Refs for #4837): #4899, #4900, #4837.

• Phase 5 — every shared grammar has exactly one implementation (§8).

  • Census: copies per pattern. The phase-heading pattern is five today (#4865 — four unanchored, one correct, three of them in the same file as the correct one). Driven to one.
  • Deletion: the four copies are removed, not aligned. Aligning them is what #4478 did, and it is why #4865 exists.
  • Unrepresentable: a drift guard fails CI on the next copy, so the count cannot climb back — the mechanism scripts/lint-table-schema-drift.cjs already applies to table schemas.
  • Evidence (fail-first; Refs for #4661, #4605, #4606): #4865, #4661, #4605, #4606. #4661 carries a constraint the phase must respect: the obvious anchor fix silently under-selects fixups into a partial revert, so the remedy is selecting by the scope a commit declares, not a better regex.

• Phase 6 — the class cannot be reintroduced (§6, §7).

  • Census: the grandfather allowlist. It starts at whatever Phases 2–5 could not reach and ends empty — an allowlist that survives the phase is a ratchet with nothing to hold.
  • Deletion: allowlist entries are deleted as each site migrates, never renewed. This is the idiom local/no-source-grep and ADR-2143 §7 both use, and ADR-2143 Phase 4's own experience is the reason it is restated: entries that are renewed instead of drained become orphaned markers pointing at closed epics.
  • Unrepresentable: the narrowed write boundary plus the field-shaped .replace() detector, so the next occurrence fails CI rather than review. Plus the positive-control lint (§7): a parser declaring an accepted grammar with no control fails the build.
  • Also ratifies this ADR to Accepted with a dated Ratification section, and adds the reciprocal Subsumed by back-links to ADR-1372 and ADR-2143 — which lifecycle rule 3 begins demanding at exactly that point.

Ordering constraints. Phase 1 introduces the primitive every later phase consumes and must precede all of them. Phase 6 must land last: a ratchet whose allowlist still grandfathers every unmigrated site is a ratchet with nothing to hold. Phases 2–5 are mutually independent — their censuses do not overlap — and may run in any order, or in parallel.

The point fixes were closed, deliberately

Six of the twelve absorbed issues had open community PRs doing point fixes at their existing call sites. All six were closed unmerged on 2026-09-20, with thanks and an explanation, along with their issues:

PR	Issue	Contributor	Owning phase
#4762	#4736	@behruznassre	3
#4897	#4837	@behruznassre	4
#4848	#4661	@0xdhx	5
#4610	#4605	@tarc	5
#4609	#4606	@tarc	5
#4530	#4499	@drungrin	2

This is the epic's non-goal enforced rather than merely stated: "Repairing the absorbed issues individually at their existing call sites without building the seam. That is the pattern that produced them — three times for #4852 alone — and it leaves the epic open." Landing six correct point fixes would have left the missing owner missing and made each phase's census start from a tree that looks healthier than it is.

The work was not wasted, and this is not a quality judgement. Every one of those PRs is cited in this ADR's Context: #4736 is the sharpest statement of the writer/reader split, #4661 supplies the constraint that the obvious anchor fix is also wrong, #4606 is the fifth attempt at one defect and is the epic's strongest recurrence evidence, and #4499 is the quietest issue in the cluster and the one that proves the writer re-renders regions it was never asked to touch.

Two consequences for the phases:

• A closed issue changes the link form, not the evidence obligation. Phase PRs reference these six with Refs #NNNN; CONTRIBUTING.md forbids a closing keyword against an already-closed issue. Each still owes its fail-first regression.
• The census is now the whole tree, not the reported sites. With no point fix landing, each phase's census reflects the real state of the code, which is the number that matters.

Consequences

• Positive. The class ends where it is generated rather than where it is reported: a field write cannot destroy its line, a writer cannot emit what its reader rejects, an unreadable document cannot report itself as empty, and a shared pattern has one copy. New verbs inherit correctness from the seam instead of re-deriving it — which is what the previous two consolidations each demonstrated.
• Cost. Seven PRs plus lint infrastructure. Phases 2, 4 and 5 carry High blast radius (cmdPhaseComplete, the roadmap/ADR read paths, five call sites across three files) and need per-consumer get_impact due diligence.
• Risk — the honest one. Behaviour-preserving migrations regress subtle formatting, and this seam's whole value proposition is formatting fidelity. Mitigated by §3's byte-stability property test, the fail-first regression per absorbed issue, §7's positive controls, and the per-phase msd-test gate. ADR-2143's own Phase 5 exists because a coverage re-check found a seam its Phase 0 had left unowned; /adr-phase-coverage runs again at epic closeout for that reason.
• Risk — naming. planning-document beside plan-document (§1). Live until absorption lands.
• Non-goals. Repairing the twelve at their existing call sites (the pattern that produced them — three times for #4852 alone). Replacing markdown as the storage format; the artifacts stay human-readable and hand-editable. Rewriting markdown-sectionizer or markdown-table. Re-litigating #1639's [^:*]* discipline as policy — this ADR changes where a grammar is defined and how a miss is reported, not what a decision title may contain, though §4a is why #4793 resolves anyway.

Alternatives considered

1. Repair the twelve issues at their call sites. The epic's own non-goal, and the pattern that produced them. Rejected in practice, not only on paper: six community PRs were doing exactly this and all six were closed unmerged rather than landed. This is the alternative that was genuinely available and genuinely declined, which is what makes the rejection load-bearing.
2. Put the composition layer inside markdown-sectionizer.cts. Rejected: that seam is generic markdown structure with no planning-domain knowledge, and CONTEXT.md scopes it that way. Teaching it what a **Plans:** line is inverts the dependency, makes a leaf module know about its consumers, and puts an Accepted contract at risk for a reason unrelated to markdown structure.
3. Path-string-addressed mutation (doc.set('phases.3.plans', v)). Rejected: a path string is a grammar, and a grammar needs a parser.
4. Re-render the document faithfully instead of splicing (§3). Rejected: an unbounded fidelity obligation, which #4499 is an instance of being missed.
5. A third shared escaping module (§4). Rejected: a second place for the reader/writer pair to drift.
6. One document-level Result that fails the whole artifact (§5). Rejected: one bad table takes out every unrelated consumer of the same file.
7. Type-narrowing alone as the ratchet (§6). Rejected on the merits, with the counter-example in-line. This is the epic's stated mechanism and it does not hold.
8. Extending lint-planning-artifact-writer-drift.cjs (§6). Rejected: correct guard, different axis, explicitly ratchet-free by design.

References

• Epic: #4906 · Phase 0 sub-issue: #4910
• Layers: ADR-1372 (markdown-sectionizer), ADR-2143 (markdown-table, bounded mutation, fail-loud)
• Fail-loud precedent: ADR-1411 — report provenance rather than fall open silently
• Sibling consolidation: #2121 (phase-id.cts)
• Absorbed: #4736, #4793, #4852, #4862, #4899, #4900, #4837, #4865, #4661, #4605, #4606, #4499

Amendment (2026-09-21): a write refuses on a document with any unreadable node

§5's node-scoping is correct for reads and was never examined for writes. This amendment adds the write rule. The original ## Decision body is unchanged and §5 still holds as written.

What was missed

§5 was reasoned entirely from #4899, which is a read bug — roadmap.analyze returning phases: []. Node-scoping is the right answer there: a ragged Progress table should not make init.progress fail as well, and it must not, because that is a command a user needs in order to see what to repair. A hand-editable format whose single typo bricks every command that could diagnose it is a worse tool.

Correction to §5's own wording, carried here rather than silently. §5's body names phase list alongside init.progress as a consumer that would be blocked. That is wrong: cmdPhasesList (src/phase.cts:207) enumerates the phases/ directory and never opens ROADMAP.md, so an unreadable Progress table cannot affect it either way. init.progress (src/init.cts:3625) does read ROADMAP.md and is a real instance; roadmap.analyze is the other. The argument stands on those two — it never needed three — but the example was not checked when §5 was written. §5's body is left unmodified per the append-only rule; fold this correction in at ratification.

But "the error lives on the node" was then stated unqualified, and it silently licensed something the original never considered: phase.complete re-serializing a ROADMAP.md whose Progress table it could not read. Serialization re-emits the whole file, so the verb republishes every region — including the one nobody could parse — while having understood only part of it. That is a partial-view write, and it is a strictly worse failure than the one #4899 reports, because the read bug returns a wrong answer while this one persists one.

The rule

Reads are node-scoped. Writes are document-scoped.

• A read of node n resolves independently: it returns n's values, or could-not-parse with n's span. A sibling node's parse failure is invisible to it. Unchanged from §5.
• A write — any PlanningDoc mutation reaching the serializer — refuses when any node in the document carries a parse error, whether or not the mutation targets that node. The refusal is a typed WriteOutcome naming the unreadable node and its span, never a silent skip and never a partial apply.

This does not reopen §5's "reserved for". §5 reserves the document-level Result<PlanningDoc> parse failure for a document that is not a planning artifact at all, and that reservation stands untouched. The refusal added here is a different type on a different axis — a WriteOutcome at mutate/serialize time, on a document that parsed successfully and merely contains one or more nodes carrying their own errors. A document can therefore be perfectly valid to open and still refuse to be written, which is the intended state.

The asymmetry is deliberate and is the point of the amendment: a reader is answering a bounded question and can honestly answer it from a bounded region, while a writer is asserting that the document it emits is the document it read. A writer that cannot read a region cannot make that assertion about it, and §3's byte-stability guarantee does not rescue it — splicing untouched bytes through faithfully is not the same as knowing they were consistent with the change being written.

Why not the alternatives

• Document-scoped for reads too (strictest, one error type, simplest to test). Rejected: one unreadable table blocks every consumer of that file, including the diagnostic commands, and the artifacts are hand-editable by design — the epic's own constraint.
• Node-scoped for writes (what §5 left implied). Rejected on the partial-view write above.
• Refuse only when the mutation's own target node is unreadable. Rejected, for two reasons that survive scrutiny:
  1. It would almost never fire. A verb locates the node in order to write it, so the target is readable in the ordinary case by construction. A precondition that is satisfied whenever the write is attempted is not a precondition.
  2. It does not match the blast radius of the operation it guards. Serialization re-emits the whole file (§3). A write is therefore a document-wide assertion — this is the document I read — regardless of how narrow the mutated span is. A document-wide act takes a document-wide precondition; scoping it to one node guards something smaller than what is actually happening.

Stated limit: this rule does not cover a write whose input comes from outside the document

An isolated review of this amendment falsified its first draft's motivating example, and the true mechanism is worth recording because it bounds what the rule can promise.

The draft claimed phase.complete derives the value it writes into **Plans:** from a different region of the same document. It does not. planCount and summaryCount are read at src/phase.cts:3429-3434 from findPhaseInternal(cwd, phaseNum) — a filesystem scan of the phase directory. No PlanningDoc node holds those counts at all.

That makes the dependency wider than the draft claimed, and it makes the limit explicit:

A document-scoped write refusal protects the document's own consistency. It says nothing about the correctness of a value sourced from outside the document. If the phase directory is mid-write, partially synced, or otherwise disagrees with reality, phase.complete writes a wrong count into a perfectly readable **Plans:** line and this rule will not object — correctly, since every node parsed.

The write rule still holds on its own terms (see the two reasons above; neither depends on where the written value came from). But the seam does not make a write correct, only whole, and an implementer must not read §5-plus-this-amendment as a guarantee that a successful write was right. Closing the outside-input gap is a separate concern about where verbs source their values, not about how documents are parsed, and it is not in this epic's scope. It is recorded here so that the next reader finds it stated rather than re-derives it from a surprise in production.

What changes downstream

• Phase 1 ships both scopes: the node-scoped read error of §5, and a document-level hasUnreadableNodes predicate the serializer consults before applying any mutation. Both get positive controls.
• Phase 2 gains an acceptance criterion that is new, not reworded: a mutation against a document carrying any unreadable node refuses, with a typed outcome naming that node — and the file on disk is byte-identical afterwards. The last clause matters: "refused" must mean nothing was written, which is a filesystem assertion, not a return-value one.
• Phase 4's census gains a second axis. It was "every read path that can return [] for an input it failed to parse". It is now that, plus every write path that can apply a mutation to a document with an unreadable node. Those are different call sets and the phase must publish both counts.

Provenance

Raised by a maintainer ruling on 2026-09-21, after §5 shipped in #4911. The gap was real: §5's node-scoping had been recorded in that PR as an interpretation of #4906's "an unparseable shape surfaces could-not-parse with the offending span" — a sentence that carries no read-or-write qualifier — and the interpretation was made without examining the write side at all.

Amendment (2026-09-22): two of Phase 2's cited defects are already fixed, and STATE.md's field-write engine is re-scoped out

Phase 2's evidence list read #4852, #4862, #4499. Two of those three are already fixed on next, independently of this epic, and the third — #4862 — exposed a subsystem whose blast radius disqualifies it from a mechanical migration. All three claims below were reproduced against the built module, not inferred from reading source.

#4499 is already fixed

src/frontmatter.cts's spliceFrontmatter already preserves untouched top-level keys verbatim, per-key, comparing structural equality before deciding whether to regenerate a key's raw text. Reproduced: a document with must_haves and tags block sequences, with only wave changed, round-trips those two keys byte-identically. This predates this epic — the mechanism (#1572 in its own comments) already implements the identity-preservation rule Decision 3 asks for, for YAML frontmatter specifically.

Struck from Phase 2's evidence. Frontmatter is a different grammar from the body-field grammar this seam models (boldField / table / checklist) — Decision 1 treats it as one opaque region, supplied by frontmatter.cts as a layer, not decomposed into writable nodes. spliceFrontmatter's internal per-key YAML splicing is therefore not a "verb writes a field with its own regex" instance in the sense this phase targets, and it is not broken. No migration is owed here.

#4862 is already fixed at its own level, and its subsystem is re-scoped out

state-document.cts's stateReplaceField already anchors its bold-field pattern to line start with same-line-only leading whitespace (its own comments cite #4243). Reproduced: writing Last Activity leaves a sibling **Last Activity Description:** field and the state_head frontmatter key both intact. The exact symptom #4862 reported does not reproduce.

What #4862's site actually is, measured rather than assumed: stateReplaceField / stateReplaceFieldWithFallback carries a CRITICAL get_impact(direction=both) rating — 190+ affected symbols, truncated as a lower bound. So, measured the same way, do phase.cts's mutateMilestonePhase (121) and roadmap.cts's cmdRoadmapUpdatePlanProgress (200) — the two sites Phase 2 does keep. The CRITICAL label does not distinguish these groups, and an earlier draft of this amendment claimed it did without checking the second two; corrected here. All three symbols live in large, single-file modules (phase.cts at 4,800+ lines, roadmap.cts at 1,600+, state-transition.cts at 3,500+), and direction: both walks into every sibling function such a file touches — a known measurement artifact of bidirectional impact on a large shared module, not evidence specific to any one of these three symbols' actual behavior.

What genuinely distinguishes them is architectural, and this is the actual basis for the re-scoping: stateReplaceField is one building block inside updateCore (state-transition.cts), which is a full read-modify-write transaction — session-vs-body field routing (sessionLabelsForBodyField), a three-condition frontmatter-fallback case (#3699 case D), frontmatter reconstruction and re-sync, and post-write preservation reconciliation (readModifyWriteStateMd). Its own comments cite four prior hardening passes against exactly the corruption classes this epic worries about — #3374, #3699, #4010, #4243 — predating #4906. mutateMilestonePhase and cmdRoadmapUpdatePlanProgress, by contrast, are each one field, one grammar, a three-arm decision that collapses onto a single setFieldValue call plus a caller-side pre-check, inside a confinement window another module already computes — a substitution of mechanism with the same inputs and outputs, not a design task.

This is not "a verb brings its own regex to a field write." updateCore is a proven, actively-maintained transactional engine that already defends against silent corruption, and it does not map onto PlanningDoc's current node model at all: there is no node concept for a multi-field transaction, a frontmatter-derived-from-body sync pass, or a session-scoped write with an archive-shadowing guard. Migrating it would mean designing that model, not calling an existing seam function.

The STATE.md field-write engine is re-scoped out of Phase 2 on that architectural basis. It is not defective, so there is no urgency, and its migration — if ever undertaken — needs its own design phase with its own node-model design, not a slot inside a phase whose other deliverable is a same-mechanism substitution in phase.cts/roadmap.cts.

Struck from Phase 2's evidence.

What Phase 2 actually delivers

With both struck, Phase 2's census is exactly the **Plans:** line: src/phase.cts's planCountBodyPattern (still live — one capture group, confined by withPhaseSection but still a regex the seam should own) and src/roadmap.cts's planCountPattern (the correct three-arm sibling, still a duplicate implementation under Decision 2's "two copies that agree today are the same defect" rule). Both write the same field on the same artifact and migrate together onto one seam call. #4852 remains the phase's fail-first evidence; Refs #4852, since it is already closed NOT_PLANNED.

No new phase number is opened for the STATE.md engine. If a future contributor wants to bring STATE.md under this seam, that is new work requiring its own issue, its own design, and its own get_impact accounting — not an unclaimed fragment of this phase.