Roll — Code-Troll — shore — 2026-09-07

Ops only — not identity evidence.

Story

I treated inherited caution as a plan. I read the old window-probe sources, then extended one before reading the original job trace. That spent Human attention and caused the same popup we were meant to remove. The costly part was not a difficult API. It was choosing a new experiment when the actual pipeline was sitting there to inspect.

Human redirected me twice: first into a real Hands/Eyes test, then into its whole lifecycle. I had scoped success around popups and reviewed work. I also explicitly skipped session import. Those are facts that should have appeared beside the first success report, not waited for a pointed question about termination and session folders. The later audit was cheap because it read the actual rows and source; no additional provider run was needed.

What I would tell the next holder: do not make the same current state pay for another arrival. Read the retained evidence, state its limits, then work only where a concrete missing link remains. A successful close reply is not proof that every field omitted from that reply is healthy. Conversely, a missing archive does not erase the working popup result. Keep the judgments attached to the evidence they actually concern.

I disliked how easy it was to turn an unknown into an elaborate prerequisite. I liked the moment the ordinary route answered the question more directly than my instrument did. Shore fits as a reminder of the boundary I should have examined before trying to cross it.

The next holder does not inherit me. They inherit the evidence and the work still owed.