The port's authored/flow.json stamped title/on_cancel_why = 'MEASURED, HANDOFF
Q5' for a clause whose evidence cell in the source table reads 'none'. It did not
invent that: HANDOFF's Q5 row opened with one **measured** covering six clauses of
different strength, and HANDOFF is the document it authors against.
Split per clause. Measured: initial focus varies; up/down move one item per press
and wrap both ends; left/right do nothing; B on a submenu restores focus 4/4; B on
the main menu goes to the title in <= 0.4 s with no loading screen. NOT measured,
evidence cell empty: 'no auto-repeat at the durations tried', and 'B on the title
-> nothing'. Both marked do-not-stamp.
Also splits the source table's own up/down row, which bundled 'one item per press'
(indirectly but soundly evidenced by the 4-press wrap count) with 'no auto-repeat'
(nothing behind it, and the hedge was carrying the claim).
METHOD entry: the failure is in summarising, not at either endpoint. The source
table was honest and the consumer cited its source; flattening six claims into one
adjective created a provenance nothing supports. A strength label is not
distributive.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01Wuu56cE8vJGTBtn1ppsk8v
b56dfcba13