re: the unit family is the only schema on the disc; an .xpr search cannot prove absence

Two exhaustive probes agree on the same 15 records. The six Shift-JIS type words
occur in the six GP_MAIN_GAME_* paks and nowhere else, and a disc-wide sweep of
every parsed record name for a wildcard shape (???, *, ###, NNN, <...>) returns
7 distinct names - exactly the seven already in the schema: Turret_???,
Hatch_???, Bridge_???, Thruster_???, ShieldGenerator_???, Versatile_???, NS_*,
each x6. So the weapon datasheet, the arsenal item and StageResource ship NO
schema; the unit datasheet is the only structure the disc describes to itself.
Wildcard field names are confined to the schema records too - NozzleSpec_???,
NozzleFrame_???, CannonFrame_???, MuzzleFrame_???.

No untyped gaps either. The full residual is 30 slots and every one holds a
sample value rather than a missing type: 28 booleans spelled Yes, plus
Generic.ID = Ship_ and Generic.Type = Vessel. The booleans follow one pattern -
the six destructible part types each carry the same four-boolean core
(IsDestructible, IsInvolved, IsRadarVisible, IsShielded), Turret_??? adds IsAuto,
Generic carries only IsDestructible, and NS_* has its own pair AttenuationAlpha /
AttenuationVolume. 28 + 2 = 30; 7 fully-typed records + 8 with examples = 15.

The third result is a refutation of my own instrument. Testing the four
genuinely-undeclared effects against the 166 .xpr packages put eff_f0002 and
eff_f0002_barn in Base.xpr and found nothing for eff_e0044 or eff_h308 - but the
control kills the negative: eff_n0071, which we measured LIVE as an Explosion
record's ExplosionFxModel, also returns nothing from the same search. A
known-live name the test cannot find means the test has no power here. Only the
positive half counts: eff_f0002/_barn do ship. Nothing follows about eff_e0044
or eff_h308, and the earlier "no mesh" remarks about eff_e0058/_e0059/_e0060 are
weaker than written - absent from a byte search over .xpr is not absent from the
disc. How an effect mesh is actually reached is now the open question, since
eff_n0071 is not a plain name string in any of the 166 packages.

All sixteen artefacts byte-identical.

docs/re/structures/unit-datasheet-schema.md

@@ -81,3 +81,39 @@ disc declares, rather than types inferred from sampled values.
 
 Regenerate with `tools/re-capture/datasheet_schema.py` →
 [`docs/re/data/datasheet-schema.txt`](../data/datasheet-schema.txt).
+
+## ✅ The unit family is the only schema on the disc
+
+Two independent probes, both exhaustive, both landing on the same 15 records:
+
+* **the type words** — the six Shift-JIS type names occur in the six
+  `GP_MAIN_GAME_*` paks and nowhere else;
+* **the wildcard names** — sweeping every parsed record name disc-wide for a
+  `???`, `*`, `###`, `NNN` or `<…>` shape returns **7 distinct names**, and they
+  are *exactly* the seven already in the schema (`Turret_???`, `Hatch_???`,
+  `Bridge_???`, `Thruster_???`, `ShieldGenerator_???`, `Versatile_???`, `NS_*`),
+  each ×6.
+
+So the weapon datasheet, the arsenal item and `StageResource` ship **no**
+schema — the unit datasheet is the only structure the disc describes to itself.
+The wildcard *field* names are likewise confined to the schema records:
+`NozzleSpec_???`, `NozzleFrame_???`, `CannonFrame_???`, `MuzzleFrame_???`.
+
+## ✅ Every untyped slot is an example — 30 of 30, no gaps
+
+The full untyped residual across all 15 schema records is **30 slots**, and
+every one holds a sample value rather than a missing type:
+
+* **28 booleans** spelled `Yes`, and they follow one pattern — the six
+  destructible part types (`Turret_???`, `Hatch_???`, `Bridge_???`,
+  `Thruster_???`, `ShieldGenerator_???`, `Versatile_???`) each carry the same
+  four-boolean core **`IsDestructible`, `IsInvolved`, `IsRadarVisible`,
+  `IsShielded`**; `Turret_???` adds `IsAuto`; `Generic` carries only
+  `IsDestructible`; `NS_*` has its own pair `AttenuationAlpha` /
+  `AttenuationVolume`;
+* `Generic.ID` = `Ship_` (the prefix) and `Generic.Type` = `Vessel` (the enum).
+
+`28 + 2 = 30`. **Seven of the fifteen records are fully typed** (`Maneuver`,
+`Shield`, `Mass`, `SE`, `Explosion`, `Effect`, `StructureCount`) and eight carry
+examples: `7 + 8 = 15`. There is no field anywhere in the schema whose type the
+disc leaves unstated.

docs/re/structures/unit-substructure-records.md

@@ -251,3 +251,23 @@ This is the direct contrast to the previous iteration's refutation — `_all` /
 `_child` was **1** of 166 with one stem and is not a convention; `_hangar` is
 **59** of 166 with zero partials and is. Suffix conventions in this corpus are
 worth testing precisely because they are not all real.
+
+### ❌ An `.xpr` byte search cannot answer "does this effect ship"
+
+Testing the four genuinely-undeclared effects against the 166 `.xpr` packages
+gave `eff_f0002` and `eff_f0002_barn` in `Base.xpr`, and nothing for `eff_e0044`
+or `eff_h308`. **But the control refutes the instrument, not the effects:**
+`eff_n0071` — measured *live*, bound by an `Explosion` record's
+`ExplosionFxModel` — **also returns nothing** from the same search.
+
+A known-live name the test cannot find means the test has no power here. So:
+
+* `eff_f0002` / `eff_f0002_barn` **do** have a mesh in `Base.xpr` (presence is
+  still evidence when it is positive);
+* nothing follows about `eff_e0044` or `eff_h308`, and the earlier remark that
+  `eff_e0058`, `eff_e0059` and `eff_e0060` "have no mesh" should be read the same
+  way — **absent from a byte search over `.xpr` is not absent from the disc**.
+
+Whatever ships `eff_n0071` is not a plain name string inside those 166 files,
+so effect meshes must be reached some other way. Finding that route is the open
+question; until then, only the positive half of this test counts.