v2.2.19 — a failed redemption is attributed to whoever actually failed (2026-09-17)

v2.2.19 — a failed redemption is attributed to whoever actually failed (2026-09-17)

• The "failed to redeem" attribution has a third bucket, and it takes precedence: when the
  tick's executor trace carries the literal "output was not parsed" marker, the row is filed as
  dropped on the executor side instead of being blamed on the proposal's age. Live case that
  forced it (tick 449): the model replied with a JSON object containing actions, but the
  opening {" was missing, so the adapter's parser failed and the whole reply — including a
  valid write action — was dropped; the engine honestly recorded a failure to redeem, and the
  age rule (59 ticks ≥ 30) would have filed it as "proposal went stale", which is the wrong
  account. infinigrow redemption now prints all three buckets
  (执行者侧未落地 / 提议过期 / 真没做); pass traces_dir (the CLI does) to enable the split —
  without it the behaviour is exactly as before.
• Also recorded, not fixed (the adapter is out of this repository's scope): 62 of 397 executor
  traces (15.6%) hit that parse fallback, 23 of them on capped-sprout topics — so roughly one in
  seven ticks an intended action never lands. The engine's bookkeeping is honest throughout; the
  loss is on the executor side, and it is the main real cause behind "failed to redeem" rows on
  the application edge.
• Docs: both mechanism documents describe the three-way split and its proof levels.
• Tests: +1 (the unparsed-marker bucket, including the "no traces_dir → old behaviour" path).