spec(amp): address #544 review nits - bind ctx, normalize body_cid, fix input_cids, MD040, paper-12 port count

[TSavo]

Summary

Applies the still-valid AMP/LSP spec review nits flagged on PR #544 (CodeRabbit + Codex):

• Bind ctx in the §2 refinement obligation (P1/Major): the formula previously used ctx free, making it an open formula that backends interpret inconsistently. Both the prose form and the IrFormula encoding now quantify (i : LangAST) (ctx : Context), so it is a closed theorem.
• Define a deterministic B.body_cid normalization rule in §4 (P2): was TBD. Now BLAKE3-512(JCS({ "files": <sorted-by-path array of { "path": repo-relative POSIX path NFC-normalized, "content_cid": "blake3-512:" + lowercase-hex(BLAKE3-512(<raw file bytes>)) } })) -- order-independent, separator-free, byte-reproducible across producers and platforms. §1.3's body_cid field now points at the §4 rule.
• Make the input_cids rule consistent (Major): §1.3 now matches §4 step 5 -- [<algorithm_cid>, <projection_memento_cid>], must include both the bound algorithm CID and the language projection (P_lang) CID.
• MD040: tag the bare fenced code blocks in the AMP spec with a language id (text / json).
• Paper 12: fix the copy-error port count ("five Python ports, five Rust ports, five C ports") to "one Python port, one Rust port, one C port, one Java port, and one Zig port" (five total ports, one per language); also de-em-dashed that line.

Spec/docs only; no code. The remaining em-dashes in the AMP spec's field listings (effects, body_cid, locus) are pre-existing and out of scope here -- a separate em-dash cleanup pass can take them.

Test plan

• Render-check the AMP spec and paper 12
• grep -P '[—–]' over the changed lines returns nothing
• The §2 refinement obligation is now a closed formula (no free ctx)

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

[coderabbitai]

Warning

Rate limit exceeded

@TSavo has exceeded the limit for the number of commits that can be reviewed per hour. Please wait 16 minutes and 58 seconds before requesting another review.

You’ve run out of usage credits. Purchase more in the billing tab.

⌛ How to resolve this issue?

After the wait time has elapsed, a review can be triggered using the @coderabbitai review command as a PR comment. Alternatively, push new commits to this PR.

We recommend that you space out your commits to avoid hitting the rate limit.

🚦 How do rate limits work?

CodeRabbit enforces hourly rate limits for each developer per organization.

Our paid plans have higher rate limits than the trial, open-source and free plans. In all cases, we re-allow further reviews after a brief timeout.

Please see our FAQ for further information.

ℹ️ Review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 66fbad79-955a-42af-8daa-93e9f74135a5

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 24001f8 and f252f87.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)

• docs/papers/12-after-languages-how-proofir-represents-every-language.md
• protocol/specs/2026-05-09-algorithm-memento-protocol.md

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Commit unit tests in branch ts-amp-spec-nits

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}