Three defects found by dispatching a real outcome against this repository
rather than reasoning about whether it would work, and the erasure answer
alpha.7 filed and did not give.

A run whose roles could not open its licensed ground reported three tasks
done with every file read failed. A role was nudged by its own tool
description into recording that it had read nothing. And records held facts
about named people with no way to remove them, which is not a safer store
but a store that cannot answer.

The strategy question that prompted the live run is settled in
RESEARCH-DECISIONS 19: no authoring playbook. The gap is composition, and an
authoring role would assert the scope and sequence two other roles were
dispatched to establish.

Corrects alpha.7's own entry for the erasure work, which described it as
shipped when the tag was cut before it landed.