Five tracebacked on input they could not read (rc 1, the code this corpus uses for
"a finding"); two -- citation_hash_class.py, citation_resolve_check.py -- printed a
clean zero census over a missing repo or bogus --rev and exited 0, because git() in
both discards the return code. Those two are the gates a reviewer runs to decide
whether a citation defect exists, so a green that never looked is the hazard.
queue_index.py / queue_claim_check.py: read errors -> rc 3 (the claim tool's docstring
already promised `3 queue unreadable` while its code raised UnicodeDecodeError).
citation_hash_class.py / citation_resolve_check.py: precondition(repo, rev) -> rc 2,
matching doc_census_check.py and landing_check.py. check_lint.py / census_row_delta.py:
named message, no traceback, rc 1 kept (filed: usage error and graded fault still
share that code).
175 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-). Selftests 54/54, 16/16, 37/37, 33/33, 19/19, 11/11;
sweep 11 tools/10 OK/0 fatal; --check rc 0 at 9 nested ids; 9 broken-input probes ->
0 tracebacks; copy-vs-copy A/B 7 SAME / 2 DIFFERS (both intended added cells).
run.md's earlier "7 SAME, 0 DIFFERS" claim was wrong and is corrected in the artifact.
timmy
016d26eae7