Join the three evidence sources that were kept apart, and extract the useful
result: each source independently decides what belongs in code and what belongs
to the model, and every serious bug we have found broke one of those rules.
* Game mechanism -> arithmetic and rules belong in CODE
* Internal state -> anything directly readable or writable belongs in CODE
* TypeSafe -> judgements go to the MODEL, in the primitive matching the
answer's shape
* never blocked in boss fights -> game mechanism (arithmetic left to the model)
* card quality asked as a Noul -> primitives (a spectrum forced into yes/no)
* indices read from the wrong array -> internal state
The counter-example is kept too: the Score we tried for fight-level planning was
unusable, so the rule is "match the primitive to the shape, and verify" rather
than "use Score more".
Also records the ordered plan (measurement first, then re-run, then primitives,
then deck composition), the continual-learning design, and why it is blocked:
with 0 wins in 37 runs the reward has no gradient, so training would fit the bug
rather than the game.
DESIGN.md covers the three-layer architecture (facts in code, Jev for
tactics, gated escalation for macro). research/ documents the engine and
mod surface, the Jev classifier's measured behavior, the STS2MCP HTTP
interface, state shapes, failure modes, decision architecture, and a
run log of the first four sessions.
