Claim, Assessment, Decision, and Admission
- Status: promoted
- Kind candidate: procedure
- Promoted to: KFD-11
- Source: Agent-generated development ontology and later cross-lineage compression, grounded in Fact Admission, KFD-2 trust semantics, KFD-10 authority allocation, Mission/Go implementation, and Action Loop settlement
Candidate
Consequential settlement must preserve the difference between an exact Claim, a purpose-bound Assessment, an authorized Decision, and the independently recorded result of Admission.
Development origin
Agents first generated Claim and purpose-bound Assessment while designing trust execution, then composed Claim, Assessment, and Decision with Mission/Go during Kungfu development. Fact Admission, Project Cut review, and recoverable Action Loop settlement later exposed that a valid Decision still does not prove that the owning authority admitted a successor state.
Replaying those development lines exposed one portable boundary: evidence does not state a proposition, assessment does not grant authority, a decision does not apply itself, and an attempted effect does not prove successor state. The later KFD allocation discussion recognized and compressed the existing model; it did not supply the intermediate objects.
Promotion boundary
KFD-11 allocates the procedure as a numbered draft. Promotion does not activate the decision, prove universal minimality, require four physical records, or replace KFD-2 Claim and Assessment schemas.
The Foundation Revision and old-to-new number map are recorded in
docs/foundation-revision-2026-07-21-decision-admission.md.
The separate
decision-admission-settlement
case records the dated development lineage, KFD-4 recognition, and provisional
KFD-5 qualification.