Scripture Response Reliability Railspike Debug Log

2026-10-15T20:48:59+00:00 — Step 1

Necessary/useful instructions

• Source: docs/railspike/docs/workflow/step1_solution_assessment.md, options and recommendation. Separating a stronger writer, quotation verification, and editorial revision avoids assuming that faster generation or another prompt edit supplies all three capabilities. Retain the explicit tradeoff comparison.

• Source: docs/railspike/RAILSPIKE.md, Plan review and organization. A separate follow-up assessment preserves the approved predecessor plans and failed evaluation, making the newly proposed source-verification scope reviewable before implementation. Retain the boundary.

Redundant/unnecessary instructions

• Source: docs/railspike/RAILSPIKE.md, phase instruction reprint. A full reprint adds substantial text before a short assessment without changing the artifact. Prefer a concise applicable-constraints statement and link; this is advisory and does not amend the workflow.

Uncertain assessments

• Source: docs/railspike/docs/workflow/step1_solution_assessment.md, one-page limit. The document is concise, but printed page count depends on rendering. A word budget would make this constraint objectively checkable.

2026-10-16T19:56:38+00:00 — Step 2

Necessary/useful instructions

• Source: docs/railspike/docs/workflow/step2_feature_description.md, Completion boundary and Risks. These requirements made source-unavailability recovery and validation before planning explicit. Retain both.

• Source: docs/railspike/RAILSPIKE.md, Commit discipline. Keeping this draft uncommitted preserves review before implementation. Retain the boundary.

Redundant/unnecessary instructions

• No supported findings.

Uncertain assessments

• Source: docs/railspike/docs/workflow/step2_feature_description.md, one-page limit versus required structure. Source handling and inherited release gates require more space than a typical rendered page; a word budget or prioritized sections would clarify the intended limit.

2026-10-16T20:00:09+00:00 — Step 3

Necessary/useful instructions

• Source: docs/railspike/docs/workflow/step3_development_plan_do.md, Key Risks and dependency requirements. Source import fidelity and the existing raw-provider review export are explicit blockers before live trials; retain early validation and mitigation requirements.

• Source: docs/railspike/docs/workflow/step3_development_plan_after.md, approval and commit boundary. This handoff leaves all plans uncommitted and makes no application changes or paid calls; retain the boundary.

Redundant/unnecessary instructions

• No supported findings.

Uncertain assessments

• Source: docs/railspike/docs/workflow/step3_development_plan_after.md, one-page limit. The seven-stage plan is 1,466 whitespace-delimited words and exceeds a typical page. Required per-stage fields and the approved requirement to freeze cases, candidate identities, source behavior, release gates, and spend rules account for the length. A short overview plus a specifically permitted protocol appendix would reconcile the competing requirements; no claim of page-limit compliance is made.

Inapplicable instructions

• Source: docs/railspike/docs/workflow/step3_development_plan_do.md, planned database/function signatures when relevant. No database changes or signature decisions are needed for this behavioral plan; retain conditional applicability rather than inventing signatures.

2026-10-16T20:37:34+00:00 — Step 4 release-gate handoff (incomplete feature)

Necessary/useful instructions

• Source: docs/railspike/docs/workflow/step4_implementation_do.md, Stage Boundary Protocol. Planning and completed stages each have isolated commits and summary evidence, preserving a reproducible candidate at 0976fddb before paid trials. Retain stage-scoped commits and verification.

• Source: docs/railspike/RAILSPIKE.md, releasable vertical slice and scope control. Normal request, publication, Expand and explicit recovery were exercised before paid selection; failed initial gates block dependent expansion trials and promotion. Retain the distinction between verified components and a successful releasable feature.

Redundant/unnecessary instructions

• No supported findings.

Uncertain assessments

• Source: docs/railspike/docs/workflow/step4_implementation_after.md, all-stages/minimum-commit checklist. An approved stop-on-failed-gates contract can legitimately prevent the last stage. Clarify that the correct handoff records incomplete delivery and the blocked dependent stage, rather than creating a nominal completion commit or claiming the feature finished. This workflow stops after Stage 6; Stage 7 was not executed.