The reviewer confirmed the T1-T4 ordering holds -- it re-derived every
intermediate state and checked that no construction path can produce
est_tokens=0 with tpm>0 before T4 -- but found four gaps.
Two existing tests go red and the plan never said so: test_types.py:94
asserts the very constraint T4 deletes, and test_embedding.py:105 is a
transport-level case for the fallback T3 rewrites, easy to miss while
looking only at test_openai_compat.py.
The T4 acceptance line claimed all three settlement sides use the
derived value, but the cancel branch never assigns actual and leaves it
at the retry.py:329 initial zero -- an implementer would have "fixed"
a branch the design freezes. Corrected here and in the design section
5 sentence it came from.
USAGE_SOURCES would have landed with no consumer, so T1 now carries the
two value-domain assertions the design asks for, including the one that
pins the no-runtime-validation ruling.
iomgaa
61231f7f6e