@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
+---
+"@objectstack/lint": patch
+---
+
+`filter-preset-comparand` enters its `publicPicker` object-binding reader by SCHEMA POSITION rather than by key name, so a node that merely spells `publicPicker` no longer takes its whole filter subtree out of the field-typed arm (#16403).
+
+`bindAncestors` walked out through a filter's ancestors and matched `if (key === PUBLIC_PICKER_KEY)` on the property NAME. `walkAuthoredFilters`/`scanForFilters` recognise a filter by key at ANY depth on all eight scanned collections, so that reader was reachable from any node named `publicPicker`, anywhere. Its unresolvable exit is `undefined` — no bound object, so arm 2's field-type oracle answers `false` for every key and the subtree is judged by nobody.
+
+- **No live defect today**: `publicPicker` is declared exactly once as a schema key, on `FormFieldBaseSchema` (`packages/spec/src/ui/view.zod.ts`), and there the reader is correct. What changed is the failure mode the day a second schema declares the same name: it would have inherited this branch silently. Under-reporting is this rule's only permitted failure direction, so the hole would never have VIOLATED that invariant — it would have quietly spent it, where no test asking "was the invariant violated?" could see it.
+- **The guard is on the entry, not the exits**: the branch now requires the enclosing ancestor to be a form field (`field`, required on `FormFieldBaseSchema`) — the same read the branch already had to make one line later, so no new coupling between the lint package and the form-view schema. Two of the three exits `#16106`'s review pinned are verbatim untouched: the `picker.object` override (`if (override) return override;`) and both `undefined` legs of the `reference` resolution (`if (!formObject) return undefined;` and the `verdict?.kind === 'ok' ? … : undefined` tail). The third — `!formField` returning `undefined` — is DELETED, and deleting it IS the fix: outside the declared position that line was the silent exit this card is about, while inside the declared position it is unreachable by construction (the guard holding means `formField` is truthy). So the behaviour P3's QUIET pin holds did not move.
+- **The `#16106` B1 false refusal stays closed**, measured: a form field's picker filter over a referenced `select` column that shares its name with a parent `date` column still reports nothing, and the positive control — the same filter where the REFERENCED object declares the field as a `date` — still reports at `views[0].sections[0].fields[0].publicPicker.filter[0].value`.
@@ -621,6 +621,43 @@ describe('validatePresetComparands — arm 2, the FIELD-TYPED equality / members
     ])).map((f) => f.path)).toEqual(['views[0].sections[0].fields[0].publicPicker.filter[0].value']);
   });
 
+  // [#16403] The picker reader is entered by POSITION, not by key NAME.
+  // `scanForFilters` recognises a filter by key at ANY depth on all eight
+  // surfaces, so a reader keyed on the NAME `publicPicker` alone would be
+  // handed every future node that happens to spell it — and its unresolvable
+  // exit is `undefined`, which takes the whole filter subtree out of arm 2
+  // SILENTLY. That is not a violation of "under-report only"; it is that
+  // budget being spent where no invariant test can see it.
+  const outsidePosition = (picker: Record<string, unknown>) => ({
+    objects: [
+      { name: 'crm_opportunity', fields: { close_date: { type: 'date' } } },
+      { name: 'crm_contact', fields: { close_date: { type: 'date' } } },
+    ],
+    dashboards: [{
+      name: 'sales',
+      // A widget is NOT a form field: it declares no `field`, so nothing here
+      // is a `FormFieldPublicPickerSchema` block whatever the key is called.
+      widgets: [{ id: 'w', object: 'crm_opportunity', publicPicker: picker }],
+    }],
+  });
+
+  it('[#16403] a `publicPicker` key outside the declared form-field position is bound by the ordinary readers, not by the picker reader', () => {
+    // Before the position guard this returned [] — the picker reader claimed
+    // the node on its key, found no enclosing `field`, and left through the
+    // `undefined` exit.
+    expect(validatePresetComparands(outsidePosition({ filter: { close_date: 'last_30_days' } }))
+      .map((f) => f.path)).toEqual(['dashboards[0].widgets[0].publicPicker.filter.close_date']);
+    // An `object` on the node still names the bound object — the picker
+    // reader's override and the ordinary `r.object` reader agree, so this half
+    // is unchanged by the guard.
+    expect(validatePresetComparands(outsidePosition({ object: 'crm_contact', filter: { close_date: 'last_30_days' } }))
+      .map((f) => f.path)).toEqual(['dashboards[0].widgets[0].publicPicker.filter.close_date']);
+    // And the arm still says nothing where the bound object makes it silent —
+    // the guard restores ordinary binding, it does not force a finding.
+    expect(validatePresetComparands(outsidePosition({ object: 'no_such_object', filter: { close_date: 'last_30_days' } })))
+      .toEqual([]);
+  });
+
   it('keeps arm 1 field-agnostic: an ordering preset still fires with NO objects in the stack, and on a text column', () => {
     const findings = validatePresetComparands({
       objects: crmObjects,
 
@@ -120,7 +120,11 @@ import { indexObjectGraph, recordsOf, resolveFieldPath, type ObjectGraph } from
  *   picker (`FormFieldPublicPickerSchema`) queries the REFERENCED object, so
  *   its `filter` must never fall through to the parent form object (#16106
  *   review finding B1: that fall-through was a false refusal wherever the two
- *   objects share a field name with differing types);
+ *   objects share a field name with differing types). That reader claims the
+ *   position by POSITION, not by key name: only where the enclosing record is
+ *   a form field (`field`, required on `FormFieldBaseSchema`). A node that
+ *   merely spells the same key somewhere else is bound by the ordinary
+ *   readers below instead of inheriting this one's unjudged exit (#16403);
  * - and, under `objects`, the object itself — its list views, tabs and
  *   `relatedListFilter` (the filter runs over the CHILD rows, i.e. the object
  *   that owns the field).
@@ -420,11 +424,26 @@ function bindAncestors(
     // parent and the referenced object share a field name with differing
     // types (a `date` on the parent, a `select` whose option value is a
     // preset name on the referenced object).
-    if (key === PUBLIC_PICKER_KEY) {
+    //
+    // [#16403] The branch is entered by POSITION, never by key NAME alone.
+    // `publicPicker` is declared in exactly ONE place — `FormFieldBaseSchema`
+    // (`ui/view.zod.ts`), where the enclosing record is a form field and its
+    // `field` is REQUIRED — so the enclosing `field` identifies the position,
+    // and it is the same read the branch already has to make. Matching on the
+    // key alone would hand this reader every future node that happens to spell
+    // `publicPicker`, at any depth on any of the eight surfaces, because
+    // `scanForFilters` recognises a filter by key rather than by declared
+    // carrier; such a node would leave through this reader's `undefined` exit
+    // and take its whole filter subtree out of arm 2 SILENTLY. Under-reporting
+    // is the only failure direction this arm may have, so that hole could
+    // never VIOLATE the invariant — it would quietly spend it, where no test
+    // asking "was the invariant violated?" can see it. Outside the declared
+    // position the node falls through to the ordinary nearest-ancestor readers
+    // below, exactly like every other key this walk does not recognise.
+    const formField = key === PUBLIC_PICKER_KEY ? strName(chain[i - 1]?.node.field) : undefined;
+    if (formField) {
       const override = literalObjectName(r.object);
       if (override) return override;
-      const formField = strName(chain[i - 1]?.node.field);
-      if (!formField) return undefined;
       const formObject = bindAncestors(collection, chain, i - 2, datasets, graph);
       if (!formObject) return undefined;
       const verdict = resolveFieldPath(graph, formObject, formField);