pm(dispatch-gates): clause-② prose in dispatch-gates.mjs (docblocks + every `--tier` printout) and core-rules.md:124 still describes a BUILD-tier mandate once the 强制条款② narrowing lands

[claude]

Filed by the os-dev executor of #16905 (branch claude/issue-16905-clause2-build-tier, session_01TezFG8ZMrNH6n5VTNpPpdH), unassigned, as an out-of-scope finding. Re-scoped in the #16905 patch round: the director seat widened PR #16915's file surface to references/contract-review.md, references/core-rules.md and references/lanes/cli.md, so every references/** site this card originally listed (including core-rules.md:124) is now rewritten in that PR. What remains here is scripts/pm/dispatch-gates.mjs prose only — scripts/pm/** stays fenced out of that PR (its H4: report the site, do not edit the script).

Blocked-by: #16905

What #16905's PR changes

强制条款② in .claude/skills/pm-dispatch/SKILL.md 〈派发〉 goes from "clause-② cards are BUILT and reviewed at CONTRACT_REVIEW_TIER" to "built at the default judgment tier, reviewed at CONTRACT_REVIEW_TIER", and the references/** copies of the mandate are rewritten in the same PR. If the maintainer rejects that PR this card is moot and should be closed as not planned.

Prose in scripts/pm/dispatch-gates.mjs that still describes clause ② as a BUILD-tier mandate (verified on origin/main at 0939ba008)

1. The CONTRACT_REVIEW_TIER docblock (around line 10160): "clause ②'s CONTRACT-REVIEW tier: the tier a card that changes contract accept/reject behaviour or widens the public surface must be dispatched at, and the tier the needs:contract-review re-review sub-round must itself be running at". After skills(pm-dispatch): 强制条款② mandates CONTRACT_REVIEW_TIER for IMPLEMENTATION of clause-② cards — drop it to TIER_DEFAULT and let the existing contract review be the gate (maintainer-authorised trial already running) #16905 only the second half holds.
2. The MANDATORY_TIER_GLOBS docblock (around line 10219): "clause ②, NOT encoded and deliberately not: a card that changes contract accept/reject behaviour or widens the public surface is also CONTRACT_REVIEW_TIER". The "not encoded" half is exactly right and is what skills(pm-dispatch): 强制条款② mandates CONTRACT_REVIEW_TIER for IMPLEMENTATION of clause-② cards — drop it to TIER_DEFAULT and let the existing contract review be the gate (maintainer-authorised trial already running) #16905's H4 relied on; the "is also CONTRACT_REVIEW_TIER" half becomes a review-tier statement, not a build-tier one.
3. tierLines (around lines 10393-10404) — printed on EVERY --tier run: "Clause ② is NOT reachable from paths: a card that changes contract accept/reject behaviour or widens the public surface is fable-mandatory too, judged from the card CONTENT", and the SUSPECT tail "(a card changing contract accept/reject behaviour or widening the public surface is CONTRACT_REVIEW_TIER)". A PM reading the instrument's output after skills(pm-dispatch): 强制条款② mandates CONTRACT_REVIEW_TIER for IMPLEMENTATION of clause-② cards — drop it to TIER_DEFAULT and let the existing contract review be the gate (maintainer-authorised trial already running) #16905 lands is told to dispatch clause-② cards at the ceiling, contradicting the skill. The trailing "whichever tier is dispatched, the PR's actual diff passes the clause-② enqueue gate before the card may enqueue" is already the post-skills(pm-dispatch): 强制条款② mandates CONTRACT_REVIEW_TIER for IMPLEMENTATION of clause-② cards — drop it to TIER_DEFAULT and let the existing contract review be the gate (maintainer-authorised trial already running) #16905 shape and needs no change.

Not a behaviour change

deriveTier derives a path mandate for the clause-① globs only; no code path encodes clause ② (grep clause in the script: all hits are prose or printed strings). So this is drift in what the instrument SAYS, not in what it decides — hence finding, no severity asserted. The fix is a prose edit in one script, verified by the script's own test suite (scripts/pm/*.test.* naming dispatch-gates).

---

Generated by Claude Code