bearing-scenarioslisted

# GitNexus Scenario Playbooks <!-- BEGIN GENERATED: graph-uncertainty — bearing regenerates this block; edits here are replaced on update --> ## The graph can be wrong A zero is not absence; a near-0.5 `r.confidence` edge is a lead, not proof (~92% of `USES`); a count can be a floor — `impact` says which in `epistemic`. Before a conclusion that matters, confirm with a scoped `Grep` (allowed here, not a gate violation) and say which check you ran. <!-- END GENERATED: graph-uncertainty --> Match your task to a playbook. Always start with READ `gitnexus://repo/__GITNEXUS_REPO__/context`. Cross-module flows / architecture questions → also read **`bearing-imaging`** skill. ## 1. Pre-edit (any symbol change) ``` - [ ] READ context resource — index fresh? - [ ] gitnexus_impact({target, direction: "upstream", repo: "__GITNEXUS_REPO__"}) - [ ] Report d=1 (WILL BREAK), affected processes, risk level to user - [ ] If HIGH/CRITICAL → warn before editing; suggest narrower change or tests - [ ] Optional: widen with relationTypes: ["CALLS","IMPORTS","ACCESSES"] for field/member edits - [ ] Make edit - [ ] Run tests for affected processes ``` ## 2. Pre-commit ``` - [ ] gitnexus_detect_changes({ scope: "staged", repo: "__GITNEXUS_REPO__" }) - [ ] Review changed_symbols + affected_processes - [ ] Unexpected cross-module hits? → split commit or narrow scope - [ ] Risk CRITICAL/HIGH → run broader test suite before commit - [ ] Commit (pre-commit hook refreshes index with PDG via `bearin