postmortem

# Postmortem Answer an explicit retrospective causal question about a completed or stopped goal, session or change using its actual intent, outcome and judgment evidence. For an explicitly requested interim analysis, pin the cutoff and pending checks; its conclusions describe that interval and do not establish a final outcome. ## Prompt ```text Postmortem this stopped change using its accepted intent, native session, check results and reviewer messages. Which correction cycles were avoidable, and which checks were necessary? No verdict file was saved. Answer inline. ``` ## Critical Constraints - Postmortem is retrospective causal analysis, not the general learning umbrella or a code-acceptance gate: acceptance proof and causal inference are different judgments. A request for code and a postmortem does not make the postmortem an input to code judgment. Wait for a known outcome unless interim analysis was requested; keep the caller's overall request incomplete until its requested analysis exists. - Existing verdicts and native judgments remain unchanged. It does not re-run acceptance validation or fabricate missing proof to enable a retrospective. An existing `verdict.v2` is optional evidence; its absence does not exclude a stopped or unvalidated subject. - Because the caller owns subsequent action, do not rewrite proof, operate tracker state, change the remaining plan, reopen work or promote a rule. - Empty or inconclusive analysis is valid; recommend no cha...