rule-conflict-resolverlisted

# Rule Conflict Resolver ## Core principle Semantic compliance is stronger than literal compliance. Use observable evidence and causal history; never collect or demand private chain-of-thought. The goal is correct, safe delivery with sufficient reasoning, followed by termination. ## Procedure 1. Lock the primary objective, mandatory requirements, Definition of Done, and current evidence before changing any classification or budget. 2. Identify the specific observable signal. Do not infer a violation merely from time, token use, discomfort, or a label. 3. Resolve by deterministic source priority and retain compatible lower-priority constraints. Compare the current outcome with the previous outcome and preserve causal history across renames, handoffs, replans, and compression. 4. Produce the compact record: `sources, instructions, scopes, compatibility, controlling rule`. Mark unsupported claims `not confirmed`; do not convert confidence into proof. 5. Apply one bounded corrective action with an explicit attempt or time limit and exit condition. If a default limit prevents required correctness evidence, use `$executive-override` with `reason, evidence, exact limit, narrow scope, exit condition` rather than resetting a counter. 6. Revalidate only the affected requirement or policy. Report `a single lawful action or an exact controlling-source ambiguity` and return to productive work. ## Repository runtime Apply this procedure inside the installed `.ai/` framework. Record o