verification-coveragelisted

# Verification Coverage An audit pass over a **drafted, not yet delivered** output. It does not make claims true. It makes unverified claims *visible*, which is the part that is currently invisible: in a finished document, a fact confirmed by running a command and a fact assumed from a code comment look exactly the same. ## Why this targets absence claims specifically Reviewing real sessions, the errors cluster hard. They are not bad reasoning, bad judgment, or bad domain knowledge. They are overwhelmingly **existence and absence claims made from having looked in one place**: | Claim asserted | What would have falsified it | |---|---| | "there are no hooks in the toolkit" | `ls <toolkit>/hooks` | | "that module doesn't exist in the repo" | `git ls-tree -r --name-only origin/main` | | "the installed copy is missing its script" | `readlink -f` | | "this field is handed to the downstream service" | grep the consumer | Each cost one command. None was run before asserting. This is a tractable target because **negative and universal claims are exactly the ones that are mechanically falsifiable**, and the ones most likely to be made from partial evidence — you assert a positive because you just saw the thing, but you assert an absence because you *didn't* see it, which is a much weaker warrant. ## Procedure ### 1. Extract the load-bearing claims A claim is load-bearing if the reader would **do something different** were it false. Recommendations, blockers, "X causes Y", cou