Proof path FAQ
This FAQ is for readers who already know they need a proof path and want bounded answers about fields, tiers, coverage, limitations, gaps, review packets, and public-safe material.
Public claim level: concept. No public conclusion without evidence. The FAQ explains how to read deterministic static evidence trails; it does not create a new proof source or approval flow.
Placement
FAQ
A proof path is a public-safe route or reference trail from a public claim to supporting static evidence, rule ID or rule family, evidence tier, coverage label, limitation, and source context.
Stop if the trail cannot name the fields that carry the evidence.
Read in this order: claim, public claim level, proof path, rule ID or rule family, evidence tier, coverage label, commit or public-safe source context, extractor version or schema family, limitation, non-claim, and next owner.
If a required field is missing or private-only, stop, downgrade, hold, or route the question to the next owner.
Tier1Semantic is compiler-resolved symbol evidence, Tier2Structural is known framework or project structure evidence, Tier3SyntaxOrTextual is syntax-only or text evidence, and Tier4Unknown is an analysis gap.
A higher tier does not mean complete coverage. A lower tier can still be useful when the uncertainty stays visible.
Coverage labels are visibility and confidence boundaries. They can be full, partial, reduced, unknown, unavailable, future-only, or gap-labeled states.
Preserve reduced or unknown labels instead of normalizing them upward.
A limitation is part of the claim boundary, not a footer. It must travel with any repeated claim because it says what the static evidence can and cannot support.
Do not repeat the claim after dropping the limitation, non-claim, or owner follow-up.
A public claim level tells the reader how strong the public surface is allowed to be. This FAQ is concept-level guidance even when it links to demo-backed pages.
Do not upgrade concept wording into demo or main wording unless a recorded public-safe evidence surface supports that stronger claim.
Stop, downgrade, label the gap, keep the claim internal, or hand off to the next owner. Missing evidence is not filled by confidence, seniority, repetition, or pressure.
The public answer is the gap or owner follow-up until the evidence-bearing field exists.
A review packet can gather proof paths, limitations, review notes, public claim levels, and owner follow-ups so a human can inspect what is known, partial, missing, or private-only.
The packet carries evidence and questions; it does not convert missing evidence into a stronger answer.
Human and automated readers must preserve the proof path, rule ID or rule family, evidence tier, coverage label, limitation, non-claim, and public claim level.
Do not repeat or summarize a claim after dropping those fields.
Static Evidence Non-Claims
Public-Safe Material
Public proof paths link only to public-safe summaries, checked-in docs, public routes, or sanctioned demo artifacts. Raw facts, raw SQLite, analyzer logs, raw source snippets, raw SQL, config values, secrets, local paths, raw remotes, generated scan directories, private sample names, raw command output, hidden validation details, and credential-like values are not public proof material.
Safe Answer Patterns
example.rule.family with reduced coverage; the limitation still applies. This is an illustrative pattern, not a real TraceMap finding.inspect, follow, compare, check, record, downgrade, hold, label the gap, hand off, and escalate.Unsafe Answer Patterns
Continue