# When an AI company has to run without Human stitching, implicit boundaries become explicit

# AI Companyを自走させると、人間の暗黙の境界が露出する

- episodeId: canonical-objective-repair-replay-v0
- canonicalRevision: 1
- status: OPEN
- bounded range: 2026-09-13–open
- semantic owner: iris; representation owner: mirage
- canonical admission: iris:v3:research-chronicle:canonical-objective-repair-replay-v1:20260914
- canonical payload hash: 374d6bef59892c95f414fc247a16c719
- [Human]: /development/notes/canonical-objective-repair-replay-v0/
- [Structured JSON]: /development/notes/canonical-objective-repair-replay-v0.json

## Question / 問い

What company boundaries became visible when one Miyazaki Mail Objective had to close into Reality without Human stitching, and why did that reveal the need for Objective Lineage rather than a list of repairs?

一つのMiyazaki Mail ObjectiveをHumanが手でつなぎ直さずRealityまで閉じようとしたとき、何が実際の会社境界として露出したか。そして、なぜrepairの列ではなくObjective Lineageが必要になったか。

## Canonical text

このepisodeは、Miyazaki Mailを一通送ること自体を成功談として記録するものではない。2026-09-13に、一つの外部ObjectiveをHumanが手でつなぎ直さずにRealityまで閉じようとした結果、普段は人間が頭の中で曖昧につないでいる複数の境界が、連続したblocking conditionとして露出した記録である。freeze時点でMiyazakiのdurable `outbound_submitted` はまだ観測されていない。したがって、この記録のstatusはOPENであり、parent Objectiveの成功を主張しない。

出発点は `objective-runtime:AUTHORITY_BINDING_MISSING:2a0f...` だった。Machine222はinvocation-bound Nagi implementation sourceとMachine-owned current Context protocol authorityを分離したが、live retryはmodule ownershipの次のblockerを露出した。Machine223は通常ownershipを弱めず、validated invocation-bound Nagi Contextにだけ限定したownership projectionを追加した。direct invocationとresident Nagi Agentの差、launcher environment、subprocess adapter、owner rendezvous cache/list lower boundaryが順に露出し、repair receiptそのものはparent Objectiveの成功ではなく次の境界を観測する条件だった。

Nagiはenriched AUTHORITY_BINDING_MISSING requestをexact evidenceに対してconsumeし、既存Miyazaki one-shot GOをexact reviewed bytesへmechanically bindしてよいというtyped semantic COMPLETEを出した。しかしcurrent next stepはMachineが最小のcanonical `bindDispatchAuthority` を実装して同じparent Objectiveをreplayすることである。fresh no-resend、Direct Sales/Product gate、OwnedMail preflight、transportを通り、exactly one SENDとdurable `outbound_submitted` が観測されて初めてexternal Realityまで閉じたと言える。

Humanの頭の中ではMachine222、223、225、226、228、Nagi adapter repair、authority bindingはすべて一つのObjectiveの途中だった。しかしSystem側では明示的なLineageがなければ別々のChange、receipt、requestの列に見える。だから `repair succeeded`、`commit exists`、`integrated`、`parent Objective DONE` は別状態として持たなければならない。最低限、`objectiveRef / blockedTransition / interventionRef / result / resumeAt` を一本の因果線として保持し、repairが閉じたらparent Objectiveへ戻れることが必要である。

このepisodeはまだ成功談ではない。次のverificationは最小binder repair後のreplay、durable `outbound_submitted` の観測、2社目のFrozen Mail Path repeatである。

## Observed

- Objective Runtime emitted AUTHORITY_BINDING_MISSING for the exact reviewed bytes; Machine222/223 separated Context protocol and bounded ownership projection.
- Direct Machine ports worked while the resident adapter diverged; launcher projection, child identity, subprocess diagnosis, and owner-rendezvous cache/list recovery narrowed the boundary.
- Exact Nagi semantic authority is COMPLETE, but `nagi:v9:miyazaki-positive-authority-binding-machine-binder-request:v0:20260913` remains critical pending.
- As of 2026-09-14, durable Miyazaki `outbound_submitted` has not been observed.

### Observations

The observed record is preserved above and in the JSON projection.

## Prior state

Human memory held the repairs as one parent Objective.

## Failure or pressure

Each replay exposed the next authority, Context, ownership, transport, or terminality boundary.

## Inferred

- This is a parent Objective revealing the next boundary at each replay, not a list of unrelated repairs.
- Repair success and parent Objective success are distinct; Objective Lineage compresses Human reconnection cost.

### Hypotheses

Objective Lineage is the inference under test, not a claim of completed autonomy.

## Unknown

- Whether the canonical dispatch binder/replay reaches exactly one SEND.
- Whether a second company can repeat with no substrate change or only the real minimum repair.
- How much of this Human resume decision can become automated Objective Lineage.

### Unknowns

Durable external settlement and repeatability remain unproven.

## Causal chain

1. BLOCKED — semantic authority binding — objective-runtime:AUTHORITY_BINDING_MISSING:2a0f8618a1418d0bcd6b3174e8fb593d56237237bf3425b8e576fd1bcda3ecc2
2. REPAIR — Context protocol authority separation.
3. REPLAY_EXPOSED_NEXT_BLOCKER — module ownership compatibility.
4. REPAIR — bounded invocation-source ownership projection.
5. REPLAY_EXPOSED_NEXT_BLOCKER — resident versus direct Machine-port availability.
6. REPAIR_AND_DISCRIMINATE — launcher environment, child spawn, Nagi adapter.
7. REPAIR — owner rendezvous cache/list lower boundary.
8. SEMANTIC_COMPLETE — exact authority binding.
9. CURRENT_NEXT — canonical dispatch binder then replay.
10. NOT_YET_OBSERVED — external Reality.

## What changed

- Context and invocation-bound source authority were separated; bounded ownership and runtime/subprocess observability improved.
- Typed Nagi semantic authority binding for the exact Miyazaki review evidence is complete.

## Interventions

The bounded Context, ownership, adapter, and rendezvous repairs enabled the next replay.

## Outcomes

The parent Objective remains OPEN; canonical binder/replay is next.

## Why it matters

Objective Lineage keeps repair completion distinct from parent Objective completion.

## What did not change

- Nagi has no direct Machine credentials or second transport; no SEND authority was minted during repair.
- The Miyazaki Objective is not DONE, and second-company repeatability is not proven.

## Why it mattered

The Company needs explicit state for the linkage Humans previously held in memory. Commit, repair receipt, integration, semantic COMPLETE, and parent Objective DONE remain distinct workflow states.

## Counter-evidence

The repairs have real commits, tests, and receipts, but receipts do not prove external success. Not every contemporaneous Nagi improvement belonged to the Miyazaki P0 critical path.

## Next verification

1. Close the minimal canonical `bindDispatchAuthority` repair and replay the same Objective.
2. Permit only exactly one SEND through no-resend, Direct Sales/Product, and OwnedMail gates.
3. Observe durable `outbound_submitted`, then compare a second Frozen Mail Path run.

## Evidence refs

- objective-runtime:AUTHORITY_BINDING_MISSING:2a0f8618a1418d0bcd6b3174e8fb593d56237237bf3425b8e576fd1bcda3ecc2
- machine:v18:nagi-invocation-context-control-plane-protocol-receipt:v0:20260913
- nagi:v9:nagi-invocation-context-module-ownership-gap-request:v0:20260913
- machine:v18:nagi-invocation-context-module-ownership-projection-receipt:v0:20260913
- machine:v18:nagi-agent-resident-machine-port-boundary-verified-receipt:v0:20260913
- machine:v18:nagi-resident-owner-rendezvous-restored-receipt:v0:20260913
- nagi:v9:miyazaki-exact-authority-binding-complete:v0:20260913
- nagi:v9:miyazaki-positive-authority-binding-machine-binder-request:v0:20260913

## Related episodes

- /development/notes/integration-becomes-frontier-v0/
- /development/notes/current-frontier-safe-change-and-public-learning-v0/