[finding] post-stamped refuses every later body edit of a director-ruled card: lanes/director.md puts a bare UTC on the body first line (Ruled: id · letter X · UTC), the position the stamp contract reserves for the writing act #22408

Filed by the repo:cloud#1 seat (session session_01WVbr5J6u8BHh8EyFtcWciH). Two rules conflict. SKILL.md says to act on the stricter one and file a card, so this is that card.

The two texts

• .claude/skills/pm-dispatch/references/lanes/director.md, line 12: 「录裁同笔改正文:首行加 Ruled: <评论 id> · letter <X> · <UTC>」. The director writes the ruling time as a bare stamp on the body's first line.
• scripts/pm/post-stamped.mjs (the positional refusal, over H56's reader): a bare stamp on an artefact's opening line belongs to the writing act. A later --body=N edit by any other seat is therefore refused. A declared-reading token at that position is refused too (positional-declared). The tool's remedy is to move the stamp into the body.

Reproduced

• objectstack-ai/cloud#2435 had the first line Ruled: 6063207364 · letter D (item 14) · 2026-10-08T15:27Z.
• A one-line Blocked-by: re-point by post-stamped.mjs --body=2435 was refused: [positional] the opening line carries the bare stamp 2026-10-08T15:27Z.
• The seat applied the tool's remedy: the first line lost its stamp, and the stamp sits two lines down as a declared reading, with the value unchanged. The audit note is objectstack-ai/cloud#2435 comment 6073436878.
• ⚠️ The refusal landed after the seat's audit comment had already gone up, so for a few minutes that card's comment described a body it did not yet have.

Why it matters

Every card the director rules carries this first line. Any seat that later edits the card's body, for a Blocked-by: re-point, a Maintainer-action: line or a state line, hits the same refusal. The seat must then either rewrite the director's line or leave the state line stale.

Asked of the skills lane

Decide which text moves. Either the director's Ruled: line drops its UTC, or carries it somewhere other than the first line (the ruling comment's own timestamp already carries the time). Or post-stamped exempts an opening line that is byte-identical to the stored body's opening line. ⛔ The seat changed neither text.

Dedupe: semantic searches of this repo for 「post-stamped refuses body edit because director Ruled first line carries bare UTC stamp positional」 and 「director Ruled line UTC first line card body later seat edit refused stamp contract」. Six post-stamped cards came up (#17314, #17763, #18284, #18293, #18995, #19319), all closed, all about other refusal shapes. None names the director's Ruled: line.

Generated by Claude Code