A.15:1 - Problem frame

When the alignment is already clear and ongoing Work still needs one next action chosen from current facts within an applicable domain Method, use A.15.7. It keeps the domain Method, steering Method, deciding System, intended performer, and any later WorkPlan or performed-action claim separate.

Complex work requires several independent distinctions: what a System is; which local system-role kind classifies it; which assignment occurrence obtains and which declared U.SystemRoleAssignment species it instantiates; how Work is done through U.Method; whether an episteme is a U.MethodDescription; which holder capability is relied on; what U.WorkPlan states; which dated Work happened; and which separate assertions, records, results, and evidence concern that Work.

A.15 brings these already defined values together without creating a new process object or redefining their ontologies:

• A.2 and C.3 identify a local system-role kind and any classification judgment. Classification neither creates an assignment nor proves Work.
• A.2.1 identifies an assignment occurrence and its declared species under U.SystemRoleAssignment. The species declares HolderSystemSlot, a declaration-local AssignedSystemRoleKindSlot with its local system-role-kind domain, its predicate and applicability, any additional participants, and its occurrence-identity rule. The occurrence supplies the actual participants and extent. Taxonomy, scheme, signature, assertion, evidence, and interval may interpret or describe the claim; they are not generic participants.
• A.13, A.15.1, and F.6 govern ordered but distinct results. A.13 supplies the exact System, local agential kind and criterion, classification, obtaining assignment, scope, working situation, window, and adequate core evidence; its characteristic profile is conditional. A.15.1 then independently admits dated Work. Only after admission, and only when the receiving use expressly consumes precise assignment-bound attribution, does F.6 relate that Work to the same assignment through performedUnderAssignment. Its holder projection is used only to compare holder equality with the actual performer already recovered through A.13; F.6 identifies neither assignment nor performer. Missing F.6 attribution does not revoke Work membership.
• A.3.1 and A.3.2 keep U.Method distinct from U.MethodDescription.
• A.15.1 and A.15.2 keep actual dated Work distinct from intended WorkPlan and from every record about either.
• A.2.2, A.10, and neighboring direct patterns keep capability-fit claims, evidence use, source currentness, publication, responsibility, authority, access, results, and assurance outside assignment and Work identity.

Use E.10, E.10.ARCH, and E.10.ROLE when source wording such as process, workflow, action, activity, schedule, or role has not yet been resolved. The wording chooses no FPF object by itself. Recover the exact Method, MethodDescription, WorkPlan, Work, Transformation, Dynamics, evidence, gate, source, publication use, participation relation, declaration slot, or ordinary non-technical use that the claim actually needs.