A.6.A:6 - Bias-Annotation

• Gov bias: this pattern may tempt authors to smuggle decisions into invitation language. Mitigation: explicit A.6.B claim classification and obligation barrier.
• Arch bias: an interpretation menu can be mistaken for one ontology of all action-oriented claims. Mitigation: recover each subject and its rule; make the menu and recovery record optional.
• Ontology and episteme bias: this pattern insists on separating invitation from evaluation, capability, commitment, and work. Mitigation: first separate a direct contrast from a cross-context semantic-correspondence claim; test F.9 only for the latter, and keep any bounded-use claim and optional F.9.1 reading note separate.
• Prag bias: it favors enactor, site, and action explicitness, which raises authoring cost. Mitigation: stop at a sufficient sentence; recover only details that change the receiving result.
• Did bias: repeated rewrites make the pattern teachable, but may over-formalize early cues. Mitigation: preserve an early cue or open question without requiring a sense token, record or closed answer.