| CC-A6F-1 Exact object or claim. | Every function-like phrase that carries an FPF claim names its subject pattern and at least one exact entity or value, claim or claim content, or claim-bearing episteme. When a direct relation is current, the admitted kind and semantic predicate are distinguished from the C.2.1 relational-assertion episteme and from any separately individuated obtaining occurrence; each current branch names its actual participants, and neither a predicate nor an assertion supplies occurrence identity. A reusable declaration appears only when typed reuse is current; another selected assertion, specification, or view appears only when that claim-bearing episteme is current; representation correspondence appears only when representation is current. | Complete the object-or-claim distinction in the wording or demote the phrase to Plain prose; use FunctionUseRepair only when its inspectable detail is needed. |
CC-A6F-2 No U.Function. | The use does not mint or rely on U.Function as a new root kind. | Assign the use to a functional view, capability, method, Work, exact system-role kind or assignment, direct participation, functioning, or responsibility predicate, mathematical lens, quality or characteristic, module allocation, or another subject pattern. |
| CC-A6F-3 Functional architecture expansion. | Functional architecture expands to an ArchitectureOf@Context claim record with one selected functional U.Structure. When the view changes action, use the ArchitectureStructuralView episteme whose EntityOfConcern is that structure and a FunctionalStructureViewUse that cites exact FunctionalElementClaim epistemes and only separately established values. No label or @Context suffix creates a functional-element individual or fills a claim. | Add the exact claim record, selected structure, view episteme, and any needed claim references; otherwise keep the phrase as ordinary recognition wording. |
| CC-A6F-4 Function and capability split. | Capability claims and function or effect claims remain distinct. | State the qualified holder-ability claim under A.2.2, using the subject pattern only as a locator, and keep the required behavior or effect claim with its requirement, functional view, method, or other exact claim-bearing source. |
| CC-A6F-4A Required-effect and actual-change split. | A required or desired behavior/effect remains claim content; every U.Transformation reference has an independent A.3.4 occurrence basis. | If only requirement, architecture, method, desired-effect, diagram, or assertion material is available, stop before U.Transformation. If an actual change is current, identify its changed referent, boundary, conditions, actual facts, and continuity or reidentification rule separately. |
| CC-A6F-5 Function, work, and method-description split. | Method, U.MethodDescription membership, work occurrence, and work result claims do not hide inside function wording; source form does not establish membership. | For a reusable way-of-doing claim, recover the exact U.Method under A.3.1. For U.MethodDescription, first identify the C.2.1 episteme, its exact admitted U.Method as EntityOfConcern, and at least one substantive way-of-doing claim under A.3.2. Otherwise use the direct plan, work, result, representation, publication, or other pattern. |
| CC-A6F-6 Function and neighboring relations split. | Local system-role kind, System-classification judgment, assignment species, assignment occurrence, participation, actual functioning, responsibility, Work, and capability remain separate. VP.AllocationResponsibility is only a recognition cue. | Name each current fact independently. An assignment needs both its directly declared species and obtaining occurrence under A.2.1; actual Work points to its basis: A.13 first, independent A.15.1 Work admission second, and F.6 afterward only for precise assignment-bound attribution. Name an admitted domain predicate and actual participants for participation, functioning, or responsibility, or return the exact A.6.RCD missing governor. |
| CC-A6F-7 Mathematical function boundary. | Mathematical function or relation wording used to justify reasoning names C.29 lens fields and stop condition. | Add C.29 lens-use admissibility value, preserved and lost structure, and stop condition, or mark mathematical use as ordinary. |
| CC-A6F-8 Quality and functionality boundary. | Quality, fitness, characteristic, score, or “functionality” wording recovers bearer and subject pattern. | Assign the claim to C.25, C.16, C.16.Q, A.17, A.18, or the characteristic named by value or measurement subject pattern according to the asserted quality, characteristic, measurement, or comparison claim. |
| CC-A6F-9 Module-interface boundary. | Functional relation, module allocation, interface, signature, port, API, protocol, flow, and mechanism wording remain separated. | Add A.6.RSIR interface-cue recovery, FunctionFlowModuleAlignmentNote, the A.6.M module-interface boundary, the A.6.0 and A.6.5 signature discipline, declared correspondence, declared allocation, or A.6.M module-relation repair. |
| CC-A6F-10 Useful action. | The repair leaves a remaining admissible use: apply the subject pattern to the exact object or claim; open a functional view; add an alignment note; add the admitted direct-relation predicate, relational assertion, separately individuated obtaining occurrence, reusable declaration, selected claim-bearing episteme, or representation correspondence only for a named use; assign the claim to C.29, C.30, C.30.ASV, A.15, C.25, C.16, A.10, B.3, A.20, A.21, or C.11; or stop. | Restore that use, or classify the phrase as reduced-use cue, quote-only wording, blocked transfer, or incomplete rewrite. |