A.6:12a - Quantum-like boundary-claim classification note

Use A.6 first for ordinary boundary, interface, API, protocol, contract, connector, publication-face, and observability-evidence wording. Quantum-like boundary prose is supported only after the boundary text still needs a probe, order, frame, export, or state-reading distinction that ordinary boundary patterns would otherwise erase.

Action classification:

Identify the boundary sentence and name the boundary object in ordinary A.6 terms.
Name the actual participants and any channel or carrier required by the boundary relation or operation separately.
Apply the applicable ordinary FPF patterns to the ordinary boundary content: A.6, A.6.B, F.9, A.15, C.16, or C.25.
If the boundary text uses a coarsened representation to claim preserved action, intervention, manipulation, explanation, or preserved structure across representation scales, state the causal-abstraction or approximate-causal-abstraction mapping before retaining QL wording.
Ask whether the boundary act is being used as a passive read or unjustified lossless-transfer reading while actually changing the represented state, export validity, or viability decision.
If yes, apply C.26.1 only to that remaining residual question; keep the ordinary boundary pattern active.
If no, keep the text in the ordinary boundary, bridge, work, measurement, or quality pattern and remove QL wording.

Minimum boundary discipline before a quantum-like boundary reading:

Field	What the author names
Boundary	Which interface, protocol, context crossing, publication face, evidence boundary, or exact service/access relation is being described; when service/access wording hides the subject or relation, recover it through A.6.P:4.11a before using this table
Endpoints	Name the actual participants required by the boundary relation or operation, preserving their direct kinds. Use A.6.5 only when reusable participant typing is needed; its declaration slots are not actual participants. If bare role remains ambiguous, use E.10.ROLE before assigning it a participant meaning.
Channel or interaction	Name the actual interaction or operation under its direct predicate. Add a channel only when that predicate uses one.
Claimed state reading	What represented state is claimed before and after the act, and whether the act is treated as passive read, action, export, or probe
Evidence / carrier	Name the exact supported claim, evidence object and any carrier used for reliance through A.10. Keep a measurement value, observation, Work result and carrier in their own positions.
Export or loss	What is copied, transformed, no longer comparable, or not faithfully exportable
Ordinary pattern tried	Which of A.6, F.9, A.15, C.16, or C.25 already carries the baseline question

Useful outputs:

an L/A/D/E-classified boundary claim set when ordinary A.6 is enough;
an F.9 Bridge and separate bounded-use claim when the export question concerns two exact local senses and the Bridge predicate obtains; add a Bridge Card only when durable packaging is useful;
a C.26.1 probe-coupled boundary note only when the boundary act changes the represented state in a decision-relevant way;
a relation repair using A.6.P when coupling words become reusable relation candidates, plus F.18 only when the recovered relation term itself needs durable naming.