C.22.1:8 - Corridor, transfer, and durability discipline

• If the adaptation claim depends on entering a new solution corridor, publish the corridorEntryBaseline first: the prior repertoire, baseline set, or comparison family relative to which corridor entry is being claimed.
• Then publish the corridorEntryEvidence that marks real entry into that corridor rather than exotic accident, for example a reproducible solution class, a stable descriptor shift, or one explicit stepping-stone sequence.
• If a stepping stone mattered, publish the stepping-stone evidence as part of the adaptation signature rather than treating it as retrospective color.
• Corridor or stepping-stone notes do not replace the work-measure threshold account; they explain why the adaptation path matters, not whether the threshold was actually reached.
• A fast threshold result is not yet enough to claim durable specialization.
• If transfer to a neighboring task family is claimed, name the transfer target and the observed gain explicitly.
• If retention is claimed, name the reuse or retention window rather than letting durability hide inside one isolated run.
• If specialization harms neighboring task families, narrows reusable competence, or creates de-specialization cost, publish that in downsideEffect? rather than telling only the upside story.
• If post-threshold performance matters to later exploitation, publish postThresholdEfficiency? so the claim is not trapped at the threshold-crossing moment only.