C.22.2:2 - Thin First Use and Output Kind

C.22.2:2.1 - Thin First-Use Form

The first substantive use is the Thin form. It is a practitioner-facing prompt for the smallest reviewable card, not a demand to complete a schema.

A ProblemCard is complete for its current use when it states:

1. what signal or cue made the practitioner stop;
2. the one exact joint EntityOfConcern, effective U.ReferenceScheme, and U.ClaimScope for the claims being carried;
3. which claim family is current: actual-PFR assertion, anticipated-condition claim, method-availability or solvability claim, or another directly governed problem-side claim;
4. why this is not merely a wish, ticket, slogan, label, or preselected Work request;
5. what would count as improvement or as an acceptance probe; and
6. one honest next use.

The next use may be P2W-ready, characterize, compare, search, refresh, retire, archive, abstainOrNoChange, or apply the direct pattern governing the named claim, relation, or boundary. If an improvement check or acceptance probe is absent, the card may preserve the signal and choose one of the other uses but cannot claim P2W-ready.

C.22.2 - ProblemCard is the pattern heading. A ProblemCard instance is the C.2.1 episteme described above. ProblemCardRef is only a reference value designating one such episteme; it is not another durable kind. Plain-register glosses and local labels do not replace the Tech name.

Local labels include problem-formulation follow-up reason, validation boundary, risk condition, solvability band, P2W-ready, reviewable, stale, refreshed, retired, archived, abstainOrNoChange, and firstPrinciplesCue. They describe claim content or a local disposition; they create no FPF kind, state-machine kind, gate result, relation occurrence, or mathematical-lens object.

Use E.10.MOVE only when move-like wording no longer denotes one of these local dispositions and instead hides a pattern-use recommendation, Work-entry readiness, performed Work, gate, transformation, source relation, architecture move, call-planning move, or another directly governed value.

Reference labels ending in Ref are reference positions, not kind names. This includes ProblemCardRef, sourceSetRef, rivalProblemFormulationRef, and representationOrWordingUseRelationRef.

Semantic locality comes from the exact EntityOfConcern, effective ReferenceScheme, ClaimScope, declared assumptions or window, and receiving use carried by the relevant claims. A broad domain, organization, practice, or location label is only recognition material until those exact values are recoverable. None becomes a container participant or establishes global Problem identity.

Plain gloss for P2W-ready: problem-side input ready. It means ready as input to downstream P2W or selector reasoning, not ready for Work execution, gate passage, method selection, evidence reliance, or autonomy.

When a downstream reader asks whether intended Work can enter a work boundary, the card may supply problem-side cues, acceptance probes, constraints, and freshness conditions, but A.15.5 governs the readiness relation. C.22.2 decides no full-kit preparation, commitment, launch gate, or performed Work.

C.22.2:2.2 - Required Solution Use

The Solution turns observed signal material into one C.2.1 episteme and one governed next use, not a completed form.

1. Capture the symptom, anomaly, risk, stakeholder cue, drift, hypothesis, or other observed signal before naming an actual Problem.
2. Recover the one joint EntityOfConcern, effective ReferenceScheme, ClaimScope, and claim family. If the claims concern unrelated entities, split the ClaimGraph and card.
3. Separate the signal detector, actual-PFR assertion if independently grounded, anticipated-condition claim, improvement check, candidate acceptance criterion, method-availability claim, monitored risk signal, and proxy-distortion risk. These are not one card status or one PFR participant set.
4. Pay only for current complexity. Add conditional content only when it changes the current next use; otherwise stop at the lighter card or name the direct pattern for the claim now current.
5. If the formulation changes EntityOfConcern, effective scheme, ClaimScope, diagram, functional description, or transformation-flow interpretation, name the representation-transition, retargeting, Bridge, structural-reinterpretation, or wording-use relation before inheriting an earlier card disposition.
6. Close by the honest next use. A filled card without a truthful next use is not a successful result.

Cheap stop. The smallest card that gives a truthful next use is sufficient. A conforming use does not require heavier fields merely because the full inventory exists.

First practitioner use. State the signal, joint EntityOfConcern, scheme, scope, claim family, not-wish reason, improvement check or acceptance probe, and honest next use. Open the relation-boundary aid only when another claim or relation changes that move.

C.22.2:2.3 - Relation Boundary Aid

Use this aid only after the Thin ProblemCard is legible: signal, joint EntityOfConcern, effective ReferenceScheme, ClaimScope, claim family, not-wish reason, improvement check or acceptance probe, and honest next use. It is not a second writing order and not a catalogue of other patterns. It answers one question:

Which claim being made, relation, or boundary changes the problem-card use, and which FPF pattern defines or constrains that claim, relation, or boundary?

If the claim, relation, or boundary does not change the current problem-card use, leave it out of the card. If it does change the move, keep only the local cue or reference that makes the card reviewable, then apply the subject pattern for that claim, relation, or boundary.

Over-capture symptom: the practitioner spends the pattern use classifying FPF patterns while one or more core Thin items in C.22.2:2.1 remain unstable.

Repair: return to the exact Thin form in C.22.2:2.1 and complete only its core items. Reopen this aid only for the claim, relation, or boundary that changes the honest next use.

C.22.2:2.4 - Use Boundaries and Record Budgets

Use C.22.2 when a signal is not yet a problem-side record and downstream task typing, P2W, method-family selection, work planning, evidence use, gate passage, autonomy control, or selected-set use depends on such a record. A known method does not close this pattern when the problem signal, scope, acceptance probe, or EntityOfConcern remains unstable.

Use another pattern directly when the question under repair is already that pattern’s EntityOfConcern or governed relation: A.15 for work planning or performed work; A.10, G.6, or B.3 for evidence, provenance, or assurance; A.21 for gate decision; E.16 for autonomy; C.11 for a local choice among explicit options; and C.18, C.19, or G.5 for archive, pool, front, or selected-set governance. C.22.2 may still preserve the problem-side cue or reference that explains why that pattern is now current.

Use record budgets:

• Thin record budget: signal, joint EntityOfConcern, effective ReferenceScheme, ClaimScope, exact claim family, not-wish, not-slogan, not-ticket, or not-preselected-work reason, provisional improvement check or acceptance probe, and one honest next use.
• Standard record budget: Thin fields plus the current comparison, acceptance, risk, validation, freshness, unknown-handling, or P2W-readiness fields needed for downstream use.
• High-relation record budget: Standard fields plus only the relation references needed when public, disputed, high-risk, set-derived, cross-scheme, cross-use-boundary, evidence-adjacent, autonomy-adjacent, gate-adjacent, agentic, temporal, causal, representation, or Part-G relations are current.

Stop at Thin when it gives a truthful next use. Stop at Standard when it supplies enough problem-side input for a minimal TaskSignature, TaskKind, or ProblemProfile under C.22. Apply the governing FPF pattern for the claim being made, relation, or boundary instead of enlarging the card when the issue under repair is no longer the problem-side record itself.

C.22.2:2.5 - Field Labels and Current-Use Conditions

Use these readable labels only when current for the case:

• problem signal and exact signal reference;

• one exact ClaimGraph, joint EntityOfConcern, effective ReferenceScheme, and ClaimScope;

• actual-PFR assertion with exact polarity and PFR reference only when C.22.PFR independently establishes the occurrence;

• anticipated-condition, forecast, scenario, or counterfactual claim with assumptions and horizon;

• method-availability or solvability claim with admitted method set, evidence qualification, constraints, and intended use;

• primary viewpoint or an explicitly recovered system-role-kind, assignment, relation-participation, responsibility, or other direct concern as claim qualification, never as card or PFR identity;

• symptom detector, problem hypothesis or cause-theory cue, and rival formulation when current;

• improvement check, acceptance probe, characterization relation, characteristic or Q-bundle relation, indicator selection, and parity or comparison relation when current;

• mandatory constraints, risk condition, validation boundary, freshness or expiry condition, and unknown handling;

• problem-formulation follow-up reason when it changes review, discrimination, or receiving use;

• representation-transition, retargeting, Bridge, structural-reinterpretation, or wording-use reference when an earlier disposition may no longer transfer;

• sourceSetRef, source-set kind, selection or retention criterion, budget or window, and non-scalar next use when the signal comes from a set, pool, front, archive, shortlist, or selected set;

• firstPrinciplesCue when a mathematical structure changes the formulation; and

• subject-pattern cue naming the direct pattern, claim kind, exact receiving-use reference, and stop condition when an outside claim changes the card use.

If a conditional value is not current, omit it rather than writing unknown. Use unknown only where the exact current value rule permits that result. If a required current value is unavailable, state whether the next use is blocked, degraded, sandboxed, or must be reconsidered under a named condition. A stale value gets the exact G.11/currentness assertion; an intentionally omitted value states the record-budget reason without implying it was checked.

When the card compares options, retained candidates, or rival formulations, it states the exact comparison or parity relation or why comparison is not current. Absence is a disposition, not an automatic defect; any positive parity or selected-set result remains outside C.22.2.

problemCardWitnessRefs may be used as a local recoverability group, not as a new kind or evidence graph:

problemCardWitnessRefs:
  problemSignalRef?
  sourceSetRef?
  selectionOrRetentionCriterion?
  characterizationRelationRef?
  parityRelationRef?
  freshnessRef?
  representationOrWordingUseRelationRef?

Generated variants, evaluator feedback, and open-ended mutation remain signal or source-set cues. They do not constitute the card, supply evidence sufficiency, make PFR obtain, or authorize action.

C.22.2:2.6 - Anti-Pattern Checks and Worked Slices

Anti-pattern checks start from the local card use:

• card-as-executable-work request: the card is treated as executable work while method, plan, and work occurrence remain undecided;
• form-completion: every field is filled because the template exists, even though the Thin next use would be truthful;
• readiness shortcut: P2W-ready is declared from signal and scope alone, without improvement check or acceptance probe;
• source-claim shortcut: a preselected solution, work request, proof-looking reference, gate-looking cue, or authority-looking cue replaces one or more core Thin items in C.22.2:2.1;
• scalar shortcut: archive, set-return, Goldilocks, NQD, OEE, partial-order, stepping-stone, or indicator material collapses into one readiness score;
• prestige shortcut: first-principles or mathematical wording is kept without practical payoff, preserved and lost structure when current, problem-formulation follow-up reason, and stop condition.

Local stop rule: if the encountered material tries to carry a claim outside C.22.2, the card keeps only the cue or reference that changes problem formulation or the next use, then names the governing FPF pattern and claim kind named by value to use before that claim is relied on.

A conforming C.22.2 use is testable against at least one Thin worked slice, such as repeated task rework or another compact problem signal, showing signal, EntityOfConcern, ReferenceScheme, ClaimScope, exact claim family, not-preselected-work reason, improvement check, and honest next use. It is also testable against at least one High-relation worked slice from a set, archive, pool, front, shortlist, selected set, or portfolio source, showing sourceSetRef, candidate acceptance criterion, risk condition, and the claim, relation, or boundary without creating a local portfolio or archive kind.

C.22.2:2.7 - Conformance Checklist Requirements

The checklist protects a completed or reviewed card from overread; the writing order remains the Thin form and honest next use.