C.3.4:9 - Anti-patterns and Repairs

Anti-pattern	Why it is wrong	Repair
Adaptation declaration treated as a new type	Duplicates the kind and hides the declaration episteme.	Keep the base kind; for a stable conceptual refinement identify another local kind and establish `U.SubkindOf` independently.
Claim- or Work-scope condition hidden in an adaptation judgment	Conflates the candidate with where a claim or Work applies.	Move the scope condition to A.2.6; keep candidate constraints and declaration applicability explicit.
Unversioned or applicability-free declaration used by a guard	Makes evaluation non-replayable.	Give the declaration a designator, pin its edition and dependencies, state applicability, and distinguish `not-applicable` from `unknown`.
Locality change treated as automatic bridge	Splits the same kind or transfers source truth.	Compare kind definitions first. Same-kind reuse needs no bridge and still gets a fresh receiving result; distinct-kind use needs an obtaining C.3.3 correspondence.
Many declarations with the same local meaning	Produces catalog entropy and inconsistent behavior.	Consolidate redundant declarations; for a stable conceptual distinction, separately identify a local kind and establish its obtaining `U.SubkindOf` relation.
Declaration name treated as a kind synonym	Hides constraints and invites misuse.	Designate the exact declaration edition and base kind separately in prose and guards.