C.31.ASAP:4.7 - Scale-refactoring moves
Before scale-preference guidance becomes action-guiding, name at least one possible repair or stop:
| Scale symptom | Possible architecture move | Boundary |
|---|---|---|
| interface variants grow without payoff | reduce interface alphabet or introduce interface grammar | A.6.M governs interface relation repair. |
| product-line or platform variants lack explicit variation points | introduce variability slots or extension rules | Platform label alone is not scale-preference evidence. |
| one aggregation scope hides lower-scope hazards | split the declared aggregation scope or architecture boundary | C.29 supplies lens-use fields only when coarse-graining is mathematical-lens use. |
| repeated work contains reusable structure | reuse a method template for subsequent work | Use A.3.1 for a Method claim, A.15 for Method–Work alignment, and A.15.1 for actual Work. Use A.15.4 only while appearance hides a work-relevant prerequisite. |
| regulatory or safety residue remains local and repeated | isolate regulatory residue or safety-specific exception register | Use A.10 for source recovery and bounded reliance, G.6 for addressable provenance, B.3 when a named assurance claim is current, and A.21 for a gate claim. |
| coarse representation loses safety, semantic, or source distinctions | return to lower-scope source-side evidence or narrow the scale window | Source-return condition is mandatory. |