C.33:4 - Solution

Create one StructuralInformationAdequacyNote@Context for the declared architecture use.

Read the note as a small missing-structure return tool, not as a new documentation format. Its didactic question is simple: “What can I safely take from this carrier, what must I not take, and where do I go if the missing structure matters?”

Work in this order:

1. Name the architecture claim or pre-claim, described holon, architecture concern, intended use, and any ClaimScope or qualification window that changes the adequacy judgment.
2. Name the selected structure refs or structure kinds being relied on. If they are not recoverable, stop and use C.30, C.30.ASV, A.22, or C.32.P2S.
3. Name the carrier, selected source structure, description, view, narrative rendering, decision record, eval report, method handoff, generated relation graph, or realized observation being used.
4. State the captured selected structure in relation terms: relations, constraints, invariants, allocations, compositions, variation classes, operations, dynamics refs, or preserved organization.
5. State the expected but uncaptured structure when the next use needs it: hidden placement, data custody, runtime dependency, transformation-flow relation, unexplored region, or missing bearer. State any unresolved source-label semantics or missing confidence class separately when it changes that use.
6. State lost or hidden structure. If no loss is claimed, justify why the carrier is adequate for the declared use rather than for all uses.
7. Add the observer and budget conditions needed to interpret a C.2.8 comparison or a source obtained from a bounded observer, learned representation, probe, relation graph, or epiplexity-style lens. Keep preparation, source access and actual help visible when they can change the recovery claim.
8. Add source label recovery when unresolved terms from a domain practice such as neural-network architectures, software modules, built assets, organizational roles, methods, or work change an architecture claim or its next use.
9. Use the pattern that defines or tests each mathematical-lens, measurement, eval, decision, evidence, assurance, gate, release, method, work, or publication claim when one of those claims is current.
10. Stop when admissible use, non-admissible use, missing-structure return condition, the next claim or question, and its required rule or test are clear.

CGUS-aware neighbor use: when a carrier, route card, narrative rendering, architecture description, framework publication, or generated relation graph is relied on because it preserves a constraint-governed unfolding structure, C.33 records only what that carrier captures and loses. The selected structure remains ConstraintGovernedUnfoldingStructure@Context or a local U.Structure block governed by A.22.CGUS, E.18.3, C.32.P2S, E.23, or another direct structure pattern. When the carrier is a narrative, A.6.3.NAR governs only its selected-source carry-through, ordering and connective account, loss, reader use, and source return; it neither selects nor admits the structure.

A DemonstrativeUnfoldingSlice@Context may be the U.Episteme slice or presentation whose captured structure and lost structure C.33 records; it is not the selected U.Structure by itself. C.33 does not admit the CGUS; it tells the practitioner handling the next question what the carrier actually preserved and where missing selected structure must be inspected or repaired.