E.19:0.2 - What this buys
E.19 gives authors, reviewers, and stewards a shared review profile: what must be checked, how deep the check should go, which defects block admission or refresh, and what evidence is needed before a pattern-quality claim is made. It also makes the recognition text visible before the heavier assurance machinery begins.
First useful move. Name the reviewed pattern edition or subset and the admission or refresh question. Select PCP-BASE plus only the risk profiles the question needs. Inspect the affected loci, then repair and verify each defect or return the actionable findings.
Local-repair boundary. If baseline triage shows that the current review question has no present ontology, usability, SoTA, boundary, naming, or authority risk beyond a small mechanical repair, close with that repair direction. Do not run every profile just because E.19 exists, and do not claim an E.21 quality value unless E.21 has evaluated the pattern version over its required coordinate set.
Three quick recognition situations. The same review move should be visible before the profile details:
| What the reviewer sees | Risk-selected move | First useful result |
|---|---|---|
| A safety-critical subsystem-deployment pattern adds a condition in prose but not in its Solution or Conformance Checklist, introduces scope-hiding terms, and treats matching cross-team labels as identity. | Apply PCP-BASE, PCP-NORM, and PCP-TERM; add PCP-BRIDGE only if the text actually claims a relation across contexts. | Repair and recheck the requirement, terms, and identity claim, or return one actionable findings set. Solution and checklist constrain the same system claim; project deployment permission remains under its own governing rule. |
| An episteme or publication pattern still reads smoothly, but its sources are stale, its Relations use superseded names, or a carrier is treated as the claim it carries. | Apply PCP-BASE and PCP-REFRESH; add PCP-TERM for the claim, publication, or carrier confusion. | Update and verify the affected Solution, source use/currentness, publication/carrier distinctions, and Relations, or return complete findings. Handle historical-only evidence as lineage under E.8. |
| A Method pattern says that the Method or checklist performed dated work, leaving the acting system, Work, and result hidden. | Apply PCP-BASE and PCP-TERM; add PCP-MOD only if the text mixes guidance with an actual occurrence. | Restore plain Method guidance and state the acting system, Work, and result separately only when an actual occurrence is claimed. |
Primary EntityOfConcern in plain terms. One FPF pattern edition or bounded subset under an admission or refresh review question. The selected checks, reviewer, any repair, findings, optional aggregate result and evidence use, and any authority-bearing decision remain distinct when those objects are current.
Primary working reader. The first reader is an FPF reviewer, with the pattern author close behind. The review must still be answerable to the eventual practitioner or manager who will rely on the admitted pattern.