ME.2:4 - Solution

Build the repertoire around one receiving use. Recover exact subjects and source contributions, qualify every relation by its own evidence, and record unsupported positions as gaps instead of filling them with guesses.

Recognition is cheap: a source or repository entry is worth inspecting when it may supply a relevant alternative, contribution, or missing relation. Assurance begins only when a decision relies on the row; then its subject status, exact source edition, evidence, relation basis, currentness, and limit must support that use.

ME.2:4.1 - Pattern-Use Unfolding

1. Bind the repertoire use. Name the focus, receiving result, decision, situation family, and what the next comparison or proposal must inspect. State what would make an entry relevant.
2. Search both source lines. Search primary Method Engineering sources for reusable approaches and source organization, and search the problem-owning practice for Methods, accounts, variants, evidence, and current operating constraints. Record exact source editions or dates and the claim-bearing passages or artifacts used.
3. Recover subjects before grouping them. Cite the existing A.3.1 identity result for every identified Method. Keep provisional material as a candidate Method account. Attach a MethodDescription only to its already identified Method. Keep tools, roles, capabilities, support arrangements, evidence, and Work occurrences under their actual kinds.
4. Extract contributions with limits. For every useful source, state the contribution used, the subject it concerns, its evidence or status, its scope, and what it does not establish. A package position or source vocabulary does not determine the FPF kind.
5. Record relations independently. Separate established family membership, project-local grouping, variant claims, input/result relations, and supported lineage relations. For lineage, name both exact subjects, the relation claimed, and the source that supports it. Leave same-Method identity, causal effect, superiority, and composition open unless their own governors settle them.
6. Pin editions and use-qualified currentness. Distinguish publication or artifact edition from the claim relied on for the current use. Keep its relevant conditions and actual evidence, permission or qualification windows; identify the changed premise that would require reconsideration. A new edition or review date can invite attention without defeating that claim. Use a broader G.2 SoTA pack only when the use needs refreshable multi-source synthesis rather than a small question-relative source set.
7. Expose missing positions. List absent alternatives, unknown editions, unsupported ancestry, missing evidence, unresolved family status, and contributions whose source meaning cannot yet be recovered. Say which next use each gap blocks or merely weakens.
8. Return the bounded repertoire. Publish the subject inventory, source-contribution rows, relation rows, currentness limits, and gaps for the named use. Stop when the next decision can inspect the live alternatives and uncertainties without guessing their status.

ME.2:4.2 - Record the Result

ME.2:4.3 - What Changes in Practice

Teams stop searching a repository as though every file were a reusable Method. They can compare identified Methods alongside promising accounts without promoting either, trace a proposal to exact contributions without asserting composition, and stop with a useful gap instead of inventing a complete lineage.