OPS.6:0 - Use This When

Use this pattern during one admitted continuing case when current facts, an exception, or a changed condition makes the standard next action uncertain. Typical cues are “the normal route no longer fits”, “the ticket moved but nothing changed”, “the model recommends a fix”, “we are waiting for one more result”, or “who may act now?” while the case subject, permission, performer, evidence, and next permissible Work are unclear.

The first useful result has one of two forms:

Progression: for case subject S in qualified state Q at configuration and horizon H, matching permission P and domain Method M support next Work W by responsible performer R, with stop or fallback F and expected evidence E; after independently supported performance, report the progressed state Q' and its evidence to the participant responsible for the next operating decision under return conditions N.

Blocker: condition K is missing, stale, contradicted, unauthorized, unsafe, unsupported, or unavailable; owner or source O must supply the bounded result; safe fallback or stop is F; retry when T obtains.

Recognition is cheap: enter when participants cannot choose or execute the next permissible Work in an admitted case from the current facts. Assurance is stronger: selected action, permission, responsible performer, actual Work, resulting evidence, and progressed case state each require separate support.

Do not use OPS.6 to design one universal workflow or case lifecycle, reconstruct a reusable Method from event data, infer progress from a ticket, plan, model, trace, or record update, or revise priority merely because the case is old. Use A.15.7 for the general situation-responsive next-action Method, A.3.1.MR when reusable Method recovery from several performances is the actual question, and OPS.7 when temporal or consequence evidence can change priority or an existing commitment.