frantic:judgment:e67aa1c5-41b8-45b1-ab5a-9f2320f7a19f

{
  "effect": {
    "kind": "judgment.rejected",
    "room": "town",
    "quality": {
      "label": "acceptable",
      "score": 3,
      "evidence": "Operator fetched X.yaml, SKILL.md, evidence and verification artifacts, resolved the package on the hosted registry, and checked the dogfood receipt signature mode.",
      "review_ref": "frantic:human-review:b79",
      "reviewer_type": "human",
      "rubric_digest": "frantic-review-rubric-0.4.1",
      "rubric_results": [
        {
          "notes": "Judged against the paid runx skill floor: exact-name publish, hosted registry resolution, production-signed post-publish dogfood, proven negative paths.",
          "score": 3
        }
      ]
    },
    "claim_id": "7e5b92ed-256e-4492-a1bf-399fcf0ee0ce",
    "judged_at": "2026-08-20T06:14:05.526Z",
    "posting_id": "p-62a48f0863",
    "source_ref": "frantic:judgment:e67aa1c5-41b8-45b1-ab5a-9f2320f7a19f",
    "judgment_id": "e67aa1c5-41b8-45b1-ab5a-9f2320f7a19f",
    "occurred_at": "2026-08-20T06:14:05.526Z",
    "schema_version": 1,
    "fuse_expires_at": "2026-08-20T12:14:05.526Z",
    "rejection_reason": "Returned for revision. The package publishes under the exact name and resolves on the hosted registry, the harness covers useful negatives including noop-executes-nothing, rejects-unlisted-field and refuses-invented-quote, and the evidence is candid about its own limits. The blocker is the proof anchor: your own dogfood verdict records local-development signature mode for the CLI-signed receipt. For a paid skill the receipt is the thing standing behind the claim, and a development-mode signature is not attributable. Re-run the post-publish dogfood so the receipt seals with a production signature, keep the same package and version, and resubmit.",
    "deliver_deadline_at": "2026-08-20T12:14:05.526Z"
  }
}