Every route in the five workspaces, every doctrine in the module documents, walked against the ten archetypes, twenty-four components and forty-three laws. Accounting got the deepest pass because it is the module the labs never gave a dedicated screen: thirty-six routes, an append-only journal, three-way matching, bank reconciliation, period close, segregation of duties and an AI agent that posts within a delegation.
The honest headline: the system holds, and the audit still earned its keep. It found three places where the system contradicts itself or the platform's own facts, one of which would have made accounting unbuildable as written, plus eight primitives the modules need that the labs never named, and a handful of places where the existing wireframes will have to change to comply.
Drawn fresh from the Untitled kit and the system’s ruled tokens, not restyled from the originals.
The strongest evidence came from accounting itself: its own design grammar, written independently, names five shapes, and they map onto the archetypes almost one to one. Two vocabularies arrived at the same building.
These are the reason to run an audit. All three are cheap to fix now and expensive after adoption.
None of these bends an existing rule. Most are the fill rule and the gate finding yet more work to do.
Not gaps in the system; places where the built product predates it. Recorded so adoption is a checklist, not archaeology.