FPF Reference

    A.6.C:8 — Common Anti-Patterns and How to Avoid Them

    Preface node heading:a-6-c-8-common-anti-patterns-and-how-to-avoid-them:12123

    What this page is

    This is generated FPF reference text from the specification preface or supporting sections. It helps interpret FPF; it is not FPF Reference product documentation.

    Methodology

    Use it to understand how the specification wants to be read, then return to a route, pattern, or work packet for active work. Cite generated IDs only when the wording changes the task decision.

    Content

    Anti-patternWhy it failsRepair
    Interface-as-promiser (“the API promises…”)Epistemes and publication carriers are descriptions; they do not commitRecover the exact policy and generic prescription, or name the actual duty bearer and separately obtaining U.Commitment when an individual duty is claimed. Keep any assignment as a rule ground and the API, signature, or interface description as a description episteme or publication carrier.
    Guarantee-without-substrateThe word hides whether the claim is semantic, deontic, an entry condition, an actual gate result, or another observed or evaluated resultClassify semantic law as L, a generic prescription or claim about an exact individual commitment or current grant as D, an entry predicate as A, and an exact A.21 GateDecisionResult or other observed or evaluated result as E; use A6-AW-* for permission-looking wording.
    SLA smuggled into lawsMixes governance with semantics; breaks substitution reasoningState the target as a generic D prescription or an exact individual commitment, reference its L-defined metric and A conditions, and cite the exact E evaluated result plus A.10 support when current
    Gate written as obligationConfuses admissibility predicates with deontic claimsWrite the predicate as A; write a generic prescription or separately instituted individual duty as a D→A reference.
    Work-result-evidence bundle“The delivered work and its log prove acceptance” makes one phrase carry occurrence, result, transfer, evidence, and verdictName the A.15.1 Work first; use the applicable A.15.1:4.6 route for each current result, delivery/transfer, or acceptance claim, and A.10 for each evidence-use claim. Omit absent claims.
    Face-level paraphrase driftA face silently changes a claim's object or quadrantCite the canonical claim ID, direct object, and selected A6-AW-* row rather than restating it
    Cross-scale contract collapseCommitments, grants, and conflict findings at different scales are treated as one D claimKeep commitments and current grants as separate D claims; classify the permission conflict finding as E through A6-AW-CONFLICT; use mediation only under its subject pattern
    Mandatory four-question recordEvery clear use of contract wording creates rows for all four questionsApply A.6.C only to a consequential ambiguity, answer only the live questions, and let a one-off repair end in the repaired atomic prose

    Last Updated: 2026-09-04 — upstream FPF commit d7a71234 (github.com/ailev/FPF)