docs(S16): Phase 3 accepted, closed, frozen

[PhysShell]

Documentation-only. Records the closure the arbiter authorized after #121 merged green.

• spec.md — §1 semantic core and §3 surface grammar are now Frozen (further change requires a new language level); §2 transport marked Superseded by §3, kept as historical record. Section-status table and intro prose updated; §3 heading is now "frozen — Phase 3 closed".
• ADR-0029 — Status: Proposed → Accepted (Phases 0–3 shipped and frozen, docs: define Swang language and verified lifting roadmap #109–S16 Phase 3, final slice: fuzz targets per ADR-0010 (and a repair the fuzzer earned) #121; Phases 4–9 remain future work under this decision).
• S16 stage doc — a status block naming Phases 0–3 done and frozen, Phases 4–9 as remaining future work; the next scope is S8 Swang Playground. Phase headings 0–3 marked (done).
• decisions.log.md — the closure Y-statement, including the fuzz gate becoming blocking and its four findings (F-002 midly + second bite, F-003 guitarpro quarantined, F-004 our own OOM bounded).

No code changes; the stage's overall Status: proposed stays, because the S16 stage (through Phase 9) is not complete — only its behavioral Phase 3 is.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

https://claude.ai/code/session_01NkqJUU6d1sW1RAfvyHrqVM

[coderabbitai]

Warning

Review limit reached

@PhysShell, you've reached your PR review limit, so we couldn't start this review.

Next review available in: 29 minutes

Enable usage-based reviews in Billing to review now. Otherwise, wait until the next included review is available.
You're only billed for reviews past your plan's rate limits ($0.25/file).

How can I continue?

After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the @coderabbitai review command as a PR comment. Alternatively, push new commits to this PR.

To avoid repeated limits, reduce automatic review volume by pausing incremental auto-reviews earlier, using label-based review opt-in, excluding WIP or generated PR titles, or requesting reviews manually when the PR is ready. If your team needs uninterrupted high-volume reviews, an organization admin can enable usage-based reviews.

How do review limits work?

CodeRabbit enforces per-developer PR review limits for each organization. Most developers receive the normal plan review availability.

For paid Pro and Pro+ PR reviews, CodeRabbit uses adaptive limits for sustained high-volume activity. When a developer's recent PR review activity reaches the 95th percentile or higher among CodeRabbit users, additional reviews become available more gradually as earlier reviews age out of the rolling window.

Please refer docs for additional details.

Review details

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: defaults

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro Plus

Run ID: 3b71b54f-d1a7-4a87-9f04-5ecd1dfcbb75

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 7bcbbb2 and 10f084d.

📒 Files selected for processing (5)

• docs/adr/0029-swang-authoring-and-verified-lifting.md
• docs/adr/README.md
• docs/decisions.log.md
• docs/stages/S16-swang-language-and-verified-lifting.md
• docs/swang/spec.md

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Commit unit tests in branch claude/s16-phase3-freeze

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.}

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 40f196e9a7

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

[PhysShell]

Арбитраж: один блокирующий документальный хвост перед формальным закрытием. В нормативном docs/swang/spec.md вводный текст и таблица уже фиксируют §1 как Frozen, но заголовок остаётся ## 1. Proposed semantic core. Заменить на ## 1. Semantic core (frozen — Phase 0 accepted) или эквивалентную недвусмысленную формулировку. После этого нужен зелёный CI на новом точном head SHA; merge только с SHA-guard. Остальной docs-only diff принят.

[PhysShell]

Both docs nits addressed:

1. The heading contradiction (arbiter): ## 1. Proposed semantic core → ## 1. Semantic core (frozen — Phase 0 accepted) (949d7e4). The section-status table, the intro prose, and the heading now agree; grep confirms no Proposed survives anywhere in spec.md, and no doc referenced the old heading anchor.
2. The ADR index (Codex): docs/adr/README.md listed 0029 as Proposed while the ADR itself moved to Accepted — now both read Accepted (Phases 0–3 frozen) (10f084d).

Docs-only; no code paths touched. Awaiting green CI on head 10f084d.