changelog.d/202.md

@@ -28,8 +28,13 @@
   reusable workflows to the armed SHA, which is the only revision whose inner
   checkout points at the fork (#202).
 
-- A `git grep` over the armed tree gates the rewrite non-zero, so a partial one
-  refuses instead of silently testing canonical main (#202).
+- The arming gate asserts what each carrier IS, not only that the old literal
+  is gone: every `repository:` equals the fork, both `CEREMONY_SELF_REF` values
+  equal the candidate code SHA, and callers match the layer they belong to
+  (#202).
+
+- It counts the `CEREMONY_SELF_REF` carriers as well as comparing them, which
+  is what catches one that vanished rather than being rewritten (#202).
 
 - Probe results are written to an issue in the probe repo and carried to the
   ceremony issue by a human, so the probe holds no path that can write to the

docs/RUNNER-PROBES.md

@@ -107,7 +107,9 @@ So:
 ### The procedure
 
 1. **Push the candidate tree** to a fork under the identity that will run the
-   probe — `<identity>/ceremony@probe-<issue>` — and record its SHA. That is
+   probe — one branch, `<identity>/ceremony@probe-<issue>` — and record its
+   SHA. Steps 1 and 2 advance the tip of that **same** branch; there are two
+   commits, not two branches. That is
    the **candidate code SHA**. Never create a branch on
    `heavy-duty/ceremony` named like a tag: it shadows that tag for every
    consumer until somebody remembers to delete it.
@@ -122,18 +124,44 @@ So:
    - reusable-workflow callers →
      `<identity>/ceremony/.github/workflows/<file>@<armed-workflow-sha>`, since
      that is the only revision whose inner checkout is rewritten.
-4. **Gate the rewrite mechanically, against the armed tree** — not against
-   whichever checkout happens to be current, and not by eyeballing prose:
+4. **Gate the arming POSITIVELY, against the armed tree.** Absence of the old
+   literal is not proof of correct arming: a negative grep stays green if
+   `CEREMONY_SELF_REF` names a tag, the *armed* SHA or some other commit; if a
+   carrier was rewritten to the wrong fork; if an executable carrier lives
+   outside `.github`; or if a carrier simply disappeared
+   (@codex-reviewer-andresmgsl, #202 review). So assert what each carrier
+   **is**, not merely what it is not:
 
    ```sh
-   git -C <armed-checkout> grep -nE \
-     '(uses:|repository:)[[:space:]]*heavy-duty/ceremony' -- .github \
-     && { echo "arming incomplete" >&2; exit 1; }
+   fork=<identity>/ceremony ; code_sha=<candidate-code-sha> ; armed_sha=<armed-workflow-sha>
+   fail() { echo "arming incomplete: $*" >&2; exit 1; }
+
+   # every self-checkout points at the fork
+   for v in $(git grep -hoP '(?<=repository:\s)\S+' -- .github); do
+     [ "$v" = "$fork" ] || fail "repository: $v"
+   done
+   # both CEREMONY_SELF_REF carriers name the CANDIDATE CODE sha
+   n=0
+   for v in $(git grep -hoP '(?<=CEREMONY_SELF_REF:\s)"?\K[^"]+' -- .github); do
+     [ "$v" = "$code_sha" ] || fail "CEREMONY_SELF_REF: $v"; n=$((n+1))
+   done
+   [ "$n" -eq 2 ] || fail "expected 2 CEREMONY_SELF_REF carriers, found $n"
+   # and in the PROBE repo: workflows pin the armed sha, actions the code sha
+   git grep -hoP '(?<=uses:\s)\S+' -- .github | while read -r u; do
+     case "$u" in
+       */.github/workflows/*) [ "${u##*@}" = "$armed_sha" ] || fail "workflow caller $u" ;;
+       */actions/*)           [ "${u##*@}" = "$code_sha" ]  || fail "action caller $u" ;;
+     esac
+   done
+   # the negative check stays, as a cheap extra rather than as the proof
+   ! git grep -qE '(uses:|repository:)[[:space:]]*heavy-duty/ceremony' -- .github \
+     || fail "canonical coordinate still present"
    ```
 
-   Exit non-zero on any hit. A partial rewrite does not fail loudly on its
-   own — it silently tests canonical `main`, and the probe's answer is then
-   about the wrong tree.
+   **A count, not just a comparison** — `n -eq 2` is what catches a carrier
+   that vanished rather than being rewritten, which a per-value loop alone
+   cannot see.
+
 5. **Invoke the probe by the event it is about**, and record which: a
    `workflow_dispatch`, or the real board event under test. A probe that fires
    a different event than the one under test proves something else.
@@ -143,7 +171,8 @@ So:
    without the two SHAs distinguished, a later reader cannot tell which tree
    answered.
 7. **Reset removes the candidate-specific EXECUTABLE state**: the caller stubs,
-   the probe workflow, the candidate and armed branches — so the next probe
+   the probe workflow, and the fork's probe branch — whose tip carries both the
+   candidate commit and the armed commit on top of it — so the next probe
    cannot inherit a pin it did not choose. **Result issues are never deleted.**
    They may be closed or relabelled; deleting them would recreate the
    expiring-log problem this venue exists to avoid.