refactor(lab): canonize selected evidence reports

docs/adr/0037-identity-bound-laboratory-value-review-index.md

@@ -0,0 +1,60 @@
+# ADR 0037: Identity-bound laboratory value-review index
+
+Date: 2026-08-05
+Status: accepted and implemented; product presentation amended by ADR 0038
+
+## Context
+
+Mission Core had immutable LAB artifacts and increasingly complete visual
+result pages, but no reviewed cross-LAB classification. A chronological list
+could not distinguish a useful negative result, a reusable architectural gain,
+an intermediate comparison, and an unreviewed replacement result. Encoding
+those distinctions in renderer branches would make the UI another source of
+truth and would let stale conclusions survive a new run.
+
+## Decision
+
+`config/laboratory-value-review.json` is a strict versioned review registry. Each
+entry references a catalog id and the exact evidence identity it evaluates,
+then records only:
+
+- `progress`, `retained`, or `failed` for the bounded LAB question;
+- `current` or `legacy` for architecture lifecycle;
+- visual-evidence availability;
+
+It intentionally contains no finding, decision, limitation, metric, or report
+copy. Those facts belong to immutable evidence and ADR 0038.
+
+The backend parses the file fail-closed and exposes a read-only value-review index.
+The frontend joins it to the live evidence catalog only when `evidence_id`
+matches. A replacement result therefore becomes `unreviewed`; it cannot inherit
+a green or yellow state from the previous artifact. Historical published
+sessions use their immutable provenance and explicit benchmark result as a
+bounded legacy fallback.
+
+The registry is a classification input for selector status lamps and lifecycle
+review. It is not the engineering report and is not rendered by the `Отчёт`
+toggle. ADR 0038 assigns that toggle to the selected immutable LAB evidence.
+
+## Classification semantics
+
+- `progress` means the experiment achieved a declared bounded objective or
+  established a reusable contract. It does not mean production acceptance.
+- `retained` means the evidence remains useful for comparison, diagnosis, or a
+  later review even though it is not a promoted result.
+- `failed` means an explicit gate or candidate objective did not pass. A failed
+  result may still be valuable regression evidence.
+- `legacy` permits removal of experiment-specific implementation while keeping
+  immutable evidence, report metadata, and a compatible renderer/read model.
+
+## Consequences
+
+- Value-review copy is reviewable configuration rather than JSX or inferred UI text.
+- New identities fail visibly into an unreviewed state.
+- Valuable legacy experiments no longer justify retaining their orchestration
+  code in Mission Core.
+- The value-review index does not execute experiments and does not solve the future
+  provider/graph/run configuration contract.
+- Full implementation history remains in Ops. Verifiable source, runtime,
+  telemetry, metrics, gates, artifacts, and hashes belong to the selected LAB
+  evidence report defined by ADR 0038.

docs/adr/0038-selected-laboratory-evidence-report.md

@@ -0,0 +1,48 @@
+# ADR 0038: Selected immutable LAB evidence report
+
+Date: 2026-08-05
+Status: accepted and implemented
+
+## Context
+
+The first `Отчёт` implementation rendered one cross-LAB list with three pieces
+of reviewed prose per run. It did not answer the operator's actual question:
+what exact source, configuration, modules, runtime, hardware load, measurements,
+gates, artifacts, and limitations prove the currently selected LAB result.
+Most of those facts already existed in immutable manifests and report artifacts,
+but the UI discarded them.
+
+## Decision
+
+`Отчёт` is the evidence report of the currently selected immutable LAB identity.
+It never changes selection and never aggregates other runs.
+
+The backend exposes
+`GET /api/v1/laboratory/evidence-reports/{work_id}/{result_id}` using
+`missioncore.laboratory-evidence-report/v1`. Before projection it verifies:
+
+- the registered work ID, result ID pattern, document schema, and exact result ID;
+- the canonical identity SHA-256 and its binding to the result ID;
+- normalized artifact paths with no traversal or symlink;
+- byte length and SHA-256 of every declared artifact;
+- the selected JSON report and runtime artifact from those verified descriptors.
+
+The response preserves the raw report and normalizes source, configuration,
+method, execution, resource telemetry, metrics, gates, decision, limitations,
+authority, artifacts, and visual evidence. Each section is marked `recorded` or
+`not-recorded`. Absence is not inferred as success, failure, or not-applicable.
+
+The value-review registry from ADR 0037 remains a separate identity-bound input
+for filled selector status lamps. It cannot supply missing evidence fields.
+
+## Consequences
+
+- The operator can audit one LAB without reading source code.
+- A green review lamp cannot hide missing telemetry or artifacts.
+- Older runs expose their actual gaps instead of receiving fabricated modern
+  fields.
+- Artifact tampering closes the report with a verification error.
+- New LAB implementations must publish the canonical evidence dimensions if
+  they want a complete report; UI copy cannot compensate for a weak payload.
+- Ops remains the place for implementation history, ownership, and planned work,
+  while product evidence remains machine-verifiable and identity-bound.