The plan's phase 6 becomes a record rather than a proposal, in the shape the
earlier phases took: what was built, what was decided and why, what a person
still has to look at. Two decisions in it were the product owner's rather than
the code's -- promoting search and profile to navigation destinations, and doing
chat alone rather than all three list-detail families -- and both are named as
such with the date.
**The audit learns two things.**
It counted `NavigationBar(`, `NavigationRail(` and friends, and reported **zero**
for an app that had just grown a navigation bar: `NavigationSuiteScaffold` is
what chooses between them per breakpoint, and the concrete component never
appears in the source. It now counts the scaffold and its items.
And it grew a `floor()` beside `report()`. Every other budget in the file is a
ceiling that ratchets down as a phase lands, which is the right shape for
literals, hardcoded colours and untriaged nulls -- things a careless edit *adds*.
The adaptive work is the opposite: a screen that stops reading the breakpoint
still compiles and still renders, and the count goes down. So `--check` now also
fails when the adaptive API count drops below 12 or the navigation component
count below 2.
**Two `contentDescription = null` that the audit caught in this phase's own
work** -- the navigation item's icon and the new-chat button's -- now say
`Decorative`. Same null, and the same convention phase 3 established: recording
that somebody looked is the whole point, and a budget of zero only holds if new
code obeys it too.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
16775bf6c7