D59/D60 follow D29/D30 separate monthly boundary-page standards, not normal cluster-page logic.
Part 2 close | separate monthly boundary page | monthly_review
Create part2_gap_repair_plan.md from D31-D58 evidence before final diagnostic.
After D58, the manager says: “Before we call this a Context Template Library, show me the gaps that must be repaired before D60 diagnoses the system.”
The trap is treating D59 as a monthly summary. D59 is a repair board: every row must name a Part 2 library candidate, a gap, an owner, a repair action, and a D60 required diagnostic action.
“Part 2 produced a useful context template library and is ready for diagnostic.”
The weak version contains useful library, ready, no owner, no D60 action.
What D58 says may be reusable.
What blocks safe approval.
What the diagnostic must check next.
Use this rule before filling the build table. The goal is a decision-ready artifact, not a broad summary.
What D58 says may be reusable.
What blocks safe approval.
What the diagnostic must check next.
D59 mirrors D29 as a repair gate, but the evidence is different: D29 repaired Month 1 foundation claims; D59 repairs Part 2 context-template library candidates before D60 can diagnose the system.
Name the D58 library candidate or upstream template component.
Name blocking evidence, limitation, owner, and repair action.
Tell D60 whether to approve, limit, hold, or escalate the component.
A manager asks whether Part 2 can close. The worker must inspect the context-template library, identify weak template-system evidence, assign repair actions, and decide what D60 must diagnose before handoff.
Create part2_gap_repair_plan.md from D31-D58 evidence before final diagnostic.
Closing the month because pages exist, without repairing weak template evidence.
“Part 2 is complete; the template library is ready.”
“One template is reusable, one requires evidence-field repair, and D60 must diagnose whether the library is safe to hand off.”
Review 3-5 highest-risk artifacts from D31-D58; do not attempt a full forensic review unless assigned.
Complete at least 3 rows: one reusable candidate, one weak/repair item, and one D60 diagnostic requirement. If blocked, mark the limitation instead of faking closure.
Dependency: D59 must produce the repair and readiness inputs D60 will diagnose; every row should name a D60 required action. D61 What Is a Workflow? is the eventual Part 3 workflow/SOP entry point.
Received: D58 context_template_library.md
Hands off: D60 Monthly Diagnostic / context_template_system_pack_and_part3_handoff.md
Redline: Do not close Part 2 while highest-risk gaps, blocking evidence, owner, repair action, or D60 action are missing.
Practice note: course practice; connected to the surrounding day sequence. Use the current monthly review page; do not rely on older drafts.
A monthly review should decide what can be reused, what must be repaired, and what must not be carried forward.
Use the previous artifact and the next handoff to keep this monthly review practical, honest, and ready for the workflow phase.
This sample is day-specific for Day 59: Part 2 Context Library Repair Board.
| No. | Artifact/template | Previous day | Highest-risk gap | Blocking evidence missing? | Review status | Repair owner | Repair action | D60 required action | D60 readiness |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Context Template Library / D58 | D58 | D53 failure log is only one failure family; D54 v2 may be under-tested | Unclear — review needed | Partial / repair needed | Worker | Add one more failure family or flag limited test coverage in D60 | D60 must diagnose as limitation | Repair before D60 |
Context Template v2 for manager update.
Audience field is vague for customer-facing use.
Run diagnostic on reuse condition and handoff safety.
Core path: 3 rows. Deep path: 3 rows. Blank required fields create export warnings.
3-row acceptable completion example: one reusable D58 library candidate, one weak/repair item, and one concrete D60 required diagnostic action.
| No. | Artifact/template | Previous day | Highest-risk gap | Blocking evidence missing? | Review status | Repair owner | Repair action | D60 required action | D60 readiness |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | |||||||||
| 2 | |||||||||
| 3 |
Use this pass to find the row that would make the artifact look ready while hiding evidence gaps, unclear owner decision, missing exception, or weak handoff.
Weak row: Part 2 library is ready because D31-D58 artifacts exist.
Repair move: Name candidate, gap, blocking evidence, repair owner, action, and D60 required diagnostic.
Better row: Candidate: v2 renewal-risk template; gap: non-CRM source untested; owner: worker; repair: add boundary test; D60 action: diagnose as limited-use only.
Choose the row you would be comfortable carrying into the next day.
Choose the row most likely to fail before AI use.
Sentence starter: The weak row is weak because ___. I will repair it by adding ___ before using AI.
This file is today’s work receipt. It should show the exact decision or handoff that the next day can use, not just that you filled a table.
What this artifact proves: This file proves the learner can turn D58 Context Template Library evidence into a Part 2 gap repair board for D60.
Weak export: Part 2 library is ready because D31-D58 artifacts exist.
Good export: Candidate: v2 renewal-risk template; gap: non-CRM source untested; owner: worker; repair: add boundary test; D60 action: diagnose as limited-use only.
Click Generate Markdown to create part2_gap_repair_plan.md.
Continue with a separate Part 2 close / Part 3 handoff practice path.