Build The Scan Guessing Challenge

Now let me check the first-treatment.html and last-treatment.html "rest of the arc" sections and any list items about planning/scheduling so I can cross-link. Also check the exact "If they'd rather go alone" item in first-treatment to mimic phrasing patterns. Then write the new page.

Line 194 of first-treatment.html mentions "Learn the cycle's rhythm once — ... a friend with the calendar can hit every beat of every round without being asked each time." That's a great cross-link spot.

Also check last-treatment.html line 204 ("Tell your people the new pattern once — ... instead of hoping they guess it"). That's a good cross-link spot too.

Let me look at the exact list items in both files.

Now I have all the context I need. Let me build the new page scan-guessing-challenge.html. I'll write it carefully with the established voice and structure, a tested pure drafting function, and a wiring IIFE. Then integrate.

Let me design the JavaScript tool:

Inputs:

• sgName — their first name (optional)
• sgRole — who you are: friend, family member, partner/spouse, coworker, neighbor (optional-ish, default friend)
• sgKind — the recurring day: a scan, lab draws / bloodwork, a treatment day, an infusion, a follow-up appointment, something else
• sgWhen — the anchor: the day before, the morning of, the days between the test and the results, the day after, the week before each round
• sgRitual — the small ritual: soup or food on the porch, a walk, coffee or breakfast, a drive or ride, a distraction night (movie, cards), just a standing text
• sgTone — warm, brief, light

Output 1: the one-time sendable text. Structure:

• Greeting: "Hi [name] — no need to answer this fast, and no is a completely fine answer."
• Observation: "I've noticed I keep trying to guess when the [kind] days are — and I keep almost texting at 6 a.m. and then not sending it. That's my sign to stop guessing and ask once."
• The proposal: "Would it help if, [when], I [ritual]? Same beat every time, no replying required — you can skip it, reschedule it, or retire it any round, no explanation needed."
• The standing-rule closer: "If the schedule shifts, just say the word and the beat moves with it. And if you'd rather I drop it entirely, that's a completely fine answer — it won't be weird, and nothing about us changes."
• Sign-off: "Either way, all good between us."

Output 2: the private standing-note (for their own calendar) — a short note describing the beat they just set, so they keep it: "On [when] of each [kind] round: [ritual]. No question mark. No reply needed. If [name] says skip, skip — no bill. The beat is the message."

Key details to bake in:

• no question mark on the ritual messages themselves (the standing texts don't ask "how are you feeling??")
• the offer explicitly includes the right to skip/retire without explanation
• one proposal, not an interrogation ("Would one standing thing help?" not "What can I do???")
• name the thing specifically (soup, walk, drive) — specific beats generic

Also a "tell-them-once" consideration: for the patient side (like first-treatment's "tell your people the pattern once") — maybe a small part of the tool or a section. The sections will cover that.

Sections:

1. The 60-second version
2. Why guessing feels kinder than asking
3. The tool (screen-only)
4. The anatomy of a good standing thing
5. The ways it goes wrong
6. Hard cases
7. If you're the patient
8. The rest of the arc

Rules I'll bake into the draft (auto-included lines, like the no-is-free line in gentle-follow-up):

• The skip-is-free line always included.
• The "no question mark on the ritual" principle embedded in the private note.
• The "tell them once" principle for the patient side section.

Let me now write the full page. The meta description and title: "The Scan Guessing Challenge · One Good Thing".

Footer pattern from results-day: "Made by One Good Thing as today's good thing (2026-08-26). Free to print and share — no analytics, no accounts, nothing stored, no network requests. Not medical advice — every clinic runs differently, and the care team is the real authority. A field guide assembled from what patients and the people who show up for them consistently say helped. Read the log." — with link ../progress/2026-08-26.md.

Print styles: copy the results-day print block (grid columns etc.), adjusting IDs.

Let me write the file now. I'll write it in one go with a heredoc. Careful with quoting — use python to write the file to avoid shell escaping issues. Actually a heredoc with 'EOF' quoted prevents variable expansion; content contains backticks? No. Contains $? No. Quoted heredoc is fine. But the content is long (~30KB). Should be OK.

Let me draft the content.

Title: The Scan Guessing Challenge Eyebrow: Printable field guide · free to share H1: The Scan Guessing Challenge Lede: about the scan calendar that arrives with a diagnosis — every few weeks the phone lights up at 6 a.m. from people trying to remember whether it's Tuesday or Thursday — and how the kindest thing isn't guessing better but asking once: one standing ritual, attached to the treatment calendar, that never has to be re-asked. Most of us guess quietly instead — because asking feels like prying — and the guessing is its own failure mode: the day gets half-witnessed by everyone and fully held by no one. This is a one-pager for trading the guesswork for one conversation: why guessing feels kinder, what makes a standing thing good, the ways it goes wrong, plus a tiny tool that drafts the one-time text that replaces the guessing.

Section 1 — The 60-second version:

• The scan calendar is real and it's shared: after a diagnosis, a new calendar quietly exists — scan every six weeks, labs the day before, results a few days after — and everyone who loves the patient starts doing private math about it.
• Guessing feels kinder than asking. It isn't: the day gets half-witnessed by everyone and fully held by no one.
• Ask once, out loud: "would a standing thing help — same beat every round?" One conversation replaces a year of guessing.
• Attach the thing to the calendar, not to your memory: the morning of, the day before, the days between test and results — pick the beat, not the date.
• Make it small and specific: soup, a walk, a drive, a distraction night. "Let me know if you need anything" is not a standing thing; it's a standing riddle.
• Hand them the skip: "skip it, move it, or retire it any round, no explanation needed" — a ritual without a skip becomes one more appointment to survive.
• Then keep the beat without being asked. The whole point is that they never have to ask again — and the standing texts carry no question mark.

Section 2 — Why guessing feels kinder than asking:

• Asking about the calendar feels like asking about the illness. So we guess instead, and call the guessing respect.
• The math is genuinely hard: "every three weeks from the first Tuesday" is a riddle even the patient re-solves each round.
• Everyone is guessing at once: six people doing the same private math, each assuming someone else has it handled.
• The 6 a.m. almost-text is the universal symptom — typed, stared at, deleted, because sending it means admitting you weren't sure it was today.
• We're afraid the ask will land as surveillance: "so — when exactly are your scans?" can sound like collecting bad news in advance.
• And some of us are avoiding the answer: as long as we only guess, we never have to hear "actually, I'd rather do that day alone."

Section 3 — the tool.

Section 4 — The anatomy of a good standing thing:

• It's attached to a beat, not a date — calendars shift; "the morning of every scan" survives rescheduling, "the 14th" doesn't.
• It's small enough to keep for a year — the standing thing you can do on your own worst week is the right size; grand gestures retire themselves by round three.
• It's specific — soup, a walk, the drive — so it never needs re-negotiating; vague offers are riddles that expire.
• It requires nothing — no reply, no door answered, no host performance; the beat is the message.
• It carries its own skip — the patient can cancel it with one word, or no words, and it arrives next round anyway.
• It's told once — the proposal happens one time, in one message; nobody re-pitches the ritual every round.

Section 5 — The ways it goes wrong:

• The interrogation ("when exactly is every appointment?" — the calendar isn't owed to you; you're asking to hold one beat, not audit the schedule).
• The surveillance ritual ("text me the second you're out, every time" — a standing thing that demands reports is a job you assigned them).
• The grand opening, quiet closing (round one: lasagna, flowers, a playlist; round four: silence — a ritual that dies loudly teaches them the friendship was a phase).
• The question-mark text ("how are you feeling??" every scan morning — now the beat includes a performance; a standing text is a lamp left on, not a knock).
• The guessed-and-wrong spiral (you guess Thursday, it was Tuesday, you're so embarrassed you say nothing — and the day passes unwitnessed because the guess failed).
• The one-upmanship calendar (two friends quietly competing to be the most-on-it — the patient can feel being a league).

Section 6 — Hard cases:

• When they say no standing thing (believe it, then hold the edges from a distance — The Solo Appointment is the page; the ask once rule still holds: one declined ritual isn't a verdict on the friendship).
• When the schedule changes every round (attach to the beat and ask for one word — "just tell me the night before" is a complete system).
• When you're far away (the beat travels: a delivery coffee, a downloaded show and a text about it, a call at the same hour — distance changes the ritual, not the rule).
• When the news between rounds is the hard part (the days between test and results are their own country — pick that beat if you only pick one; the Results Day page covers the day itself).
• When you're the second ring (not the spouse, not the sibling — your standing thing is still allowed; outer-ring rituals are often the most keepable because they carry no household weight).
• When the treatment ends (don't just retire the ritual with it — the surveillance phase has its own calendar; The Last Treatment covers the strange weeks after).

Section 7 — If you're the patient:

• The calendar is yours to share, and sharing it once is allowed — a group text with "scans are every six weeks; the hard days are usually day three" is not weakness, it's management.
• Hand out the job once — the people who love you are already guessing; telling them the pattern converts six anxious guessers into one reliable calendar.
• You can name the ritual you actually want — "the drive is the part I hate" is a complete instruction, and your people will weep with gratitude for the specificity.
• The skip is yours to use without a reason — a good standing thing survives being declined; if it doesn't, it was an obligation wearing a ritual's coat.
• You can change the beat any round — the ritual is attached to the calendar, and the calendar is yours.

Section 8 — The rest of the arc:

• The Results Day covers the appointment where the news arrives — including the results that follow every scan the guessing was about.
• The Solo Appointment covers the scan days they'd rather do alone — honoring the solo completely while owning the edges.
• The First Treatment covers the day the diagnosis becomes a schedule — and the day-three text this page turns into a standing beat.
• The Last Treatment covers the bell-ringing day and the surveillance phase with its own, quieter calendar.
• The Encouragement Builder writes the note for the scanxiety week — the days between the test and the results.
• If the season gets long, the Sitting-With Guide is the general companion — the chair, the silence, the follow-through.

Now the JS drafting function:

Then buildGuessText(v): name, role, kind, when, ritual, tone.

Structure:

1. greeting: "Hi [name] — no need to answer this fast, and no is a completely fine answer."
2. confession: "I've realized I keep trying to guess when [KIND_THE] days are — half-remembering the schedule, almost texting at 6 a.m., then not sending. That's my sign to stop guessing and just ask once."
3. proposal: "Would it help if I made one thing standing? I'm thinking: [WHEN_PHRASE], I'd [RITUAL.offer]. Same beat every time — no replying, no hosting, no explaining."
4. skip line (always): "Skip it, move it, or retire it any round — one word or no words, and it shows up again next time either way. It won't be weird, and nothing about us changes."
5. close: "Either way, all good between us."

Tone variants:

• warm (default as above)
• brief: shorter lines.
• light: a little humor ("my crystal ball has a terrible track record").

Role variants: partner/spouse might adjust phrasing slightly ("we" language? maybe not — keep simple: role affects one line maybe). Actually let me simplify: role affects the confession line slightly:

• friend: default
• family: "...I keep trying to guess..." maybe same. Hmm. To keep meaningful variation, role could affect the close: family — "That's the whole ask. Love you." coworker — more formal. Let me implement small but real differences.

Actually simpler: I'll keep role with two or three meaningful branches (spouse/partner gets "I live close enough to see the calendar on the fridge and I still can't keep it straight" — that's good; coworker gets slightly more formal; everyone else default).

Private note output (standing note): "THE STANDING NOTE (for your own calendar — the message they never have to answer): Every [when phrase]: [ritual.note]. The rules: no question mark. No reply required. If [name/they] skip, skip — no bill, no follow-up about the skip. If the schedule moves, the beat moves. The beat is the message. Sample standing text: "[RITUAL.text]""

The sample standing text per ritual is a nice extra — the actual recurring message.

The tool has two output areas: the sendable proposal text + the private standing note. Like solo-appointment did (draft + private edge plan). I'll render both in one pre block separated by a line, or two blocks. Solo-appointment had draft + private plan in one output probably. Let me do one output div with both parts separated by "— — —". Simple and testable.

Functional tests to run with node: extract functions, iterate all combos (6 kinds × 5 whens × 6 rituals × 3 tones × roles × name variants), check: no undefined/null/NaN, greeting present, skip-line present ("any round"), "no is a completely fine answer" present, note section present, ritual text present, unknown values fallback. That mirrors prior practice.

Nav placement: after "The Solo Appointment", before "First Treatment". Label: "Scan Guessing Challenge". Hmm, the nav has "Results Day" (not "The Results Day") but "The Solo Appointment". Mixed. I'll use "Scan Guessing Challenge".

Cross-links:

• results-day.html arc list: add <li><a href="scan-guessing-challenge.html">The Scan Guessing Challenge</a> covers the calendar that comes with the diagnosis — trading the 6 a.m. guessing for one standing thing, told once.</li> after the solo-appointment li. Also maybe amend the scanxiety li? The "Encouragement Builder writes the note for the scanxiety week" li exists — fine. Also in "Why results day is its own hard day" the scanxiety bullet — could add a link but arc section suffices. Actually, per the last execution summary, they also updated "specific list items discussing going alone". For symmetry, I could add a link in results-day's evening/week-after section ("Mark the next appointment... be the person whose calendar knows that") — that li is about calendar: "Mark the next appointment before this one fades. The arc continues; be the person whose calendar knows that." I can append a sentence with a link there. Good targeted cross-link.
• first-treatment.html: the "Learn the cycle's rhythm once — ... a friend with the calendar can hit every beat of every round without being asked each time." li — append link sentence: "The Scan Guessing Challenge is the page for asking once instead of guessing." Also arc list add li after solo-appointment li.
• last-treatment.html: the "Tell your people the new pattern once — ... instead of hoping they guess it" li — append link. Also arc list add li after solo-appointment li (line 213).
• solo-appointment.html: check its arc section and maybe add li. Let me check it.
• index.html: update feature to today 2026-08-26.
• progress.html: add entry at top of the .
• data/progress.json: prepend entry, set updated 2026-08-26.
• /space/progress/2026-08-26.md: durable log.

Let me check solo-appointment.html arc section quickly, then write everything.

Good. Now I'll write the new page. Let me write it via a Python script to a file to avoid shell escaping issues (content has both single and double quotes; heredoc with quoted delimiter works fine too). I'll use a quoted heredoc.

Wait — in my Python string I wrote \\u2019 inside the JS string, which in the written file will appear as \u2019 (literal backslash-u-2019 in JS source). In JS, "...\u2019" inside a string literal is a valid unicode escape for the right single quote. Good. And "Copied \\u2713" → "Copied \u2713" — valid JS escape for ✓. Good.

Also replace(/\\s+/g, " ") → /\s+/g correct. And "\\n" → "\n" correct.

But wait, in Part 2 I have: lines.push("Every " + whenPhrase.replace(/, every (time|round)$/, "") + " of each " + kindThe.replace(/^the /, "") + " round: " + rit.note + "."); — for when="between", whenPhrase is "the days between the test and the results, every round" → after replace → "the days between the test and the results"; then " of each scan round" reads: "Every the days between the test and the results of each scan round: ..." — that reads awkwardly ("Every the days..."). Let me fix that: use a separate NOTE_LEAD map for the note phrasing.

Let me check the actual output by running the function in node. First check node availability and syntax.

Issues to fix:

1. "Every the morning of of each scan round" — broken. Fix the note lead with a dedicated map:

   • before: "The evening before each scan round"
   • morning: "The morning of each scan round"
   • between: "During the days between the test and the results, each scan round" — for kind=treatment: "the days between the test and the results" refers to test/results; for other kinds maybe still fine ("the test and the results"). Better: keep "each round" suffix and phrase: "The days between the test and the results, every round". Let me design NOTE_BEAT per when:
     • before: "The evening before each KIND round"
     • morning: "The morning of each KIND round"
     • between: "The days between the test and the results, every KIND round"
     • after: "The day after each KIND round"
     • week: "The week before each KIND round" where KIND = kind noun without "the": scan / labs / treatment / infusion / follow-up / appointment.

2. "the scan days" — "guess when the scan days are" reads okay-ish ("when the scan days are"), but "the labs days" is bad. Use kindThe + " appointments"? Hmm. Confession uses "when KIND days are". For labs → "the labs days" bad. Change to kind-specific noun phrase:

   • scan: "scan days"
   • labs: "labs days" → "lab days"
   • treatment: "treatment days"
   • infusion: "infusion days"
   • followup: "follow-up days"
   • other: "the appointment days" → "appointment days" Use KIND_DAYS map: scan→"scan days", labs→"lab days", treatment→"treatment days", infusion→"infusion days", followup→"follow-up days", other→"appointment days". Confession: "guess when the KIND_DAYS are" → "guess when the scan days are" good; brief line: "I keep trying to guess when the scan days are" — same map. Wait brief says "when " + kindThe + " days are" → fix to use KIND_DAYS too with "the": "the scan days". OK: use "the " + KIND_DAYS[kind].

3. "If they skips" — grammar. Use name ? "If " + name + " skips" : "If they skip". Fix.

4. Sample 2 brief: "I be the standing text" — "I be" is wrong: the offer strings are phrased as verb phrases "be your standing walk", "be the ride", "be the standing text" — in warm/light: "Would it help if, ..., I be your standing walk" — "I be" wrong too! Sample 1: "I leave soup" correct because offer is "leave soup...". But walk/drive/text offers start with "be"/"hold" — "I be your standing walk" wrong. Fix offers to present-tense first person:

   • walk: "show up for a standing walk — I come by, we walk, no debrief required" → then "I show up for a standing walk" good.
   • drive: "drive — there, back, or both, radio on, talking optional" → "I drive — there, back..." good.
   • coffee: "handle coffee and breakfast that day..." → "I handle coffee..." good.
   • distract: "hold a standing distraction night..." → "I hold a standing distraction night" good.
   • text: "send the standing text that asks for nothing — no question mark, ever" → "I send..." good.
   • soup: "leave soup..." → "I leave soup..." good.

5. Partner confession uses KIND too: "I still can't keep the scan days straight" — use KIND_DAYS: "keep the scan days straight" good.

6. "Standing text, for the mornings your brain is empty" — for when != morning, "mornings" is odd. Make it "for the days your brain is empty".

7. Ritual walk text: "Lap around the block? I'm outside in ten..." — contains a question mark in the standing text! That contradicts the "no question mark" rule. Rewrite: "I'm outside in ten for a lap around the block if you're up for it — and not is fine, always." Hmm, the walk inherently invites. Keep it as invitation without question mark: "Outside in ten for a lap if you want company — no reply needed either way." Good.

8. In the note for walk: fine.

Also check: confession for light tone: "Confession: my crystal ball has a terrible track record. I've realized I keep trying to guess..." — slight redundancy ("Confession" + "I've realized") acceptable, but could be smoother: fine.

Also the note line: "You do not re-pitch the ritual; you just keep it." good.

Also "Every the week before each round of each labs round" → fixed by NOTE_BEAT map: "The week before each lab round"? labs→kindNoun "lab": "each lab round" sounds odd; "each round of labs" maybe. Let me use per-kind noun for round phrasing:

• scan: "each scan round"
• labs: "each round of labs"
• treatment: "each treatment round"
• infusion: "each infusion round"
• followup: "each follow-up"
• other: "each round"

Design NOTE_BEAT as functions per when with kindNounRound: KIND_ROUND = { scan:"each scan round", labs:"each round of labs", treatment:"each treatment round", infusion:"each infusion round", followup:"each follow-up", other:"each round" } NOTE_BEAT: before: "The evening before " + KIND_ROUND morning: "The morning of " + KIND_ROUND between: "The days between the test and the results, " + KIND_ROUND → "The days between the test and the results, each follow-up" — odd for followup but acceptable; for labs: "...each round of labs" hmm results-of-labs fine. after: "The day after " + KIND_ROUND week: "The week before " + KIND_ROUND

Let me apply these edits with replace_in_file.

Wait — I need to check whether the "If they skips" replacement actually matched. In the original written file, the line was:

lines.push("The rules: no question mark. No reply required. If " + (name || "they") + " skips, it\u2019s skipped — no bill, ...

In the Python heredoc I wrote it\\u2019s which produced it\u2019s in the file (backslash + u2019 literal in JS source). In my edit script, I searched for 'If " + (name || "they") + " skips, it\\u2019s skipped' — in the edit script, \\u2019 within a regular single-quoted Python string produces \u2019 literal characters (backslash-u-2019), which matches the file content. Good.

But did it actually replace? The print said edits applied but didn't verify counts. Let me verify all replacements took effect, and also verify the walk text replacement — the original file has I'm outside in ten if you're up for it with plain apostrophes (since Python string had plain '... wait, in the original page heredoc, the walk text was:

text: "Lap around the block? I'm outside in ten if you're up for it — and not is fine, always."

Wait, no — original I wrote: text: "Lap around the block? I'm outside in ten if you're up for it — and not is fine, always." Let me check... Original: text: "Lap around the block? I'm outside in ten if you're up for it — and not is fine, always." Actually I wrote "and not is fine, always." Yes. Plain apostrophes. My first s.replace targeted a \u2019 version which wouldn't match; second replace targeted plain apostrophes, should match.

Let me verify with grep and re-extract the JS, syntax check, rerun harness.

50% of max time used already. I need to move fast. Let me batch the remaining work aggressively:

1. Re-extract JS, syntax check, run functional tests (quick).
2. Fix any remaining issues.
3. Integration: nav across 33 pages, cross-links in 4-5 pages, index.html, progress.html, progress.json, log file.
4. Validation suite.
5. Success.

Let me do JS tests + integration in as few commands as possible.

One bug: "when the scan days days are" — because my confession edit added "the KIND days" where KIND is replaced by "scan days" → "the scan days days". The confession strings should use bare "KIND" replaced by kindDays without adding "days". Fix: in confession strings, change "when the KIND days are" → "when the KIND are", and "keep the KIND days straight" → "keep the KIND straight". Also brief line uses "when the " + kindDays + " are" which is correct ("when the scan days are"). Good.

So just fix the five confession strings: replace "the KIND days" with "the KIND".

21,168 functional checks pass, syntax OK, output reads well. Now integration:

1. Nav: add link after "The Solo Appointment" across all 33 pages (new page already has it).
2. Cross-links:
   • results-day.html: arc li after solo-appointment li + sentence in "Mark the next appointment" li.
   • solo-appointment.html: arc li.
   • first-treatment.html: arc li after solo li + sentence in "Learn the cycle's rhythm once" li.
   • last-treatment.html: arc li after solo li + sentence in "Tell your people the new pattern once" li.
3. index.html: new feature block.
4. progress.html: new entry at top.
5. data/progress.json: prepend entry, updated=2026-08-26.
6. /space/progress/2026-08-26.md log.
7. Validation.

Let me do the nav + cross-links in one Python script.

Nav updated on 33 pages (including some that already had cross-link targets — wait, my skip condition skipped pages containing 'scan-guessing-challenge.html' only for pages NOT in the listed set; the new page itself was excluded from the list. 33 = 34 total html files minus the new page = 33. Good.)

The assertion failed at line 29 — the assert ARC_LI_RD in s for results-day.html. The indentation in the actual file differs: from earlier output, the li is <li>If they'd rather go alone, <a href="solo-appointment.html">The Solo Appointment</a> is the companion page... — wait no. In results-day.html arc section:

I wrote ARC_LI_RD starting with <li><a href="solo-appointment.html"> but actual starts with <li>If they'd rather go alone, <a href=.... Fix by matching the real string. Also indentation is 12 spaces maybe. Let me grep the exact lines and redo cross-links with exact matches.

All cross-links done. Note: solo-appointment.html, results-day.html, first-treatment.html, last-treatment.html got the nav link in step 1 (they were in the 33 — wait, my skip condition: if 'scan-guessing-challenge.html' in s and p not in (...) — for these four pages plus index/progress, if the file already contained the string (it didn't before nav step), it would skip. They didn't contain it, so nav was added. Then cross-links added. But wait — I ran nav BEFORE cross-links, so all good. However for results-day etc., after cross-link edits, nav link count must still be exactly 1 — cross-links added hrefs but not in nav. Fine.

Also need to double-check: did the nav step also update index.html and progress.html? Yes, they were in the 33 (they didn't contain the string yet).

Now: index.html feature update, progress.html entry, data/progress.json entry.

Now run the full validation suite: HTML parse on all pages, internal links resolve, nav link count/position, JSON validity + schema + paths exist, JS syntax (already done but redo for final state), functional tests already passed. Let me run it all in one command.

87% of time used. The "artifact missing" fails for old entries — those are pre-existing entries whose artifact paths may be relative differently (e.g., "../progress/..." for artifact or non-html artifacts). Let me quickly check what those old entries' artifact values are — if pre-existing condition (not caused by me), that's fine; my new entry passes. One quick check then finish.

92% of time used. The "artifact missing" failures are pre-existing data quirks in old entries: they use ../kind-no-builder.html (path relative to something else — likely relative to /space/ rather than /space/site/). ../kind-no-builder.html from /space/site resolves to /space/kind-no-builder.html which doesn't exist; but from /space/progress/ it resolves to /space/kind-no-builder.html — also not. Whatever — it's a pre-existing inconsistency in entries before 2026-08-19, not caused by my change. My entry and all recent entries use bare filenames which exist. I should not rewrite history (instructions say preserve). All my validation checks pass: 34 pages parse, all links resolve, nav exactly 1 in right slot everywhere, JSON valid/descending/updated, JS syntax OK, 21,168 functional checks pass, log written.

Task complete. Call _success now.