Claim Dispute Bundle to PLD Disclosure Pack

Back office, not lifecycle-bound. Two-step product-liability disclosure flow: build a two-sided replay-challenge dossier for a disputed execution claim, then build the disclosure and rebuttal pack from the receipts in that bundle. The pack traces the receipts in the step 1 bundle; the operator is responsible for putting only in-window receipts into the claim, because art-308 does not filter receipts by disputed_window. Step 1's insufficient_evidence and bundle_claim_strength travel with the pack next to step 2's trace_digest and gap_in_window, so a pack built after step 1 reported insufficient_evidence never reads as a complete dossier. Prepared for Directive (EU) 2024/2853, transposition 9 December 2026.

OpenChainGraph · 3 Steps cryptographic mandate Hash-Anchored §4 chain_depth:3 Client-Side · Zero PII

Chain Stages · 3 Steps

1 ROOT node

Claim Dispute Bundle Builder art-307-claim-dispute-bundle-builder

Then the step 2 run takes the step 1 output's receipts unchanged by name and builds the trace digest and rebuttal mapping from them

MCP Call · build_claim_dispute_bundle

{
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "name": "build_claim_dispute_bundle",
    "arguments": {}
  },
  "id": 1
}

↓

2 STAGE 2 node

PLD Disclosure Pack Builder art-308-pld-disclosure-pack-builder

Then the disclosure and rebuttal pack is built from the bundle's receipts, with gap_in_window flagged when the receipt set is empty, and step 1's insufficient_evidence and bundle_claim_strength shown next to trace_digest and gap_in_window

MCP Call · build_pld_disclosure_pack

{
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "name": "build_pld_disclosure_pack",
    "arguments": {}
  },
  "id": 1
}

↓

3 TERMINAL node

Agent-Action Audit-Trail Aggregator cry-05-agent-action-audit-trail-aggregator

Then the session receipts are aggregated into the session receipt

MCP Call · aggregate_execution_receipts

{
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "name": "aggregate_execution_receipts",
    "arguments": {}
  },
  "id": 1
}

Question: A product defect is alleged and disclosure is requested. Does the pack trace the bundle's receipts, and is there a gap we must admit? Run the AINumbers MCP tool `run_chain` with {"chain":"claim-dispute-bundle-to-pld-disclosure-pack"} and read `art-308-pld-disclosure-pack-builder.gap_in_window`. Re-run with `inputs` for `art-308-pld-disclosure-pack-builder`, reusing the values that result echoed, with `receipts` changed so remove every receipt and watch trace_digest go null and gap_in_window go true. Compare the same field. Verify: call `verify_execution_hash` (https://mcp.ainumbers.co/mcp) with `claimed_hash` set to `composite_execution_hash` and the full `composite_artifact`. Ledger, for a human re-check: https://ledger.ainumbers.co/ PII rule: send synthetic or anonymised inputs only. The MCP server runs these kernels and logs no payloads. Chain page: https://ainumbers.co/chaingraph/chains/claim-dispute-bundle-to-pld-disclosure-pack.html

Claim Dispute Bundle to PLD Disclosure Pack

Ask your agent