Review of Addendum 1

Mode: refactor. Surface: interactive game and analytical tools. Locale: Czech/English. Source: docs/spec/01-addendum-simulation.md, existing code, tests, and a bounded independent code/reader review. Existing pirate identity, common rules, hot-seat play, and theme registration were preserved.

Findings and disposition

Severity Finding / evidence Action Confidence
HIGH One global RNG made extra reveals shift all subsequent draws. Named, keyed chance sources; pairing/independence regressions. High
HIGH Exported statistics lacked a complete reusable experiment specification. Versioned experiment model, saved configuration, CLI/UI reruns and paired comparisons. High
HIGH Raw legal-action counts could be mistaken for meaningful choices. Retain their literal label; add a separate policy-conditioned rollout estimate with formula, sample size and caveat. High
HIGH New agent-context draft exposed a seed that could be inverted to predict hidden outcomes. Remove all source seeds from public contexts; keep policy randomness private; regression test. High
HIGH Invalid experiment controls could execute the previous valid JSON. Disable Run on failed preparation or JSON validation. High
HIGH Imported subsets of bots could be replaced when only repetitions changed. Preserve the imported subset until agent selection is explicitly changed. High
MEDIUM Retroactive bot-assisted trajectories were labeled “human”. Use unattributed; explicitly label controlled experiment/runner traces. High
MEDIUM Small means hid distribution and pairing uncertainty. Median/percentiles, sample sizes, paired deltas and approximate intervals. High
MEDIUM Mixed Czech singular/plural instructions and English decimal presentation. Consistent plural instructions, Czech dashes and locale-aware numeric results. High
MEDIUM Replacing action/character DOM nodes discarded keyboard focus. Restore focus to the selected character or next available action. High
KEEP Theme-neutral mechanics and pirate names explain the same game. Preserve both; add no engine fork or provider dependency. High

The claims ledger for the UI is deliberately narrow: numbers are actual simulation outputs; confidence intervals describe their calculation; the planner is not claimed to be optimal; estimates do not establish fun, age suitability, causal luck contribution, or a dominant strategy.

Dimensions

The copy scanner was run before and after. Its 95% warning corresponds to the implemented interval, not an invented claim; many lexical hits were JavaScript identifiers. Typography checks were applied to extracted prose because applying them directly to JavaScript produced unsafe quote/code edits. No unsafe source rewrite was accepted.

Validation and follow-up

The suite passed 51 checks after this refactor, including legacy replay compatibility, seed isolation, hidden-information boundaries, trajectory corruption, historical branches, paired experiments, provider-neutral agents, UI import/export and stale-spec regressions. A 200-game paired comparison completed through the CLI.

The preferred VS Code browser could not be controlled: Computer Use again returned “Computer Use permissions are not granted”. DOM tests do not substitute for desktop/mobile visual review. No deployment or external AI calls were performed.

A stable identity profile could be extracted from the current theme definitions later; it is not necessary to block this functional refactor. Advanced analytics and automated optimization remain explicitly deferred in docs/experiments.md.