Merge pull request 'docs(knowledge): Reference Transition Scenarios (RTS) + ISO9001->CRA' (#14) from feat/reference-transition-scenarios into main

backend-compliance/knowledge/reference_transition_scenarios/RTS-001.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,53 @@
+# Reference Transition Scenario — canonical regression scenario (NOT a test fixture).
+# ANONYMIZED ARCHETYPE ONLY — no real company names are stored in the system; illustrative.
+# Each RTS pins an Expected Outcome so every commit must reproduce it (identical or better).
+
+id: RTS-001
+archetype: "Automotive supplier with a mature ISMS — embedded electronics + software, CE products, OEM supply chain"
+note: "Anonymized typical starting situation; illustrative only."
+
+reference_company:
+  sector: automotive_supply
+  known_certifications: [TISAX, ISO27001]
+  product_traits:
+    is_machine: false            # component / embedded supplier
+    is_component: true
+    has_embedded_software: true
+    connected_to_internet: true
+    has_remote_access: true
+    generates_usage_data: null   # UNKNOWN -> a deciding question, not an assertion
+    market: [EU]
+
+transition_goal:
+  from: [TISAX, ISO27001]
+  to:
+    - target: CRA
+      pattern: TP-ISO27001-CRA-v1     # executed through RS-005 below
+    - target: MaschinenVO
+      pattern: null
+      note: pattern_pending           # no MaschinenVO pattern yet
+
+expected_outcome:
+  cra:
+    pattern: TP-ISO27001-CRA-v1
+    # The mature ISMS reduces effort here (most info-security capabilities probably covered).
+    expected_likely_covered_at_least:
+      - incident_management
+      - supplier_security
+      - secure_development_lifecycle
+      - asset_and_configuration_management
+      - security_logging_and_monitoring
+      - access_control_and_authentication
+    # ... but the CRA product-cyber delta remains.
+    expected_delta_at_least:
+      - sbom_creation
+      - coordinated_vulnerability_disclosure
+      - security_update_support_period
+      - secure_signed_update_distribution
+      - exploited_vuln_and_incident_reporting
+      - product_cyber_risk_assessment
+      - ce_conformity_assessment_and_technical_documentation
+  data_act:
+    expectation: uncertain            # NEVER a fixed gilt/gilt-nicht
+    deciding_questions: [generates_usage_data, connected_product, data_act_scope]
+    rationale: "A connected component MAY fall under the Data Act; applicability depends on usage-data generation + scope. The engine must SURFACE this uncertainty and ask, not assert."

backend-compliance/knowledge/reference_transition_scenarios/RTS-002.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,50 @@
+# Reference Transition Scenario — ANONYMIZED ARCHETYPE ONLY (no real company names stored).
+id: RTS-002
+archetype: "Classic machine builder with only a QMS — precision systems, CE products, no ISMS"
+note: "Anonymized typical starting situation; illustrative only. Contrast to RTS-001: a much LARGER delta."
+
+reference_company:
+  sector: mechanical_engineering
+  known_certifications: [ISO9001]
+  product_traits:
+    is_machine: true
+    is_component: false
+    has_embedded_software: true
+    connected_to_internet: false   # often not connected -> Data Act less likely, still a question
+    has_remote_access: null
+    generates_usage_data: null
+    market: [EU]
+
+transition_goal:
+  from: [ISO9001]
+  to:
+    - target: CRA
+      pattern: TP-ISO9001-CRA-v1
+    - target: MaschinenVO
+      pattern: null
+      note: pattern_pending
+
+expected_outcome:
+  cra:
+    pattern: TP-ISO9001-CRA-v1
+    # A QMS gives only process discipline...
+    expected_likely_covered_at_least:
+      - document_and_change_control
+      - supplier_evaluation
+      - release_and_approval_process
+    # ...so the CRA delta is LARGE — nearly the whole security set.
+    expected_delta_at_least:
+      - product_cyber_risk_assessment
+      - secure_development_lifecycle
+      - technical_vulnerability_management
+      - coordinated_vulnerability_disclosure
+      - sbom_creation
+      - security_update_support_period
+      - secure_signed_update_distribution
+      - exploited_vuln_and_incident_reporting
+      - ce_conformity_assessment_and_technical_documentation
+    expected_delta_much_larger_than: RTS-001   # regression: ISO9001 leaves more open than ISO27001
+  data_act:
+    expectation: uncertain
+    deciding_questions: [connected_product, generates_usage_data, data_act_scope]
+    rationale: "Often not a connected product, but applicability is not assumed either way — the engine must ask."

backend-compliance/knowledge/reference_transition_scenarios/RTS-003.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,54 @@
+# Reference Transition Scenario — ANONYMIZED ARCHETYPE ONLY (no real company names stored).
+id: RTS-003
+archetype: "Machine builder with an ISMS and networked products — connected machines that may generate usage data"
+note: "Anonymized typical starting situation; illustrative only. Highlights the Data-Act uncertainty."
+
+reference_company:
+  sector: mechanical_engineering
+  known_certifications: [ISO27001]   # ISMS ~ ISO 27001
+  product_traits:
+    is_machine: true
+    is_component: false
+    has_embedded_software: true
+    connected_to_internet: true
+    has_remote_access: true
+    generates_usage_data: null       # UNKNOWN -> the Data-Act deciding question
+    market: [EU]
+
+transition_goal:
+  from: [ISO27001]
+  to:
+    - target: CRA
+      pattern: TP-ISO27001-CRA-v1
+    - target: MaschinenVO
+      pattern: null
+      note: pattern_pending
+    - target: DataAct
+      pattern: null
+      note: uncertain_hypothesis     # NOT asserted — see expected_outcome.data_act
+
+expected_outcome:
+  cra:
+    pattern: TP-ISO27001-CRA-v1
+    expected_likely_covered_at_least:
+      - incident_management
+      - technical_vulnerability_management
+      - secure_development_lifecycle
+      - access_control_and_authentication
+      - security_logging_and_monitoring
+    expected_delta_at_least:
+      - sbom_creation
+      - coordinated_vulnerability_disclosure
+      - security_update_support_period
+      - secure_signed_update_distribution
+      - exploited_vuln_and_incident_reporting
+      - product_cyber_risk_assessment
+      - ce_conformity_assessment_and_technical_documentation
+  data_act:
+    expectation: uncertain            # the core correction: a connected machine MAY fall under the Data Act
+    deciding_questions: [generates_usage_data, connected_product, data_act_scope]
+    rationale: >
+      A networked machine is MORE likely to fall under the Data Act than a pure component, but it is NOT
+      a settled fact — it depends on usage-data generation, user access, and scope. The Reference Suite
+      checks that the engine recognises the RIGHT uncertainty and asks the deciding question, NOT that it
+      writes a fixed gilt/gilt-nicht.

backend-compliance/knowledge/transition_patterns/transition_pattern_iso9001_to_cra_v1.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,95 @@
+# Transition KNOWLEDGE Pattern (TKP) — ISO 9001 (QMS)  ->  CRA (Reg. (EU) 2024/2847)
+# Curated regulatory KNOWLEDGE. Different character again: ISO 9001 gives PROCESS discipline
+# (document/change control, supplier evaluation, release approval) but almost NOTHING product-cyber.
+# Therefore the CRA delta is LARGE — the opposite shape of ISMS->TISAX. Used by RTS-002.
+
+id: TP-ISO9001-CRA-v1
+status: draft                 # levels: draft(L1) -> reviewed(L2) -> validated(L3, expert) -> proven(L4)
+version: 1
+
+transition_goal:
+  from:
+    standard: "ISO 9001"
+    edition: "2015"
+    nature: organizational_qms
+  to:
+    regulation: "Cyber Resilience Act"
+    reference: "Regulation (EU) 2024/2847"
+    applies_from: "2027-12-11"
+    nature: product_cybersecurity
+  one_line: "Move a manufacturer whose only management system is a QMS toward CRA conformity for a product with digital elements."
+
+provenance:
+  author: "Claude (Reasoning session) — AI first draft (L1)"
+  basis: "ISO 9001:2015 (7.5 documented information, 8.4 external providers, 8.5.6 control of changes, 8.6 release) vs CRA Annex I."
+  reviewed_by: null
+  reviewed_at: null
+  validated_by: null
+
+disclaimer: >
+  Curated expert knowledge, NOT a normative proof. KEY INSIGHT: ISO 9001 is a QUALITY management
+  system — it provides process discipline but no information-security or product-cybersecurity
+  capability. The CRA delta for an ISO-9001-only manufacturer is therefore LARGE (nearly the whole
+  CRA security + vulnerability-handling + conformity set). Welt-1; confidence from the curated relationship.
+
+source_state_variants:
+  certified:       "ISO 9001 certified -> the process-discipline assumptions hold; security substance is still missing."
+  qms_introduced:  "QMS implemented but not certified -> downgrade 'partially_supports' to needs_confirmation."
+
+# ── A) LIKELY COVERED — only process discipline (partially_supports), NOT security. ──
+likely_covered:
+  - capability: document_and_change_control
+    iso9001_basis: ["7.5", "8.5.6"]
+    cra_target: [Annex_VII_technical_documentation, Annex_I_Part_II_2_updates]
+    relationship: partially_supports
+    confidence_source: relationship
+    verification: required
+    expected_evidence: [document_control_procedure]
+    rationale: "ISO 9001 document/change control gives the discipline to MAINTAIN technical documentation and controlled updates — but no security content. Hence 'partially_supports'."
+    reviewable_claim: "Document/change control helps maintain CRA technical documentation but does not produce it."
+
+  - capability: supplier_evaluation
+    iso9001_basis: ["8.4"]
+    cra_target: [Annex_I_Part_II_1_components]
+    relationship: partially_supports
+    confidence_source: relationship
+    verification: required
+    expected_evidence: [supplier_evaluation_records]
+    rationale: "Supplier evaluation gives a basis for supply-chain control — but ISO 9001 evaluates QUALITY, not security/components. Hence 'partially_supports'."
+    reviewable_claim: "Quality supplier evaluation does not establish component security or an SBOM."
+
+  - capability: release_and_approval_process
+    iso9001_basis: ["8.6"]
+    cra_target: [Annex_I_Part_II_8_distribution]
+    relationship: partially_supports
+    confidence_source: relationship
+    verification: required
+    expected_evidence: [release_procedure]
+    rationale: "A release/approval gate gives release discipline — but not secure, signed update distribution. Hence 'partially_supports'."
+    reviewable_claim: "A quality release gate does not establish signed secure update distribution."
+
+# ── B) DELTA — nearly the whole CRA security + vulnerability-handling + conformity set. ──
+delta_requirements:
+  - {capability: product_cyber_risk_assessment, cra_basis: "Annex I + technical documentation", missing_because: "ISO 9001 has no security risk assessment.", why_asked: "The CRA needs a product cyber risk assessment; a QMS has none.", dropped_if: ["A product cyber risk assessment exists."], needed_information: verify_existence, expected_evidence: [product_risk_assessment], priority: high, reviewable_claim: "ISO 9001 establishes no product cyber risk assessment."}
+  - {capability: secure_development_lifecycle, cra_basis: "Annex I Part I (1), Part II (3)", missing_because: "ISO 9001 has no secure development.", why_asked: "The CRA requires secure-by-design development + security testing; a QMS does not address security.", dropped_if: ["A documented secure development lifecycle exists."], needed_information: verify_existence, expected_evidence: [secure_development_policy], priority: high, reviewable_claim: "ISO 9001 does not establish a secure development lifecycle."}
+  - {capability: technical_vulnerability_management, cra_basis: "Annex I Part II (2)", missing_because: "ISO 9001 has no vulnerability management.", why_asked: "The CRA requires handling product vulnerabilities; a QMS has no such process.", dropped_if: ["A vulnerability management process exists."], needed_information: verify_existence, expected_evidence: [vulnerability_management_procedure], priority: high, reviewable_claim: "ISO 9001 does not establish vulnerability management."}
+  - {capability: coordinated_vulnerability_disclosure, cra_basis: "Annex I Part II (5,6)", missing_because: "No CVD in a QMS.", why_asked: "The CRA requires a way to receive product vulnerability reports (CVD/PSIRT).", dropped_if: ["A published CVD policy + contact exists."], needed_information: verify_existence, expected_evidence: [cvd_policy], priority: high, reviewable_claim: "ISO 9001 does not establish coordinated vulnerability disclosure."}
+  - {capability: sbom_creation, cra_basis: "Annex I Part II (1)", missing_because: "No SBOM in a QMS.", why_asked: "The CRA requires a software bill of materials.", dropped_if: ["A machine-readable SBOM is produced per release."], needed_information: determine_sbom_maturity, expected_evidence: [sbom], priority: high, reviewable_claim: "ISO 9001 does not produce an SBOM."}
+  - {capability: security_update_support_period, cra_basis: "Art. 13(8) + Annex I", missing_because: "No support period in a QMS.", why_asked: "The CRA requires a defined security-update support period.", dropped_if: ["A product support/lifecycle policy defines the period."], needed_information: determine_duration, expected_evidence: [support_policy], priority: high, reviewable_claim: "ISO 9001 does not define a security-update support period."}
+  - {capability: secure_signed_update_distribution, cra_basis: "Annex I Part II (8)", missing_because: "No signed updates in a QMS.", why_asked: "The CRA requires authenticity/integrity-protected updates.", dropped_if: ["Updates are cryptographically signed and verified."], needed_information: verify_existence, expected_evidence: [config_export], priority: high, reviewable_claim: "ISO 9001 does not establish signed update distribution."}
+  - {capability: exploited_vuln_and_incident_reporting, cra_basis: "Art. 14", missing_because: "No Art. 14 reporting in a QMS.", why_asked: "The CRA imposes 24h/72h reporting of exploited vulnerabilities to authorities.", dropped_if: ["A documented Art. 14 reporting procedure exists."], needed_information: verify_existence, expected_evidence: [reporting_procedure], priority: high, reviewable_claim: "ISO 9001 does not establish CRA Art. 14 reporting."}
+  - {capability: access_control_and_authentication, cra_basis: "Annex I Part I (4)", missing_because: "No security access control in a QMS.", why_asked: "The CRA requires product authentication / no default credentials.", dropped_if: ["Product authentication is documented + tested."], needed_information: verify_existence, expected_evidence: [access_control_policy], priority: medium, reviewable_claim: "ISO 9001 does not establish product authentication."}
+  - {capability: ce_conformity_assessment_and_technical_documentation, cra_basis: "Annex VII + CE", missing_because: "No CRA conformity in a QMS.", why_asked: "CRA conformity needs a product conformity assessment + CE + technical documentation + DoC.", dropped_if: ["A CRA conformity assessment + technical documentation exist."], needed_information: request_evidence, expected_evidence: [technical_documentation, declaration_of_conformity], priority: high, reviewable_claim: "ISO 9001 does not satisfy CRA conformity assessment."}
+
+rejected_assumptions:
+  - "ISO 9001 does NOT establish information security or product cybersecurity."
+  - "ISO 9001 does NOT establish secure development, vulnerability management, SBOM, CVD, or Art. 14 reporting."
+  - "An ISO 9001 certificate does NOT satisfy CRA conformity assessment."
+
+determinism_goal: >
+  Two independent auditors should agree that an ISO-9001-only manufacturer needs almost the whole CRA
+  security set; the QMS reduces effort only on documentation/change/release discipline.
+
+review_checklist:
+  - "Confirm the (deliberately large) delta with a CRA expert."
+  - "Replace capability ids with Capability Registry MCAP ids once assigned."

backend-compliance/reference_scenarios/generate.py

@@ -35,7 +35,7 @@ from compliance.capability import (
 )
 from compliance.reasoning.enums import Confidence
 from compliance.transition_reasoning import (
-    TransitionContext, TransitionGoal, TargetType, TargetRequirement, assess_transition,
+    TransitionContext, TransitionGoal, TargetType, TargetRequirement, assess_transition, CoverageStatus,
 )
 import os
 import yaml
@@ -279,6 +279,63 @@ for _pf in _pat_files:
 _t_rows.append(("RS-005.1 Renderer (Fragetext)", "TODO", "verschoben — Engine liefert nur Requests"))
 coverage_table(_t_rows)
 
+# ── Reference Transition Scenarios (RTS) — canonical regression (Soll/Ist + knowledge) ───
+w("## Reference Transition Scenarios (RTS) — kanonische Regression (Soll/Ist)")
+w("")
+w('_Anonymisierte Archetypen (KEINE Firmennamen). Jeder RTS pinnt ein Expected Outcome; jeder Commit muss es reproduzieren (identisch oder besser). Data Act = `uncertain`, nie fix „gilt/gilt-nicht"._')
+w("")
+_rts_dir = os.path.join(os.path.dirname(__file__), "..", "knowledge", "reference_transition_scenarios")
+_pat_d2 = os.path.join(os.path.dirname(__file__), "..", "knowledge", "transition_patterns")
+_pat_by_id = {}
+for _pf in sorted(os.listdir(_pat_d2)):
+    if _pf.startswith("transition_pattern_") and _pf.endswith(".yaml"):
+        with open(os.path.join(_pat_d2, _pf), encoding="utf-8") as _h:
+            _pp = yaml.safe_load(_h)
+        _pat_by_id[_pp["id"]] = _pp
+_rts_rows: List[Row] = []
+for _rf in sorted(f for f in os.listdir(_rts_dir) if f.startswith("RTS-") and f.endswith(".yaml")):
+    with open(os.path.join(_rts_dir, _rf), encoding="utf-8") as _f:
+        RTS = yaml.safe_load(_f)
+    _cra = RTS["expected_outcome"]["cra"]
+    _pat = _pat_by_id[_cra["pattern"]]
+    _src = RTS["reference_company"]["known_certifications"][0]
+    _have = [a["capability"] for a in _pat["likely_covered"]]
+    _map = {_src: CapabilityMappingEntry(capability_ids=_have, confidence=Confidence.MEDIUM)}
+    _profile = build_company_profile(
+        CompanyContext(company_id="rts", certifications=[Certification(certification_id=_src)]), _map)
+    _reqs = [TargetRequirement(capability_id=a["capability"]) for a in _pat["likely_covered"]]
+    _reqs += [TargetRequirement(capability_id=d["capability"], question_intent=d.get("needed_information", "verify_existence"))
+              for d in _pat["delta_requirements"]]
+    _a = assess_transition(TransitionContext(company_id="rts", target=TransitionGoal(target_id="CRA")), _reqs, _profile)
+    _actual_missing = {c.capability_id for c in _a.coverage if c.status == CoverageStatus.MISSING}
+    _exp_delta = set(_cra["expected_delta_at_least"])
+    _exp_cov = set(_cra["expected_likely_covered_at_least"])
+    _delta_ok = _exp_delta <= _actual_missing
+    _cov_ok = _exp_cov <= set(_a.summary.probably_covered)
+    # Data Act: the engine must SURFACE uncertainty, never ASSERT "applies".
+    _tr = RTS["reference_company"]["product_traits"]
+    _P = P(name="rts", product_type=PT.MACHINERY if _tr.get("is_machine") else PT.HARDWARE,
+           markets=_tr.get("market", ["EU"]), economic_operator_role=Role.MANUFACTURER,
+           lifecycle_phase=LP.PLACING_ON_MARKET, is_machine=_tr.get("is_machine"),
+           is_component=_tr.get("is_component"), has_embedded_software=_tr.get("has_embedded_software"),
+           connected_to_internet=_tr.get("connected_to_internet"), has_remote_access=_tr.get("has_remote_access"),
+           generates_usage_data=_tr.get("generates_usage_data"))
+    _rmap = render_regulatory_map(_P)
+    _appl = {v.regulation_id for v in _rmap.applicable_regulations}
+    _unc = {v.regulation_id for v in _rmap.uncertain_regulations}
+    _da = "applicable" if "DataAct" in _appl else ("uncertain" if "DataAct" in _unc else "excluded/absent")
+    _da_ok = "DataAct" not in _appl   # never wrongly asserted as applicable
+    _ok = _delta_ok and _cov_ok and _da_ok
+    w("**%s** — %s" % (RTS["id"], RTS["archetype"]))
+    w("> Start %s → CRA. %s" % ("+".join(RTS["reference_company"]["known_certifications"]), _a.summary.headline))
+    w("- Expected Delta erfüllt: **%s** (%d/%d Soll-Delta in der Ist-Lücke)" % ("ja" if _delta_ok else "NEIN", len(_exp_delta & _actual_missing), len(_exp_delta)))
+    w("- Expected likely_covered erfüllt: **%s**" % ("ja" if _cov_ok else "NEIN"))
+    w("- Data Act: Engine sagt **%s** (Soll: uncertain; nie asserted) → %s" % (_da, "ok" if _da_ok else "FEHLER (asserted!)"))
+    w("")
+    _rts_rows.append(("%s (%s→CRA)" % (RTS["id"], _src), "PASS" if _ok else "PARTIAL",
+                      "%d/%d Delta-Soll · likely_covered %s · DataAct=%s" % (len(_exp_delta & _actual_missing), len(_exp_delta), "ok" if _cov_ok else "NEIN", _da)))
+coverage_table(_rts_rows)
+
 # ── Epics + roll-up ───────────────────────────────────────────────────────
 w("## Gaps → Epics (Backlog — nur erfasst, NICHT implementiert)")
 w("")

backend-compliance/reference_scenarios/reference_scenario_suite_v1.md

@@ -161,14 +161,51 @@ _Genericity-Beweis: derselbe Algorithmus trägt jeden Transition Knowledge Patte
 - vermutlich abgedeckt: incident_management, technical_vulnerability_management, supplier_security, access_control_and_authentication, cryptography, security_logging_and_monitoring, secure_development_lifecycle, asset_and_configuration_management
 - Pattern getragen: **ja** (17 caps → 17 coverage + 17 requests)
 
+**ISO 9001 → Cyber Resilience Act** _(TP-ISO9001-CRA-v1, status=draft)_
+> 13 zu klären, 0 bereits abgedeckt, 3 vermutlich vorhanden, 10 fehlt, 0 n/a, 0 nicht im Korpus.
+- Delta zuerst (HIGH): access_control_and_authentication, ce_conformity_assessment_and_technical_documentation, coordinated_vulnerability_disclosure, exploited_vuln_and_incident_reporting, product_cyber_risk_assessment, sbom_creation, secure_development_lifecycle, secure_signed_update_distribution, security_update_support_period, technical_vulnerability_management
+- vermutlich abgedeckt: document_and_change_control, supplier_evaluation, release_and_approval_process
+- Pattern getragen: **ja** (13 caps → 13 coverage + 13 requests)
+
 **Architecture Coverage**
 
 | Layer | Status | Hinweis |
 |---|---|---|
 | Transition ISOIEC27001→TISAX | **PASS** | draft · 5 HIGH-Delta + 8 zu bestätigen |
 | Transition ISOIEC27001→Cyber Resilience Act | **PASS** | reviewed · 9 HIGH-Delta + 8 zu bestätigen |
+| Transition ISO9001→Cyber Resilience Act | **PASS** | draft · 10 HIGH-Delta + 3 zu bestätigen |
 | RS-005.1 Renderer (Fragetext) | **TODO** | verschoben — Engine liefert nur Requests |
 
+## Reference Transition Scenarios (RTS) — kanonische Regression (Soll/Ist)
+
+_Anonymisierte Archetypen (KEINE Firmennamen). Jeder RTS pinnt ein Expected Outcome; jeder Commit muss es reproduzieren (identisch oder besser). Data Act = `uncertain`, nie fix „gilt/gilt-nicht"._
+
+**RTS-001** — Automotive supplier with a mature ISMS — embedded electronics + software, CE products, OEM supply chain
+> Start TISAX+ISO27001 → CRA. 17 zu klären, 0 bereits abgedeckt, 8 vermutlich vorhanden, 9 fehlt, 0 n/a, 0 nicht im Korpus.
+- Expected Delta erfüllt: **ja** (7/7 Soll-Delta in der Ist-Lücke)
+- Expected likely_covered erfüllt: **ja**
+- Data Act: Engine sagt **uncertain** (Soll: uncertain; nie asserted) → ok
+
+**RTS-002** — Classic machine builder with only a QMS — precision systems, CE products, no ISMS
+> Start ISO9001 → CRA. 13 zu klären, 0 bereits abgedeckt, 3 vermutlich vorhanden, 10 fehlt, 0 n/a, 0 nicht im Korpus.
+- Expected Delta erfüllt: **ja** (9/9 Soll-Delta in der Ist-Lücke)
+- Expected likely_covered erfüllt: **ja**
+- Data Act: Engine sagt **uncertain** (Soll: uncertain; nie asserted) → ok
+
+**RTS-003** — Machine builder with an ISMS and networked products — connected machines that may generate usage data
+> Start ISO27001 → CRA. 17 zu klären, 0 bereits abgedeckt, 8 vermutlich vorhanden, 9 fehlt, 0 n/a, 0 nicht im Korpus.
+- Expected Delta erfüllt: **ja** (7/7 Soll-Delta in der Ist-Lücke)
+- Expected likely_covered erfüllt: **ja**
+- Data Act: Engine sagt **uncertain** (Soll: uncertain; nie asserted) → ok
+
+**Architecture Coverage**
+
+| Layer | Status | Hinweis |
+|---|---|---|
+| RTS-001 (TISAX→CRA) | **PASS** | 7/7 Delta-Soll · likely_covered ok · DataAct=uncertain |
+| RTS-002 (ISO9001→CRA) | **PASS** | 9/9 Delta-Soll · likely_covered ok · DataAct=uncertain |
+| RTS-003 (ISO27001→CRA) | **PASS** | 7/7 Delta-Soll · likely_covered ok · DataAct=uncertain |
+
 ## Gaps → Epics (Backlog — nur erfasst, NICHT implementiert)
 
 | Epic | Titel | schliesst Coverage-Luecke |
@@ -180,6 +217,6 @@ _Genericity-Beweis: derselbe Algorithmus trägt jeden Transition Knowledge Patte
 
 ## Suite-Status (Roll-up)
 
-- Coverage-Zellen gesamt: **23**
+- Coverage-Zellen gesamt: **27**
-- PASS: **15** · PARTIAL: 3 · UNSUPPORTED: 1 · TODO: 3 · N/A: 1 · NEEDS_FACTS: 0
+- PASS: **19** · PARTIAL: 3 · UNSUPPORTED: 1 · TODO: 3 · N/A: 1 · NEEDS_FACTS: 0
 - Fortschritt = PASS-Anteil steigt, wenn Epics RS-001…004 landen (objektiver Maßstab, kein LOC).