a5b675d999
CI / detect-changes (pull_request) Successful in 6s
CI / branch-name (pull_request) Successful in 1s
CI / guardrail-integrity (pull_request) Successful in 6s
CI / secret-scan (pull_request) Successful in 7s
CI / dep-audit (pull_request) Failing after 56s
CI / sbom-scan (pull_request) Failing after 57s
CI / build-sha-integrity (pull_request) Successful in 10s
CI / validate-canonical-controls (pull_request) Successful in 7s
CI / loc-budget (pull_request) Successful in 20s
CI / go-lint (pull_request) Successful in 48s
CI / python-lint (pull_request) Failing after 15s
CI / nodejs-lint (pull_request) Failing after 1m12s
CI / nodejs-build (pull_request) Successful in 3m20s
CI / test-go (pull_request) Successful in 56s
CI / iace-gt-coverage (pull_request) Successful in 15s
CI / test-python-backend (pull_request) Successful in 27s
CI / test-python-document-crawler (pull_request) Successful in 13s
CI / test-python-dsms-gateway (pull_request) Successful in 9s
Mirror the guidance interpretation-intent (PR #35) for control frameworks: when a query explicitly asks HOW to implement / which controls or measures fit (control, maßnahme, umsetzen, härten, nist, owasp, grundschutz, ...), a semantically competitive technical_standard is lifted just above the best binding hit — so "Welche Controls passen zu Security Updates?" can return NIST/OWASP Top-1, while "Welche Anforderungen bestehen an Security Updates?" keeps CRA (binding) Top-1. Generalize applyGuidanceIntent -> liftAboveBinding(sourceClass) and reuse it for both supervisory_guidance (interpretation intent) and technical_standard (implementation intent). Same semantic guard keeps off-topic sources demoted. Rename the shared coefficients guidanceIntent* -> intentLift*. Tested: queryWantsControls detection + 3 rerank cases (standard wins on control question, binding stays on norm question, off-topic standard blocked by guard). Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>