{"policy_url":"https://probe402.com/method#corrections","acknowledge_within_days":2,"resolve_or_interim_within_days":7,"as_of":"2026-08-27T16:20:02.089Z","count":1,"note":"Every correction ever filed, of every class, including the ones where we were right. Publishing only the ones we lost would be a marketing document.","corrections":[{"acknowledged_at":"2026-08-24T00:00:00.000Z","annotation":{"note":"Every observation of these two endpoints in this range was derived from a POST we sent with no request body. The endpoints rejected the REQUEST; they did not report their own state. Read these rows as `Not probed - no-request-body`: an absence of ours, never a grade of theirs. The range is left OPEN because the collector keeps running until the corrected seed is deployed, and closing it at a date we have not reached would be a claim we cannot make yet.","outcome_should_read":"Not probed","sub_codes_add":["no-request-body","instrument-error-corr_2026-08-24_001"]},"claim":"Nobody raised this. We found it in our own archive: probe402 sent these two endpoints a POST with NO REQUEST BODY, and then published the endpoints' rejection of that malformed request as an observation of the endpoints' state. It is the artefact 402index reads as `degraded` across 61% of MPP, reproduced by us, in our own record.","class":"instrument-error","correction_id":"corr_2026-08-24_001","finding":"Measured 2026-08-24 against captures taken 2026-08-21T08:00:21Z, in the endpoints' own words. ep_5bfb57c12c2b3548 (api.statemind.ai/mcp) answered HTTP 200 with {\"jsonrpc\":\"2.0\",\"id\":null,\"error\":{\"code\":-32700,\"message\":\"request body is not valid JSON\"}} and was graded `Answered, no quote` / R19 [http-200]. ep_46652289eaf2c57b (govlaws.ai/api/mpp/search) answered HTTP 400 with {\"error\":\"invalid_json\",\"message\":\"Request body must be valid JSON\"} and was graded `Answered, no quote` / R19 [http-400]. Both seed rows carry method POST with request_body: null, so the prober sent a bodyless POST on every tick from collector-live onward. Neither grade is a fact about the operator; both are facts about our request. Seven of 29 seed rows share the shape (A8, C2, M1, M2, M3, M4, M5); these two are the ones where the endpoint stated the cause explicitly, so they are the ones this correction scopes. The other five answered in ways that do not establish our request as the cause and are NOT annotated here - an unproven annotation would be its own instrument error.","method_change_ref":null,"original_records_preserved":true,"raised_at":"2026-08-24T00:00:00.000Z","raised_by":"self","remedy":"FIXED FORWARD, NOT REWRITTEN. The prober now refuses to send a body-bearing method with no body and records `Not probed` with sub-code `no-request-body` - our gap, on our side of the line (DATA-MODEL constraint 2). No stored observation is edited: the affected rows still say what they said, and this record is how they should be read. NO BODY WAS INVENTED. ADR-039 J5 permits deriving one from a catalogue input example and there is none to derive from - measured, 402index's rows carry price, network, health_status and latency and no input schema, and the Bazaar row for api.statemind.ai carries prose and no input block. A body we made up would be a guess at another operator's API contract published as a grade of them, which is worse than the defect it replaces because the guess would be invisible in the record while `request body is not valid JSON` is right there in the capture. Restoring these two endpoints to a real series therefore needs an input contract we do not have; until we do, `Not probed` is the honest reading and the series stays absent rather than wrong.","reprobe_tick_id":null,"resolved_at":"2026-08-24T00:00:00.000Z","schema_version":1,"scope":{"endpoint_ids":["ep_5bfb57c12c2b3548","ep_46652289eaf2c57b"],"from":"2026-08-21T08:00:00.000Z","to":null},"status":"resolved"}]}