Four primitives — load-path analysis, refusal-with-reason, structural improvement diff, and regenerative synthesis — that let anyone walk the same reasoning path a load-bearing engineer walks before he swings the hammer. The last one is the gift: verify what's true, name what's running out, propose what could replace it, and rebuild toward structures the world can actually regenerate.
Which sentences carry structural work, which are ornament. Every sentence in a reply is either load-bearing (a claim the answer will collapse without) or ornamental (rhetorical filler that could be trimmed). Paste text and see the read-out.
Never cold, always structural. The Sentinel refuses the way a remodel specialist explains code to a client — a warm, reasoned no that leaves the relationship intact. Pick a category and see what the tether actually says.
Did a rewrite actually improve the structure, or just add ornament? Compare before/after and see which load-bearing claims survived, which were added, and which were removed.
The Architect's phone workflow, wired native. Start with verified facts about a current structure, name which resources it depends on that are running out, and the tether proposes abundant/renewable swaps from the curated knowledge base — each with why it works and which depleting resource it relieves.
backend/construction_reasoning.py and is exposed at /api/reasoning/*. See /origin for why this reasoning exists at all, and /how-it-works for how the tether uses it upstream of every reply.