Every path the inner command could resolve to, shortest first.
Menu context in force at the bracket, / at document root.
Was the menu context in force BEFORE this statement known? A false here
does not invalidate a resolved reading — the resolver already degrades
every context-DEPENDENT statement when context is lost, so a statement that
still resolved did not consume it (#192, #197).
Bracket nesting depth; 0 is directly inside a statement.
A
[…]command substitution, re-constituted against its enclosing menu.Same vocabulary as ExplainStatement, deliberately: an inner command is a command, and a caller should not have to learn a second shape to read one.
That means the verb boundary here is Q6's answer (
resolveVerbover the bracket's inner text), not Q3'sResolution.path. The two are not always the same — Q3'spathis documented as the greedy leading run, its "best guess", and it reads[/system/identity/get name]as the menu/system/identity/getwhere Q6 reads menu/system/identity+ verbget. Q6 is the module that decides verbs (and #211's R9 exists precisely so these two stop contradicting each other), so it is what the envelope presents; Q3's alternative readings survive as candidates. Where Q3 REFUSED, this refuses too, whatever Q6 says — the fail-closed floor is not up for a second opinion.