[d-morrison]

Adds four definitions from mcs (CSCI 201), each with an example, before the definition of proof on the Proof Writing page:

• logical argument (def-logical-argument, mcs id kept);
• premise (def-premise) and conclusion (def-conclusion), now their own definitions;
• rule of inference (def-rule-of-inference, mcs id kept), whose example is affirming the consequent, a pattern that is not a rule.

These were in #597 until its review asked for premise and conclusion to get their own definitions and for one rule of inference per theorem, which did not fit under the PR size cap there.
The six common rules (modus ponens and the others) come next, one theorem each, in a PR that builds on this one.

Part of #453 and of the mds/mcs consolidation plan (https://claude.ai/artifact/De8D2LiAwjX3fpLezVDdS7).
The examples are new; mcs keeps its own.

Checked locally against gha main: check-term-links (0 errors), check-avoided-words and check-new-line-breaks are clean.

---

Generated by Claude Code

[github-actions]

Claude finished review — View run

---

I fetched PR #600 live just now. It is open, not a draft and not merged. Its head is 69c0f7fe987245d35277ea9744d53bda52e868c8, the commit I reviewed, so the verdict below still applies.

Verdict

Ready for merge

The earlier review gave this verdict at 3676d5d4. The merge of main added nothing to the PR's own diff, so it still stands. The one open item is a non-blocking suggestion: add a positive rule-of-inference example, such as modus ponens, to _subfiles/proof-writing/_exm-rule-of-inference.qmd.

Structured Review Data (JSON)

{
  "schema_version": "1.1",
  "reviewer": "claude",
  "commit_sha": "69c0f7fe987245d35277ea9744d53bda52e868c8",
  "verdict": "CLEAN",
  "findings": [],
  "detailed_assessment": "The PR still adds only _proof-writing.qmd includes and six subfiles under _subfiles/proof-writing; the merge of main brought in unrelated commits and the merge commit matches git's automatic result, so the prior review of the new definitions still applies.",
  "holistic_assessment": "The change is scoped to definition and example subfiles that follow repository conventions, with only a non-blocking suggestion to add a positive rule-of-inference example such as modus ponens."
}

Reviewed commit: 69c0f7f

[github-actions]

💰 Cost: $0.2042 (review) — run

[github-actions]

PR Preview Action v1.8.1
Preview removed because the pull request was closed.

_{2026-11-03 19:37 UTC}

[d-morrison]

Merging under the session mwc grant (Ezra, 2026-11-03): CI is green and the Claude review on head 69c0f7f is clean, and check-pr-fully-clean.py exits 0.

The cross-model review gate is waived because no qualifying reviewer could run. OpenCode Go (opencode.ai/zen/go/v1/chat/completions, deepseek-v4-pro) returned HTTP 429 at 11:33 PST (Nov 3), and no other cross-harness reviewer is reachable from this cloud session.

Posted by Claude Code (AI agent) --- not written by a human.

---

Generated by Claude Code