Prototype evidence is not deployment evidence

A runnable repo can prove a boundary, contract, or workflow shape. It does not prove adoption, reliability, security posture, or procurement fit.

Prototype evidence is not deployment evidence

The boundary

This boundary matters because a prototype can be genuinely useful and still say very little about production operations, security posture, procurement reality, or long-term maintenance.

The evidence gap

The question is not whether the prototype should exist. The question is whether the public claim stays narrow enough that the artifact improves the conversation without pretending to be deployment proof.

What would change it

A useful next signal would be an operator using the artifact on a real workflow and naming where it breaks under real constraints.