When availability firings lost the write lock with rows in hand, how many 2026 games reached their start/sit window (T-90 to kickoff) with the warehouse's newest LIVE-STORED capture predating T-90, did the lost captures carry status changes for fantasy-relevant players, and did the alert that tells the manager to read the list himself ever arrive?

Owner lane: decision

Question

When availability firings lost the write lock with rows in hand, how many 2026 games reached their start/sit window (T-90 to kickoff) with the warehouse's newest LIVE-STORED capture predating T-90, did the lost captures carry status changes for fantasy-relevant players, and did the alert that tells the manager to read the list himself ever arrive?

Prediction

Row as filed: 12 consecutive firings held the T-90 inactives and all logged alert=False. No fresh prediction was frozen before this run; the enumeration was run once as written and every endpoint is reported.

Finding and verdict

TESTED. alert=False on every lost firing with rows is CONFIRMED and current. The 'T-90 inactives in hand' premise is REFUTED at the source: ESPN summary returns at most 5 designations per team. Decision reach: 8 of 30 games (09-13 17:00Z) had the warehouse blind for 84.8 of 90 window minutes (lower bound: the drain has no fold clock, so an earlier fold cannot be ruled out or in); 0 skill statuses changed inside those windows, against 9 changes in 5 of 30 games overall.

Reasoning

The decision lane owns what a manager does with the number; a lineup is set inside [T-90,T-0], so the quantity that matters is whether the warehouse held a post-T-90 capture then, not whether a firing failed.

Next action

(1) The 5-per-team cap is filed as its own hypothesis (the sensor, not the lock). (2) The drain needs a fold clock (ingested_at) or 'was it in the warehouse at kickoff' can only ever be a lower bound -- noted in the new row. (3) Alert delivery (push delivered 0) belongs to operations, not this lane.