Every method in this series makes a falsifiable claim: given these inputs, this is the architecture — or process, or code structure — that follows. The standing invitation is to prove one wrong.
Run the worksheet on a system you actually know: your production service, not a toy example. Answer the questions honestly, walk the derivation, and compare what it produces against what the system actually runs. If they diverge, that’s a counterexample. File it as an issue on the replication kit: the filled answer sheet, and the observed vector — what the system does, dated, since architectures drift and an undated report can’t be checked against anything.
A good report is scoped (one system, one derivation, not a general objection), priced (the service-level objectives that drove the divergence, not a feeling that something’s off), and specific about where the method’s answer and reality parted ways.