# Review scope: Save an instruction and restore its project context

Draft; changes required. A project instruction card receives a camera emphasis, then opens an empty dialog. A complete instruction appears at one native-frame boundary. The dialog remains visible through the outward camera move before the same instruction appears truncated in the restored project home. Four existing files remain throughout. Original fictional garden and workshop content replaces source branding and copy. Camera transforms, blur, pointer, focus and caret are authored approximations. No typed sequence, generated answer or later persistence is shown. Parent-informed sampled still review only; no independent moving or native Resolve approval.

The parent inspected source overview and boundary samples before building, then
sampled actual candidate renders. This was not a fresh independent or blind
review. No perceived moving-source review, native Resolve execution or source-
quality approval is claimed. The retained complete rendition was decoded at its actual integer PTS. It is not
asserted equivalent to an absent historical master. Research excerpts
are 960×540, while the new outputs are 1920×1080. No source image is a renderer input.

Selected native source interval: [940,1260),
24/1 fps. The discrete replacement gates are observed at native frames.
Project/dialog geometry, camera transforms, blur, pointer path, focus, caret, background and art are authored approximations. The dialog, whole instruction, Save appearance and saved-home replacements retain observed native gates. The instruction is not progressively typed, and the four-file context does not change.
Source material, production detail and typography are not reproduced exactly.

The two content variants form one candidate. Resolve delivery comprises a manual
construction guide and generated controls, not an executed or verified .drp file.
Existing pinned dependencies support the checks; a clean npm install was not run.