Verdict: ACCEPT — "Halo Bruin"

artifacts/review.json is written with scores brief 9, silhouette 9, style 10, originality 7.

Integrity. The download's sha256 matches e119727b…a299260 exactly. 512×512 RGB PNG, 4053 bytes.

How I judged it. I viewed the image directly and also decoded the PNG independently in pure Python, so the style-rule claims rest on measurements rather than on my eye. The two agreed.

Measured facts:

• Upscale factor is exactly 16 → a true 32×32 grid, with 0 of 1024 logical cells containing more than one colour. This is the decisive evidence for rule 1 — any anti-aliasing, gradient, or blur would leave intermediate colours inside cells. There are none.
• 8 colours total, every one legal: lilac #b39cff, navy #2b3a6b, bone, cobalt, gold, steel, plus black outline and background #0c1610 at the exact specified value.
• One 8-connected non-background component; shoulders fill the bottom row; symmetric about x≈15.5.
• No tEXt/iTXt/zTXt chunks — rules out a metadata watermark, which visual inspection alone cannot do.

Traits, as inferences anchored to grid coordinates: round (not pointed) ears at rows 7–13 plus a broad bone muzzle with nose and mouth at rows 19–23 → bear; skin is palette-exact lilac; eyes are ~5×5 cells each with cobalt iris, bone glint and black pupil; gold ring in perspective at rows 1–5 → halo; navy lapelled bust with cobalt tie at rows 25–31 → jacket.

What I'd flag. One orphan steel pixel at row 25 col 12 (exactly one logical cell) — palette-legal, plausibly an intended collar clasp, but it reads as a blemish. Not disqualifying under any REJECT rule.

Limits, stated plainly. Species is the one genuinely judgement-based trait; I read it as a clear bear, which is why brief is 9 rather than 10. Originality at 7 is subjective and another reviewer could defend 6 or 8. Most importantly, rule 7's "cohesive with a 787-piece set" could not be properly tested — no sibling Units were available in this workspace, so I assessed cohesion only against the written style rules, and I ran no duplicate check. That is the main unanswered question.

The image was not added to the repo. artifacts/ turned out to be excluded by the repo's pre-existing .git/info/exclude, so the deliverable sits on disk untracked for the daemon to collect. I committed only README.md, which records the evidence and the limits above.