Instant/Fast effort levels contradict Discrete Phase Enforcement

阅读 versions/TheAlgorithm_Latest.md 中第 36 行附近的工作量等级表，以及第 758-771 行附近的 Discrete Phase Enforcement。比较 Instant 和 Fast 的措辞，然后使用提出的选项之一解决优先级与七个阶段预算之间的矛盾。完成的标准是：规则在阶段是否适用，以及 Fast 如何核算所有阶段这两点上保持一致。

The Contradiction

Two rules in v0.5.9 directly conflict:

Rule 1: Effort Level Table (OBSERVE phase)

Instant | <10s | "right now", trivial lookup, greeting | No phases — minimal format only
Fast | <1min | "quickly", simple fix | OBSERVE 10s, BUILD 20s, EXECUTE 20s, VERIFY 10s

Rule 2: Discrete Phase Enforcement

Every phase is independent. NEVER combine, merge, or skip phases.
A Fast effort level still has 7 discrete phases — they're just quick.
Skipping or combining phases defeats the entire purpose of systematic progression

The Problems

1. Instant says "No phases" but Discrete Phase Enforcement says phases are NEVER skipped. Which takes precedence?

2. Fast only budgets 4 of 7 phases (OBSERVE, BUILD, EXECUTE, VERIFY = 60s) but the same section says "Fast still has 7 discrete phases." Where do THINK, PLAN, and LEARN fit in the <1min budget?

Suggested Resolution Options

Option A: Instant is the ONE exception to discrete phases. Fast gets all 7 phases with time budgets (e.g., THINK 5s, PLAN 5s, LEARN 5s to fill the remaining time).

Option B: Reword Instant to use "implicit single-pass phases" instead of "No phases." Reword Fast to include all 7 phase budgets.

Option C: Relax Discrete Phase Enforcement to say "phases may be skipped at Instant/Fast but never merged at Standard+."

Location

• Effort level table: line ~36 in versions/TheAlgorithm_Latest.md
• Discrete Phase Enforcement: lines ~758-771