The two margin controls behave differently, and each now says which it is
Decided
Each margin slider states its own floor mechanic in copy beside the control. The product tab says the floor is a lower bound that the applied margin cannot cross; the commercial tab says its floor warns rather than clamps. The product tab's readout is now labelled applied and shows the requested figure struck through beside it whenever the two differ.
Affects: components/CPQSandbox.tsx (product tab, homepage and /platform/cpq), components/cpq/trade-estimator.tsx (commercial tab)
What the problem was. D-056 fixed the sentence that said *locked* above a movable slider, and it fixed the sentence. It did not fix the reason a reader needed that sentence explained: on the product tab, dragging below the floor moves the handle while the number beside it stops. Two unlabelled figures, one following the control and one refusing to, reads as a broken widget rather than as a rule doing its job. Nothing on screen said which number was which.
The second half is worse and had gone unnoticed. The commercial tab's slider does *not* clamp. TRADE_CONSTANTS.MIN_TARGET_MARGIN is 5%, well under the 28% commercial floor, and assessMargin there returns a warning rather than holding the price. So a reader who learned the rule on the product tab and moved to the commercial tab learned a rule that is false on the tab they are now looking at. Publishing one mechanic and shipping two is the same class of defect as publishing one figure and shipping two.
Why the two genuinely differ, rather than being made to match. A manufactured-goods quote is priced against a rate card we own, so a floor there is arithmetic and clamping it costs nothing. A tender is a competitive decision made by somebody looking at the bid it answers. Clamping that would not stop a below-floor bid; it would move it into a spreadsheet, where nothing records the shortfall. The engine's job on tendered work is to price what it is asked and say plainly what the margin came out at.
The alternative that was rejected. Unifying the two mechanics so one sentence covers both. That is a pricing-policy change disguised as a copy fix, and it would either clamp bids that should not be clamped or release a floor that costs nothing to enforce.
What would have to change for this to be wrong. If the commercial floor ever becomes contractual rather than advisory, that slider should clamp, and this entry and the copy under it both come out.