scaffold-project.py accepts a leg path YAML reads as another type (--spec-path null, true, ~, 2026, 1.5), so it creates all three repositories and the new project's own bootstrap fails manifest-leg-path #225

(lane openRepoShape-2, 2026-10-11T18:59:08Z) Found by this lane's review of the #179 branch at 8050563 (its P3-1, #179 (comment)) and re-checked on main a5b09c3 after PR #201 and PR #200 landed. Not claimed.

What is wrong. The leg-path rule from #179 (leg_path_problem, scripts/shape_materialize.py) accepts null, true, ~, 2026 and 1.5. The templates write the path unquoted: templates/assembly-root/project.yaml:159,163 and templates/assembly-root/contracts/{spec,code}-pin.yaml:22 hold the placeholder bare (path: {{SPEC_PATH}}). The project reads it back as None, True, an int or a float. #181 covers only adopt's plan writer y() and touches none of these templates.

Reproduction (local remotes; --dry-run seen on main a5b09c3, the real run at a11a128, byte-identical in the files involved):

scaffold-project.py --org testorg --project Northwind --elected-by 'Test Human' \
  --elected-on 2026-09-02 --spec-path 2026 --local-remote-dir remotes --work-dir work

--dry-run accepts all five values (exit 0). The real run exits 0 and creates three repositories. project.yaml holds path: 2026, and the new project's scripts/validate-manifest.py exits 1: FINDING manifest-leg-path: leg 'spec': path is 2026. setup-project.py ... -- --spec-path 2026 fails the same way, after the three repositories exist. adopt-project.py execute --spec-path 2026 ends alike: adoption verified, then bootstrap FAILED: manifest (exit 1), pins (exit 1).

Fix. Either (a) refuse in leg_path_problem any value for which repo_shape._scalar(value) != value. Both tools ask it before anything exists. A prototype refused the five and kept spec, legs/spec, a..b, v1.5 and 1.5.2, and 376 tests passed. Or (b) quote the four template lines, which moves the shape digest. Add a test per value for scaffold --dry-run and adopt check.

P3: the values are implausible, and this is no regression of #201.