AI Flow

adom-aiflow 0.2.1, KiCad 10.0.3 (Windows), board-from-scratch run.

Power zones that were written into the board file offline cannot be accepted by land pours or verify-pours, so finish cannot see the pours as landed even though the copper is on the board, filled and measured.

Why the zones were written offline. In KiCad 10.0.3's Python (pcbnew SWIG) on Windows, ZONE.Outline() returns a bare SwigPyObject (no NewOutline, no Append), and BOARD.Zones() / BOARD.GetArea(i) also return untyped objects, so a headless script cannot build a zone outline. The zones were therefore written into the .kicad_pcb as s-expressions (net, layer, name, priority, connect_pads yes with clearance 0.25, min_thickness 0.2, island_removal_mode 0, polygon) and then filled with pcbnew.ZONE_FILLER headlessly. The board was adopted with adopt-board (evidence file listing every zone) and later opened in KiCad for the live steps.

land pours refusal (live board open, bound with bind-remote-board):

ERROR: pour for zone-ownership refused by the preflight: "zone_ownership_conflict" {}

verify-pours --plan aiflow/run/plan-pours.json (the plan was regenerated by pour from spec.pours, whose polygons are exactly the zones' outlines in board coordinates, with clearance 0.25 and minThickness 0.2):

ERROR: saved pours do not match the plan: ["0: P3 5V0 power: expected one exact geometry/settings match, found 0", "1: P3 5V0 plane: ...", "2: ...", ... every zone ...]
Hint: Review the actual geometry and intended plan; never replay pours merely to restore evidence. No board or ownership was changed.

The polygon points in the plan and in the board file are identical (checked point by point). The plan carries only clearance, minThickness, priority, layers, net, name, polygon; the board zones also carry pad connection (solid), thermal gap 0.3, thermal bridge 0.4 and island removal mode 0, which the plan cannot express, so an exact settings match seems impossible for zones not landed by the flow.

Asks:

1. Let verify-pours report which field differs per zone (geometry, net, layer, priority, clearance, min thickness, pad connection, thermal settings, islands).
2. Let spec.pours carry pad connection (solid or thermal), thermal gap and bridge and island removal, so a reviewed plan can describe zones exactly.
3. Or an adopt pours path: take ownership of existing filled zones that match the reviewed plan's geometry, recorded as adopted (not landed) so finish can proceed honestly.

I did not replay the pours to manufacture evidence. Copper was measured live with measure (KiCad's fills).