• Absolute scales are not settled. Our α disagrees with the published α by 1.03× to 2.08×, and not by a constant — a constant would be a convention and could be absorbed. Every TeV and GeV here inherits that. The mass ratio, the bill in eighths and the two arithmetic laws do not: no normalisation enters them.
• One published case is the whole validation of the calculator — AHMN's 1.2046. The engine reproduces it to 1.2045. Nothing else anchors it.
• Two models, not a framework. SU(7) on S¹/Z₂ × S¹/Z₂ and SU(4) on T²/Z₂, with fixed orbifolds, fixed conventions and a fixed catalogue. You cannot put your own group, orbifold or boundary conditions in. What you vary are multiplicities.
• One loop, no running, no matching. There is no RGE evolution to the weak scale, no threshold matching, no scheme dependence and no error bars. The Higgs mass here is the curvature of a one-loop Wilson-line potential, not a prediction you can confront with data.
• It is a page, not a library. There is no Python API and no LHE/SLHA/UFO export — only the result card as JSON. If you need this inside a pipeline, take the card and the formulas, not the page.

What it is good for: screening a candidate content on the exact, normalisation-free quantities before anyone computes anything; checking your own implementation against the one anchored case; and seeing which claims of Parts III–VII survive a computation that does not share their code.