1# Data audit2| file | SHA-256 | rows | cols |3|---|---|---|---|4| data/endowments.csv | fc130a2f54c750a5834ec7314060d91f7984769c7c006ad04b98582a016ba74b | 2 | 3 (agent, good1, good2) |5| data/parameters.csv | 717807e75337fbf4aff8e4d74e0fc0b83b799f78fa689172be0d501cb3e43983 | 4 | 3 (parameter, value, description) |67- endowments: A=(8,2), B=(4,8); units of goods; no missing, no duplicates, all strictly positive. No dates (theoretical data).8- parameters: alpha_A=0.4, alpha_B=0.6 (both in (0,1)); aggregate_endowment_good1=14, aggregate_endowment_good2=10.9- **Anomaly:** sheet aggregate of good 1 (14) != sum of individual rows (8+4=12). Good 2 consistent (2+8=10).10- **Decision:** individual endowments are the primary data (TASK.md) and determine wealth; aggregates are taken as row sums (12, 10). Sheet value 14 reported only as a diagnostic and in data_issues. Using 14 would be inconsistent with budget constraints (no price clears the market and Walras' law fails).11- No information-availability violations: only data/ used; no time dimension.12- Exclusions: none (see out/exclusions.csv; 2 raw -> 2 analysed).13