Done. artifacts/review.json is written, schema-valid, and untracked (the repo's .git/info/exclude already excludes artifacts/, so nothing was added or force-added to Git).

Verdict: ACCEPT — IU_0086 "Drowsy Mothkin"

Integrity (fact, verified): downloaded sha256 = 8f7fc26f…5902c, matches the required hash exactly. PNG, 512×512, 8-bit RGB, non-interlaced.

Facts — measured from the decoded pixels

I decoded the PNG in pure Python (test/scratch/png.py) rather than judging the rendering by eye:

Rule	Measurement	Result
1. True 32×32, hard NN edges	0 / 1024 16×16 blocks contain >1 colour	pass — no AA, gradients or blur
2. One character, centered, shoulders to bottom	1 connected component (580 px) spanning rows 1–31, cols 1–30; row 31 filled cols 1–30	pass
4. Background #0c1610	42.97% of pixels, exact hex; only 4 isolated 1-px specks (3× moss #1b7a35, 1× phosphor #39ff6a)	pass — no scenery
5. Limited palette	11 distinct colours total; the 9 non-black, non-background ones are all exact matches from the allowed list (lilac, cobalt, steel, navy, bone, bubblegum, moss, lagoon, phosphor)	pass — zero off-palette colours
6. No text / frame	border ring is pure background except the shoulders at row 31; no glyph-shaped runs	pass
3. Thick black outline	#000000 = 160 px @32, bounding head, antennae, eye sockets, nose, mouth and jacket	pass

Traits (fact, located in the grid): antennae rows 1–5 (BUG); head lilac #b39cff, 168 px (lilac); head top rows 5–11 bare apart from antennae (headgear NONE); torso rows 23–31 = cobalt body, navy collar, steel placket between black lapel lines (JACKET).

Sleepy eyes (inference, well-supported): inside each eye box, row 13 is skin-lilac and row 14 is bone sclera with a navy pupil — the upper half of the socket is covered by a skin-toned lid and the pupil sits low. That is the standard pixel-art rendering of heavy-lidded/half-closed eyes, so I read it as SLEEPY.

Scores

brief 9 · silhouette 9 · style 10 · originality 9

Style is a clean 10 — the grid, palette and background are exact, not approximate. The others lose a point each for the judgment calls below.

Uncertainty, stated plainly

• "BUG" rests on the antennae alone. There are no compound eyes, mandibles or extra limbs; the eyes are humanoid (bone sclera, navy pupil). Antennae on a bust are the conventional and unambiguous insect cue at this resolution, so I scored brief 9 rather than rejecting — but a stricter reviewer could argue the species signal is thin.
• The eye sockets have unusually thick black rims that can read as goggles or heavy glasses. I did not treat this as a headgear violation: eyewear is not headgear, no eyewear trait was specified, and rule 3 mandates thick black outlines around every shape. This is the one call most open to disagreement.
• The 1-px antennae may fade at very small display sizes, hence silhouette 9 rather than 10.

Not answered

Rule 7 (cohesion with the other 786 pieces) cannot be verified from a single image — I had no access to the rest of the set. Nothing here contradicts the collection look, but that is an absence of evidence, not confirmation.

Note on method: the image was downloaded to /tmp and never added to the repo; the decoder is scratch tooling under test/scratch/, which is not part of the deliverable.