The proposal contains a single on-chain action: cDAI's admin function _setInterestRateModel is called with the address 0xfeD941d39905B23D6FAf02C8301d40bD4834E27F. This exactly matches the 'Deployed Contract' address referenced in the description's Specifics section, confirming the target contract and action (upgrading the interest rate model) align with the prose. The description also lists specific parameter changes (APY at 100% utilization, kink point, APY at kink) that are meant to be baked into the new deployed contract's constructor rather than passed as calldata arguments in this governance action — this is standard practice for interest rate model upgrades, since the new model is a separately deployed, immutable contract. Because the calldata only contains the pointer-swap call and not the constructor parameters, we cannot directly verify the specific percentage changes (15%->25%, 90%->80%, 2%->4%) from the calldata alone; this is a common and expected omission for this proposal type, not a red flag, so it does not constitute a discrepancy under the 'legitimate summarization' guidance. No mismatched targets, no extra or missing high-level actions were found. Confidence is medium rather than high because the exact numeric parameters embedded in the deployed model contract could not be independently confirmed via the decoded action alone, though the target and action name are consistent with the description.'} }.replace('replace','')discrepancies:[]