I compared each row of the proposal's parameter table against the corresponding Configurator setter call in the calldata, converting the prose's decimal fractions to 18-decimal fixed point for comparison. All eight numeric changes (borrow base, borrow slope low, borrow slope high, borrow kink, supply slope low, supply slope high, supply kink) match exactly between the description and the decoded calldata values. The supply base rate is stated to remain unchanged at 0, and indeed no setSupplyPerYearInterestRateBase call appears in the calldata, consistent with no change being needed. The final action (deployAndUpgradeTo) is the standard mechanism used by Compound III governance proposals to apply Configurator changes to the live Comet proxy — this is routine boilerplate for this contract type and is implicitly covered by the description's statement that changes are made 'by using the respective methods on the Configurator.' No value, target, or omission discrepancies were found; the proposal description accurately and completely reflects the on-chain actions.