I believe this is what is called a Type II (with rim) but there's also partial reed on it which also shows on the obverse which I'm not able to find information online. I'm not familiar with how the reeding of the coin is done, is it struck or is it part of the process when the rim is raised? Also, how is the date determined on blank planchets?
Date cant be other than gross characteristcs (clad vs silver) Reeds come from the collar not the upset mill (that generates to proto rim). What I don't get is how you get this. I could see if you have three blanks in the coining chamber and nothing from the die one surface of the 1st and 3rd planchet. And nothing on the 2nd at all. But how do you get reeds when the collar doesn't reach the 2nd in the stack.
It should weigh 2.268 grams. I'm wondering if it wasn't machined and then carried around in a pocketful of change to wear off the machine lines and age it to look as it does. It's weight will tell.
This isn't my area but I don't think Type 1 or Type 2's can have reeds. Unless it some how escaped being struck after being reeded? "The edges of dimes, quarters, half-dollars and dollars are marked with tiny ridges. This process is known as "reeding". It is done by a collar which is a part of the stamping operation." The Type 1's and Type 2's make it into circulation after missing the stamping operation when the reeds are put on. Your coin seems unusually shiny for a planchet or blank. If this coin is a genuine error, I think it's rare.
Coin World has a 2/2/2013 article by Mike Diamond about reeded weakly struck dime. Here's the link. https://www.coinworld.com/news/us-coins/2013/02/unexpected-source-of-reeding-revealed-by-weak.html
OP's coin seems to be completely reeded not partially. Is there a faint image on the OP's coin from being weakly struck? Would that take the luster off? It almost seems polished. (Last photo in post #1.)
Never seen one like this before. There is a bit of a problem with this piece which is very difficult to ignore... The planchet is within the weight tolerance for a clad dime, so that's good. It would in fact be slightly smaller/narrower if it was not stamped yet, so that's good. It also appears to have the same, normal-looking contact marks that many blanks and planchets have. (Doesn't appear to have had the design buffed of or whizzed out to make it flat, otherwise it wouldn't have those types of contact marks). Yet some parts of the edge appear to have been harshly polished. The only thing I don't understand, and why I don't feel confident saying this is a genuine piece, is that the reeded edge is done by the collar during the stamping process...So...this would mean this coin was placed inside the collar, and the reeding was pressed, but neither the obverse nor the reverse dies were in place to strike it, leaving it unstamped on both sides? Both the hammer and anvil die would have to have been absent while the collar pressed the reeded edge. How is this possible? I would need to more closely examine the edge with a 10x loupe. Though it appears to be kosher, it isn't impossible to make these reeding marks yourself and have one heck of a unique piece, nor would it be hard to then smooth and round it off. (One purpose of reeding was to prevent people from shaving off the silver and gold from precious metal coins; if the reeding was missing, or didnt look uniform, you might be looking at the barrel of a Smith and Wesson.) I am leaning towards this being modified...but then there are much stranger combinations that are genuine.
Here is a link as to the minting and reeding process https://www.treasury.gov/about/education/Pages/manufacturing.aspx
I'll try and get more sharper pics of the reeds where it fades on both sides but I don't have a microscope so I can't promise a real close up.
Without the pressure of the dies, the planchet cannot be forced into the collar die that makes the reeds.
One more set of pics that might help. Side by side comparison with a 2017 dime. Tough to get it any sharper, my phone keeps auto focusing :