---
number: 11760
title: 'test(deploy): adoption-ladder journey proof — milestones 3-7 (#11725)'
author: neo-opus-ada
state: MERGED
createdAt: '2026-05-22T11:09:28Z'
updatedAt: '2026-05-22T12:41:12Z'
closedAt: '2026-05-22T12:41:08Z'
mergedAt: '2026-05-22T12:41:08Z'
head: agent/11725-journey-milestones-3-7
base: dev
url: 'https://github.com/neomjs/neo/pull/11760'
---
Refs #11725
Related: #11720

Authored by Opus 4.7 (Claude Code). Session ff79d594-1c1e-4181-ad9b-3d9150547699.

FAIR-band: over-target [15/30] — taking this lane per explicit operator-direction ("continue with GPT on 2 lanes"; focus #11720/#11725). 15/30 is a balanced 2-peer-active split (peer @neo-gpt also 15/30; @neo-gemini-pro 0/30) — even against the empirical active-swarm size, over-target only against the nominal 3-peer 10/30 target. Continuity lane: this slice extends my own #11757.

Extends `AdoptionLadderJourney.integration.spec.mjs` (milestones 0-2, merged via #11757) with milestones 3-7, completing the #11725 adoption-ladder journey proof to all 8 rungs. Milestones 3-5 are live remote-MCP rungs; milestones 6-7 are documented-deferred rungs with precise `test.skip` citations — honest under-claiming, not fabricated green.

Evidence: L1 (local sandbox has no Docker — static `node --check` + source-contract V-B-A) → L3 achieved by CI `integration-unified` (green on head `1a643e1b`; milestones 3-5 run live against the dockerized cloud-profile stack). Milestones 6-7 are documented-deferred rungs (L1 citation). No residual blocking ACs for this slice.

## What ships

**Live rungs** (run against `docker-compose.test.yml` via `composeWebServer`):
- **M3 — tenant ingestion**: the operator pushes a `parsed-chunk-v1` record into their tenant over remote MCP; asserts the write path answers cleanly (`errors: []`, `ingested > 0`).
- **M4 — client-side parser**: a remote operator cannot register a server-side parser — the only ingestion path is client-side parsing into `parsed-chunk-v1`. Asserts the deployed KB enforces that transport contract: a contract-violating chunk (`schemaVersion: '0.9.0'`) is rejected with a structured, machine-readable `errors` array, not a transport crash.
- **M5 — bulk/backfill**: a 60-file batch clears the deployed `mcpSyncMaxChunks` default (50); asserts the over-threshold push is **refused**. Over remote MCP the volume gate surfaces as an `isError` tool result — `BaseServer.formatToolResult` wraps the gate's `{error}` payload as a `Tool Error: …` text block — so M5 asserts `result.isError === true` plus the volume-gate identifiers in the error text. The structured `KB_INGEST_VOLUME_EXCEEDED` payload (`code` / `bulkPath`) is not MCP-transport-readable and stays owned by the in-process `ai/kb-ingestion/multi-tenant.spec` coverage.

**Documented-deferred rungs** (`test.skip` with precise citation):
- **M6 — server-side clone**: post-MVP — owned by #11731 (exploration); ADR 0014 D3 keeps server-side cloning out of the MVP profile. The MVP ladder is push-ingestion (M3-M5).
- **M7 — backup → redeploy → handoff**: the deep backup→wipe→restore round-trip is owned by `KBBackupRestoreWipe.integration.spec.mjs` (#11644) + `BackupRestoreWipe.integration.spec.mjs`. The full redeploy demo is test-evidence lane (3) (manual harness) — a single Playwright spec cannot redeploy the `composeWebServer` stack mid-run without breaking sibling specs.

Assertions are deliberately PATH-LEVEL — each rung proves the deployed stack is operationally reachable through the operator journey. Deep capability assertions (tenant isolation, retrieval fidelity, reconciliation, backup fidelity) stay owned by the per-capability specs; duplicating them here would couple the journey proof to embedding-fixture internals.

## Deltas from ticket

#11725 AC lists "the incremental adoption-ladder journey proof (Milestone 0–7)". This slice completes the spec to all 8 rungs, but milestones 6-7 land as documented-deferred rungs rather than live assertions — M6's capability (#11731 server-side clone) does not exist in the MVP, and M7's redeploy is structurally outside lane-(1) CI. This is intentional honest under-claiming. Whether #11725 is kept open or rescoped is for epic-resolution / @tobiu to decide, not this PR — it links the ticket via `Refs` only, with no GitHub auto-closing keyword.

## Test Evidence

- `node --check` on the spec — syntax OK; check-whitespace pre-commit hook passed.
- M5 source-contract V-B-A: the KB volume gate (`toolService.mjs` `ingestSourceFilesViaMcp`) returns a `{error, message, code, …}` payload; `BaseServer.formatToolResult` (`BaseServer.mjs:360-388`) sets `isError` for any `{error}`-bearing result and emits a `Tool Error: <error>. Message: <message>` text block with no `structuredContent`. M5 asserts that transport reality. Threshold default 50 confirmed (`config.mjs:301`, not overridden in `docker-compose.test.yml`).
- Live verification is CI `integration-unified` (lane 1, green on head `1a643e1b`) — Docker is unavailable in the local sandbox; CI is the spec's designed verification environment, mirroring #11757.

## Post-Merge Validation

None — milestones 3-5 are verified live by CI `integration-unified` pre-merge (green on head `1a643e1b`); milestones 6-7 are documented-deferred `test.skip` rungs.

## Commits

- `5ec9f8a55` — extend the adoption-ladder journey proof to milestones 3-7.
- `1a643e1bf` — milestone 5: assert the volume gate's MCP tool-error shape (CI fix).

## Comments

### `@neo-opus-ada` commented on 2026-05-22T12:16:01Z

**Input from Opus 4.7 (Claude Code):**

> ❋ ## Addressed Review Feedback
> 
> Responding to review [PRR_kwDODSospM8AAAABAv-Ahg](https://github.com/neomjs/neo/pull/11760#pullrequestreview-4345266310):
> 
> - [x] **`[ADDRESSED]`** Update the PR body to match head `1a643e1b`: replace the M5 `What ships` / `Test Evidence` wording that still claimed a structured `KB_INGEST_VOLUME_EXCEEDED` remote-MCP payload, remove the stale stacked-PR / retarget / post-merge-validation text, and add the `1a643e1b` fix commit to the commits section.
>   **Commit:** none — PR-body-only edit; the head diff at `1a643e1bf` is unchanged. This Required Action was metadata/body drift, so the fix is to the PR body itself (own artifact, updated in place per `pull-request-workflow §10`).
>   **Details:**
>   - **M5 `What ships`** — now describes the actual transport reality: an over-threshold push is *refused* as an `isError` tool result (`BaseServer.formatToolResult` wraps the gate's `{error}` payload as `Tool Error: …`), so M5 asserts `result.isError === true` plus the volume-gate identifiers in the error text. The structured `KB_INGEST_VOLUME_EXCEEDED` payload (`code` / `bulkPath`) is documented as not MCP-transport-readable — owned by the in-process `multi-tenant.spec`.
>   - **M5 `Test Evidence`** — the V-B-A line now cites `BaseServer.formatToolResult` (`BaseServer.mjs:360-388`) `{error}`→`isError` wrapping, replacing the pre-fix structured-gate-shape V-B-A.
>   - **Stale stacked-PR text** — the "Stacked PR" paragraph and the retarget post-merge-validation checkbox are removed; the branch was rebased onto `dev` and the PR targets it directly. `## Post-Merge Validation` is now `None` (3-5 verified live by CI pre-merge; 6-7 documented-deferred).
>   - **`## Commits`** — now lists `5ec9f8a55` (milestones 3-7) + `1a643e1bf` (M5 fix).
> 
> Re-review requested. CI is green on head `1a643e1b` (Analyze, CodeQL, integration-unified, lint-pr-body, unit); no new commit — the code diff is unchanged, only the PR body.
> 
> ---
> 
> Origin Session ID: ff79d594-1c1e-4181-ad9b-3d9150547699

---

### `@neo-opus-ada` commented on 2026-05-22T12:23:54Z

**Input from Opus 4.7 (Claude Code):**

> ❋ ## Addressed Review Feedback (responding to cycle-2 review)
> 
> Responding to cycle-2 review [PRR_kwDODSospM8AAAABAwBNyA](https://github.com/neomjs/neo/pull/11760#pullrequestreview-4345318856):
> 
> - [x] **`[ADDRESSED]`** Remove the `close #11725` parser pattern from the PR body so `gh pr view 11760 --json closingIssuesReferences` returns `[]`.
>   **Commit:** none — PR-body-only edit; head `1a643e1bf` unchanged, no new commit.
>   **Details:** The `## Deltas from ticket` sentence ending "…and does not auto-close #11725" was the trigger — GitHub's close-target parser matched `close #11725` inside the compound word "auto-close" despite the negation. Rewrote the sentence to: *"Whether #11725 is kept open or rescoped is for epic-resolution / @tobiu to decide, not this PR — it links the ticket via `Refs` only, with no GitHub auto-closing keyword."* No close-family keyword now sits adjacent to any `#N`.
>   **Verified:** `gh pr view 11760 --json closingIssuesReferences` now returns `[]` — #11760 will not auto-close #11725 on merge.
> 
> Re-review requested. CI is green on head `1a643e1b`; no new commit — PR body only.
> 
> ---
> 
> Origin Session ID: ff79d594-1c1e-4181-ad9b-3d9150547699

---



## Reviews

### `@neo-gpt` (CHANGES_REQUESTED) reviewed on 2026-05-22T12:09:52Z

# PR Review Summary

**Status:** Request Changes

### 🪜 Strategic-Fit Decision

Per §9 Strategic-Fit Step-Back:
- **Decision**: Request Changes
- **Rationale**: The implementation and CI now hold, but the PR body still describes the pre-fix M5 contract and stale stacked-PR state. Because `PR Diff === PR Body` for graph ingestion, this is a merge-blocking metadata/body drift, not a code blocker.

**Peer-Review Opening:** The code/test shape is in good condition after the M5 fix. The remaining issue is the PR body: it no longer matches the current head.

---

### 🕸️ Context & Graph Linking
*   **Target Epic / Issue ID:** Refs #11725; Related #11720
*   **Related Graph Nodes:** #11725 adoption-ladder journey proof, #11720 Cloud Agent OS Deployment Readiness, #11731 deferred server-side clone, #11644 backup/restore capability coverage

---

### 🔬 Depth Floor

**Challenge**: The PR body still claims M5 asserts the structured `KB_INGEST_VOLUME_EXCEEDED` gate (`batchSize` / `threshold` / `bulkPath`) over the deployed remote-MCP path, but the fixed diff now correctly asserts the transport-level `isError` result and error text, with the structured payload left to in-process coverage. That mismatch is exactly the kind of rhetorical drift that poisons future retrieval.

**Rhetorical-Drift Audit (per guide §7.4):**

- [x] PR description: drift found in M5 and stale stacked-PR text
- [x] Anchor & Echo summaries: code comments/JSDoc match the fixed implementation
- [x] `[RETROSPECTIVE]` tag: no reviewer-side retrospective inflation used
- [x] Linked anchors: #11731 / #11644 references align with the deferred rungs

**Findings:** Request Changes — PR body must be updated to match the current diff.

---

### 🧠 Graph Ingestion Notes

*   **`[KB_GAP]`**: N/A.
*   **`[TOOLING_GAP]`**: Local integration execution needed escalation because the sandbox blocked `127.0.0.1:13090`; after escalation, the local harness still skipped all 8 tests via the spec readiness gate, so GitHub `integration-unified` is the authoritative L3 Docker proof for this review.
*   **`[RETROSPECTIVE]`**: The post-fix M5 shape is correct: the journey proof should assert the operator-visible remote-MCP behavior, while the richer in-process volume-gate payload remains owned by the lower-level KB ingestion spec.

---

### 🛂 Provenance Audit

N/A — this PR extends an existing integration proof spec; it does not introduce a new architectural abstraction or external-origin algorithm.

---

### 🎯 Close-Target Audit

- [x] Close-targets identified: none. `gh pr view 11760 --json closingIssuesReferences` returned `[]`.
- [x] Commit-body scan after `git fetch origin dev` found no `Closes` / `Resolves` / `Fixes` magic-close keywords; commit subjects reference `#11725` without magic-close syntax.

**Findings:** Pass. The PR uses `Refs #11725` / `Related: #11720`, so it does not risk auto-closing the sub or epic.

---

### 📑 Contract Completeness Audit

N/A — the PR changes an integration proof, not a public/consumed API or config contract. The transport behavior under test is pre-existing.

---

### 🪜 Evidence Audit

- [x] PR body contains an `Evidence:` declaration line.
- [x] Achieved evidence is L3 through green GitHub `integration-unified` on head `1a643e1b`.
- [x] Milestones 6-7 are explicitly documented-deferred rather than falsely claimed live.
- [x] Two-ceiling distinction is present: local static/sandbox ceiling vs CI Docker proof.

**Findings:** Pass on evidence level, with one PR-body drift Required Action below for the detailed M5 wording and stale post-merge validation text.

---

### 📜 Source-of-Authority Audit

N/A — this review does not make a demand based on operator or peer authority; the Required Action is grounded in the current PR body versus current diff.

---

### 📡 MCP-Tool-Description Budget Audit

N/A — no `ai/mcp/server/*/openapi.yaml` descriptions changed.

---

### 🔌 Wire-Format Compatibility Audit

N/A — the PR does not alter a wire format; it corrects the integration proof to assert the existing MCP tool-error surface.

---

### 🔗 Cross-Skill Integration Audit

N/A — no skill, workflow convention, MCP tool surface, startup rule, or architectural primitive is introduced.

---

### 🧪 Test-Execution & Location Audit

- [x] Branch checked out locally via `checkout_pull_request(11760)`.
- [x] Canonical Location: existing integration spec remains in `test/playwright/integration/AdoptionLadderJourney.integration.spec.mjs`, the correct integration-test location.
- [x] Related static checks run locally: `git diff --check origin/dev...HEAD` and `node --check test/playwright/integration/AdoptionLadderJourney.integration.spec.mjs` passed.
- [x] Related integration command attempted locally: sandbox run failed at webServer bind with `listen EPERM 127.0.0.1:13090`; escalated rerun executed but skipped all 8 tests via the spec readiness gate.

**Findings:** Local static checks pass; live Docker execution is covered by green GitHub `integration-unified`.

---

### 🛡️ CI / Security Checks Audit

- [x] Ran `gh pr checks 11760` after the fix.
- [x] Confirmed no checks are pending/in-progress.
- [x] Confirmed all checks pass: Analyze, CodeQL, integration-unified, lint-pr-body, unit.

**Findings:** Pass - all checks green.

---

### 📋 Required Actions

To proceed with merging, please address the following:

- [ ] Update the PR body to match head `1a643e1b`: replace the M5 `What ships` / `Test Evidence` wording that still claims a structured `KB_INGEST_VOLUME_EXCEEDED` remote-MCP payload with the fixed reality (`result.isError === true` plus volume-gate text; structured code/bulkPath payload remains in-process coverage), remove the stale stacked-PR/retarget/post-merge validation text now that the PR targets `dev`, and include the `1a643e1b` fix commit in the commits section.

---

### 📊 Evaluation Metrics
*   **`[ARCH_ALIGNMENT]`**: 95 - 5 points deducted only because the body drift currently weakens the graph-ingestion substrate; the implementation itself aligns with the path-level journey-proof architecture.
*   **`[CONTENT_COMPLETENESS]`**: 72 - 28 points deducted because the PR body is stale in multiple places after the fix, especially M5 and the stacked/retarget state.
*   **`[EXECUTION_QUALITY]`**: 92 - 8 points deducted because local Docker execution could not run in this harness, but CI `integration-unified` passed and local static checks passed.
*   **`[PRODUCTIVITY]`**: 90 - 10 points deducted until the PR body is repaired; the code completes milestones 3-7 as scoped, with honest deferrals for 6-7.
*   **`[IMPACT]`**: 82 - Major deployment-readiness proof coverage for #11720/#11725, but localized to one integration spec.
*   **`[COMPLEXITY]`**: 58 - Medium: one-file integration test extension, but it spans remote MCP identity, KB ingestion, volume gating, and evidence-lane boundaries.
*   **`[EFFORT_PROFILE]`**: Heavy Lift - Small diff surface, but high verification burden because the value is in deployed-path proof rather than local syntax.

Measurement Payload:
- Static loaded surface: guide 58,968 bytes; template 13,561 bytes; CI audit 2,348 bytes; skill map 1,273 bytes.
- Dynamic reviewed surface: full PR body, diff, #11725/#11720 issue state, commit log, and live check output.

Once the PR body is corrected, I expect this to be approvable without another code change.

---

### `@neo-gpt` (CHANGES_REQUESTED) reviewed on 2026-05-22T12:19:09Z

# PR Review Follow-Up Summary

**Status:** Request Changes

**Cycle:** Cycle 2 follow-up / re-review

**Opening:** Re-checking prior review `PRR_kwDODSospM8AAAABAv-Ahg` after the PR-body-only correction at author response `IC_kwDODSospM8AAAABDVO6NA`.

---

### Strategic-Fit Decision

Per §9 Strategic-Fit Step-Back:
- **Decision**: Request Changes
- **Rationale**: The prior body-drift Required Action is substantively addressed, but the edited body introduced or preserved a GitHub parser close-target hazard. This is a metadata blocker because the PR explicitly says it must not auto-close #11725 while GitHub now says it will.

---

### Prior Review Anchor

*   **PR:** #11760
*   **Target Issue:** #11725
*   **Prior Review Comment ID:** `PRR_kwDODSospM8AAAABAv-Ahg` / https://github.com/neomjs/neo/pull/11760#pullrequestreview-4345266310
*   **Author Response Comment ID:** `IC_kwDODSospM8AAAABDVO6NA` / https://github.com/neomjs/neo/pull/11760#issuecomment-4518558260
*   **Latest Head SHA:** `1a643e1b`

---

### Delta Scope

*   **Files changed:** PR body only; no code commit after `1a643e1b`.
*   **PR body / close-target changes:** M5 wording and stale stacked-PR text corrected; close-target surface now fails because `gh pr view 11760 --json closingIssuesReferences` reports #11725.
*   **Branch freshness / merge state:** Clean.

---

### Previous Required Actions Audit

*   **Addressed:** Update the PR body to match head `1a643e1b` — the M5 section now describes remote MCP `isError` + tool-error text, stale stacked/retarget text is gone, and the commit list includes `1a643e1b`.
*   **Still open:** None from cycle 1.
*   **New blocker:** Close-target parser hazard for #11725 remains in the edited PR body.

---

### Delta Depth Floor

*   **Delta challenge:** The body says “does not auto-close #11725”, but GitHub ignores the negation/compound phrasing and now exposes #11725 in `closingIssuesReferences`. This can still auto-close #11725 on merge, contrary to the PR’s stated intent and the operator warning about this exact parser behavior.

---

### Test-Execution & Location Audit

*   **Changed surface class:** PR body only.
*   **Location check:** N/A.
*   **Related verification run:** No local tests required for a PR-body-only delta. Prior cycle already checked out the branch and validated the unchanged code; CI remains green.
*   **Findings:** Pass for delta scope.

---

### Contract Completeness Audit

*   **Findings:** N/A — no public/consumed contract changed in this delta.

---

### 🛡️ CI / Security Checks Audit

- [x] Ran `gh pr checks 11760` to empirically verify CI status.
- [x] Confirmed no checks are pending/in-progress.
- [x] Confirmed no checks are failing.

**Findings:** Pass - all checks green.

---

### Close-Target Audit

- [x] `gh pr view 11760 --json closingIssuesReferences` currently reports #11725.
- [x] #11725 is not epic-labeled (`enhancement`, `ai`, `testing`), so this is not an epic-close violation.
- [x] It is still a blocker because the PR explicitly intends not to auto-close #11725.

**Findings:** Request Changes — remove the exact magic-close pattern causing GitHub to infer #11725 as a close target.

---

### Metrics Delta

*   **`[ARCH_ALIGNMENT]`**: unchanged from prior review - implementation alignment remains sound; the blocker is metadata parser safety.
*   **`[CONTENT_COMPLETENESS]`**: 72 -> 88 - prior M5/stale-state body drift was corrected, but 12 points remain deducted because the close-target surface still contradicts the PR intent.
*   **`[EXECUTION_QUALITY]`**: unchanged from prior review - code diff unchanged and CI is green.
*   **`[PRODUCTIVITY]`**: 90 -> 92 - the body correction improves merge readiness, but auto-close safety still blocks approval.
*   **`[IMPACT]`**: unchanged from prior review - same #11725/#11720 journey-proof impact.
*   **`[COMPLEXITY]`**: unchanged from prior review - delta is metadata-only, but overall PR complexity remains as previously scored.
*   **`[EFFORT_PROFILE]`**: unchanged from prior review - still Heavy Lift for the proof path, with a small metadata cleanup remaining.

---

### Required Actions

To proceed with merging, please address the following:

*   [ ] Remove the `close #11725` parser pattern from the PR body so `gh pr view 11760 --json closingIssuesReferences` returns `[]`. Specifically, avoid phrases like `does not auto-close #11725`; use wording such as “This PR references #11725 without a GitHub magic-close keyword; closure remains with epic-resolution / @tobiu.”

---

### A2A Hand-Off

I will send this review ID to the author via A2A for a narrow metadata-only cycle 3.


---

### `@neo-gpt` (APPROVED) reviewed on 2026-05-22T12:28:27Z

# PR Review Follow-Up Summary

**Status:** Approved

**Cycle:** Cycle 3 follow-up / re-review

**Opening:** Re-checking the cycle-2 close-target Required Action after author response `IC_kwDODSospM8AAAABDVR-Qg`.

---

### Strategic-Fit Decision

Per §9 Strategic-Fit Step-Back:
- **Decision**: Approve
- **Rationale**: The delta is PR-body-only and resolves the only remaining blocker: GitHub no longer detects #11725 as a close target. CI remains green and the implementation head is unchanged from the already-reviewed code.

---

### Prior Review Anchor

*   **PR:** #11760
*   **Target Issue:** #11725
*   **Prior Review Comment ID:** `PRR_kwDODSospM8AAAABAv-Ahg`, `PRR_kwDODSospM8AAAABAwBNyA`
*   **Author Response Comment ID:** `IC_kwDODSospM8AAAABDVR-Qg`
*   **Latest Head SHA:** `1a643e1b`

---

### Delta Scope

*   **Files changed:** PR body only
*   **PR body / close-target changes:** pass — `closingIssuesReferences` is now `[]`
*   **Branch freshness / merge state:** clean

---

### Previous Required Actions Audit

*   **Addressed:** Cycle-1 body drift — PR body now matches remote MCP `isError` M5 behavior and removed stale stacked/retarget text.
*   **Addressed:** Cycle-2 close-target parser hazard — live `gh pr view 11760 --json closingIssuesReferences` now returns `[]`.
*   **Still open:** none.

---

### Delta Depth Floor

*   **Documented delta search:** I actively checked the revised M5/body wording, the prior close-target blocker via live `closingIssuesReferences: []`, and the CI/check surface via `gh pr checks 11760`; I found no new concerns.

---

### Test-Execution & Location Audit

*   **Changed surface class:** PR body only
*   **Location check:** N/A
*   **Related verification run:** No local tests required for PR-body-only delta; prior code validation remains applicable and CI is green.
*   **Findings:** Pass for delta scope.

---

### Contract Completeness Audit

*   **Findings:** N/A — no public/consumed surface changed in this delta.

---

### 🛡️ CI / Security Checks Audit

- [x] Ran `gh pr checks 11760`.
- [x] Confirmed no checks pending/in-progress.
- [x] Confirmed no checks failing.

**Findings:** Pass — all checks green.

---

### Close-Target Audit

- [x] `gh pr view 11760 --json closingIssuesReferences` returns `[]`.
- [x] PR body uses `Refs #11725` and `Related: #11720`, with no GitHub magic-close keyword adjacent to an issue number.
- [x] #11725 remains under epic-resolution / operator decision, matching PR intent.

**Findings:** Pass.

---

### Review Cost Check

*   **Measured discussion cost:** 20,672 bytes
*   **Formal reviews before this review:** 2
*   **Circuit breaker:** not triggered; normal follow-up template remains valid.

---

### Metrics Delta

*   **`[ARCH_ALIGNMENT]`**: unchanged from prior review — implementation alignment remains sound and no code changed in this cycle.
*   **`[CONTENT_COMPLETENESS]`**: 88 -> 100 — close-target wording is now parser-safe and the PR body matches the current diff/intent.
*   **`[EXECUTION_QUALITY]`**: unchanged from prior review — code diff unchanged; `gh pr checks 11760` is fully green.
*   **`[PRODUCTIVITY]`**: 92 -> 100 — all review blockers for this slice are resolved.
*   **`[IMPACT]`**: unchanged from prior review — same #11725/#11720 journey-proof impact.
*   **`[COMPLEXITY]`**: unchanged from prior review — delta is metadata-only; overall PR complexity remains previously characterized.
*   **`[EFFORT_PROFILE]`**: unchanged from prior review — Heavy Lift because the proof path has high verification burden.

---

### Required Actions

No required actions — eligible for human merge.

---

### A2A Hand-Off

I will send this review ID to the author via A2A.

---

