operational-rigor §2: a blanket go covers everything you surfaced as pending

[firaen22]

What

One clause on the existing "Approval is not a verdict" bullet in
operational-rigor §2, plus a Provenance entry.

A blanket go — "proceed", "do them all" — reaches every item the agent has put
in front of the user as pending, not just its most recent message. If part of
that queue is deliberately excluded, the excluded items get named before
starting, not when the user asks where they went.

Why this isn't already covered

§2 has two approval rules, and both run the same direction: they stop an
approval from reaching forward — past a pending verdict, or on to the next
consequential action. Neither covers an approval being silently trimmed
backward to a subset of what was already surfaced. The clause states the
asymmetry explicitly so it doesn't read as loosening the per-invocation rule:
a blanket go covers what you surfaced, never work you never put in front of
them.

Provenance

One downstream consumer's session: the user answered a list of pending items
with "proceed all", the agent applied it only to the items named in its
immediately preceding message, and the remainder sat untouched until the user
asked why they were skipped. The agent's own answer at the time was "no good
reason, scope habit" — a defensible reading of the words and a bad reading of
the intent.

Ships unprobed per the covenant.

Verification

• Purely additive: git diff --stat = 19 insertions, 0 deletions;
  word-diff shows zero removed words.
• All new lines ≤ 80 chars (character count, not bytes).
• Non-ASCII limited to the house set: §, em-dash, ❌.
• §2 citation resolved against the destination file by line number, not
  assumed.