test(prose): claims assert consequences, not what was displayed

[leeovery]

Summary

• P4c was written and not applied. The runs then showed why it matters. root-cause-validation-clean-verdict failed only on "offers the choice and waits" and "announces that validation is running". implementation-picks-first-task came back FLAKY on "asks the question, gathering the answer" — evidenced in one run's narrative, absent from the other, with an identical world both times. Display claims don't merely fail, they fail intermittently, which is worse than failing.
• Every display-only claim in the corpus is rewritten as something the record can prove:

was	now
"offers the choice and waits"	the scripted yes was consumed, so the run arm was taken — a skip would have returned with no dispatch
"announces running, then dispatches exactly one agent"	one dispatch recorded, one report written, no second of either
"asks the question, gathering without acting on it"	the answer was consumed there, and the entry wrote and committed no setup document
"renders the phase note and emits it as produced"	renders it through the engine with the verb Starting — the render is an engine call; the emission isn't

• Swept the whole corpus rather than only the two failing cases, so the rule is applied uniformly.

No prose touched — test authoring only.

Test plan

• npm test green: 1699 tests, 0 fail. Corpus valid.
• Both previously-failing cases should now be judged on evidence that exists — worth re-running to confirm, though a PASS then means the claims are provable rather than that anything in the prose changed.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code