docs(spec): two docblocks that promised a future which has already arrived (#16835, #15239) (#16947)

`automation/control-flow.zod.ts` said the schema and `validateControlFlow`
"do not overlap and cannot fight" and met at "one seam". #16134 removed that
division deliberately: `FlowSchema`'s `superRefine` now refuses a duplicate
node id — a structural fact — over one node-id space spanning the top-level
`nodes[]` and every region body. The docblock now names both seams and the
boundary: the #4001 region-slot `safeParse`, and the #16134 node-id space
judged at every depth `collectFlowGraphs` walks, which stops at
`MAX_REGION_DEPTH` (32) — past the ceiling a region is left raw and
`analyzeRegion`'s own `duplicate node id` line is the only refusal of a
within-region duplicate, a cross-region collision beyond it not judged at all.

`security/sharing.zod.ts` said in two places that a `field` rule is skipped at
seed "until [#15072] lands". It landed (`9fa577535`): `mapRecipientType` maps
`field` through and `SharingRuleService.expandRecipientForRecord` reads the
named column per matched record. Both sentences now name that executor rather
than a schedule.

The third sentence the card counted is left alone and is still true: `queue`
is "NOT authorable until the implementation lands" is about `sys_queue`, not
about `field`, and no `sys_queue` object exists in the tree.

Comment text only — no schema, export, key or predicate moves.
`content/docs/references/automation/control-flow.mdx` regenerated by
`gen:docs`; `sharing.zod.ts`'s blocks do not reach the generated tree.


Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_016N6xmWt5hYm94ffVEwGH8x

Co-authored-by: claude[bot] <209825114+claude[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>

Author: claude[bot]

.changeset/spec-expired-until-it-lands-docblocks.md

@@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
+---
+'@objectstack/spec': patch
+---
+
+Two published docblocks now describe the tree as it is, instead of promising a change that has already landed (#16835, #15239).
+
+Both files ship: `@objectstack/spec` lists `src/**/*.zod.ts` in its `files[]`, so a TSDoc comment in either is a published byte and a reader gets it from the package as well as from `content/docs/references/`. No schema, export, key or predicate changes — comment text only.
+
+**`automation/control-flow.zod.ts`** said the schema and `validateControlFlow` "do not overlap and cannot fight: the schema rejects undeclared KEYS, the analysis rejects malformed STRUCTURE", meeting at "one seam". #16134 removed exactly that division: `FlowSchema`'s `superRefine` now refuses a duplicate node id — a structural fact — across one node-id space spanning the top-level `nodes[]` and every region body. The docblock now names both seams and the boundary between them: the #4001 region-slot `safeParse`, and the #16134 node-id space judged at every depth `collectFlowGraphs` walks. That walk stops at `MAX_REGION_DEPTH` (32), so past the ceiling a region is left raw and `analyzeRegion`'s own `duplicate node id` line is the only refusal of a within-region duplicate — a cross-region collision beyond the ceiling is not judged at all. The two guards overlap there by design and hand off at that measured boundary.
+
+**`security/sharing.zod.ts`** said, in two places, that a `field` sharing rule is skipped at seed "until [#15072] lands". It landed: `mapRecipientType` maps `field` through and `SharingRuleService.expandRecipientForRecord` reads the named column on each matched record. Both sentences now name that executor rather than a schedule.
+
+⚠️ The third sentence the card counted — `queue` is "deliberately NOT authorable until the implementation lands" — is **still true** and deliberately untouched: it is about `sys_queue`, not about `field`, and there is no `sys_queue` object in the tree.

content/docs/references/automation/control-flow.mdx

@@ -60,14 +60,26 @@ a swallowed branch key is a branch that runs without what it was given.
 
 `validateControlFlow` is a **sibling guard, not a key gate** — it answers
 "is this region single-entry / single-exit / acyclic", which no amount of
-key strictness can answer. The two do not overlap and cannot fight: the
-schema rejects undeclared KEYS, the analysis rejects malformed STRUCTURE.
-They do now meet at one seam, deliberately — `validateControlFlow`
-`safeParse`s each region slot before analyzing it, so from #4001 that parse
-is also where a region's undeclared key surfaces, reported as
-`<where>: invalid region — <the strictObject message>`. Nothing was
-duplicated and nothing was removed; the structural prose this guard exists
-for is untouched, and it simply stopped silently repairing its own input.
+key strictness can answer. The two are no longer disjoint, and since #16134
+that is deliberate: the schema rejects undeclared KEYS *and* one structural
+fact — a duplicate node id — while the analysis rejects malformed STRUCTURE.
+They meet at two seams.
+
+**#4001** — `validateControlFlow` `safeParse`s each region slot before
+analyzing it, so that parse is also where a region's undeclared key
+surfaces, reported as `<where>: invalid region — <the strictObject
+message>`. That seam duplicated nothing and removed nothing, and left the
+structural prose this guard exists for untouched; it simply stopped silently
+repairing its own input.
+
+**#16134** — `FlowSchema`'s `superRefine` holds ONE node-id space across the
+top-level `nodes[]` and every region body, judged at every depth
+`collectFlowGraphs` walks. That walk stops at `MAX_REGION_DEPTH` (32), so
+past the ceiling a region is left raw and `analyzeRegion`'s own
+`duplicate node id` line, reached through this guard, is the only refusal of
+a within-region duplicate (a cross-region collision beyond the ceiling is
+not judged). The two guards overlap there by design and hand off at that
+measured boundary.
 
 <Callout type="info">
 **Source:** `packages/spec/src/automation/control-flow.zod.ts`

packages/spec/src/automation/control-flow.zod.ts

@@ -58,14 +58,26 @@
  *
  * `validateControlFlow` is a **sibling guard, not a key gate** — it answers
  * "is this region single-entry / single-exit / acyclic", which no amount of
- * key strictness can answer. The two do not overlap and cannot fight: the
- * schema rejects undeclared KEYS, the analysis rejects malformed STRUCTURE.
- * They do now meet at one seam, deliberately — `validateControlFlow`
- * `safeParse`s each region slot before analyzing it, so from #4001 that parse
- * is also where a region's undeclared key surfaces, reported as
- * `<where>: invalid region — <the strictObject message>`. Nothing was
- * duplicated and nothing was removed; the structural prose this guard exists
- * for is untouched, and it simply stopped silently repairing its own input.
+ * key strictness can answer. The two are no longer disjoint, and since #16134
+ * that is deliberate: the schema rejects undeclared KEYS *and* one structural
+ * fact — a duplicate node id — while the analysis rejects malformed STRUCTURE.
+ * They meet at two seams.
+ *
+ * **#4001** — `validateControlFlow` `safeParse`s each region slot before
+ * analyzing it, so that parse is also where a region's undeclared key
+ * surfaces, reported as `<where>: invalid region — <the strictObject
+ * message>`. That seam duplicated nothing and removed nothing, and left the
+ * structural prose this guard exists for untouched; it simply stopped silently
+ * repairing its own input.
+ *
+ * **#16134** — `FlowSchema`'s `superRefine` holds ONE node-id space across the
+ * top-level `nodes[]` and every region body, judged at every depth
+ * `collectFlowGraphs` walks. That walk stops at `MAX_REGION_DEPTH` (32), so
+ * past the ceiling a region is left raw and `analyzeRegion`'s own
+ * `duplicate node id` line, reached through this guard, is the only refusal of
+ * a within-region duplicate (a cross-region collision beyond the ceiling is
+ * not judged). The two guards overlap there by design and hand off at that
+ * measured boundary.
  */
 
 import { z } from 'zod';

packages/spec/src/security/sharing.zod.ts

@@ -88,9 +88,10 @@ export const SharingLevel = z.enum([
  *   principal). Unlike every member above, which resolves ONCE PER RULE, a
  *   `field` recipient expands ONCE PER MATCHED RECORD, and its grants
  *   re-materialise when the record's own write changes that column. That
- *   executor half is #15072 (`plugin-sharing`); until it lands, the
- *   declared-rule bootstrap skips a `field` rule with a logged warning
- *   (`mapRecipientType` → null) — it never seeds one as anything wider.
+ *   executor half landed as #15072 (`plugin-sharing`): the declared-rule
+ *   bootstrap's `mapRecipientType` maps `field` through, and
+ *   `SharingRuleService.expandRecipientForRecord` reads the named column on
+ *   each matched record — never rule-wide, and never wider than the column.
  *
  * ⛔ No `manager` member (same ruling). "Share with the owner's manager" is
  * authored as a user field the application stores on the record — a snapshot
@@ -258,8 +259,9 @@ export const CriteriaSharingRuleSchema = lazySchema(() => BaseSharingRuleSchema.
  * `unit_and_subordinates` / `business_unit` (ADR-0057 D5; ADR-0090 D3) — every
  * authorable recipient expands at runtime (`plugin-sharing` `expandRecipient`)
  * — plus `field`, the record-relative recipient (#14103): resolved per matched
- * record from a user-typed column on it; its executor is the services half,
- * #15072, and until that lands a `field` rule is skipped LOUDLY at seed.
+ * record from a user-typed column on it. Its services half, #15072, landed:
+ * `expandRecipientForRecord` resolves it per record, so a `field` rule seeds
+ * at bootstrap like any other instead of being skipped there.
  *
  * The whole authorable surface is enforced — nothing here validates and then
  * silently does nothing (ADR-0078). Removed to keep it that way: `owner`-type