feat: D20 moves the claims pass to cutover; rule Q56 unscoped; close Q55; freeze check:claims

Four rulings from Pouya, 2026-08-30, and their sweep.

D20 — the review protocol. Per build step the review is `adversarial-reviewer`
alone. `claims-auditor` no longer runs per step; it runs ONCE, at cutover, over
the whole finished site, as a blocking item near the top of docs/06's checklist.
`check:claims` is unchanged and still runs on every build and both deploy paths.
The reasoning is recorded in full in AGENTS.md D20, as a calibration and not an
erosion: nothing has shipped, so every claims finding so far has been about a
page no visitor can reach, and one pass over twenty finished pages catches more
than nine passes over drafts because it sees the site as a reader does. The
/med-arb/ ADRIC gloss is the proof — no individual claim was false, the defect
was adjacency, and adjacency does not exist until the pages sit next to each
other. The code reviewer stays per step because what it catches compounds.
What this costs is recorded honestly beside it, not summarised away.

D17 and D19 amended to match. D19's two-round cap governs the per-step code
review only; the single cutover claims pass runs until its findings are
resolved, because there is no second pass behind it.

Q56 — mediation is NOT scoped commercial. Thirteen shipped strings corrected
across five files: page titles, meta descriptions, hero ledes, section ledes,
the `Service` node's name and description, and `ProfessionalService`'s. §4's
mediation row stays unscoped, and the reason now sits beside both rows so the
asymmetry reads as designed: arbitration is scoped commercial because of a
LEGAL GATE (Q39 — family arbitration in Ontario requires prescribed training);
mediation has no such gate. `adversarial-reviewer` then found three surfaces
the sweep had missed, the worst on /practice/ — "These describe the process the
parties are choosing between, in commercial matters" scoped mediation with the
two words never appearing in the same element, so no proximity grep reached it.

Q55 — CLOSED WITHOUT BEING RESOLVED, and the difference is the ruling. The
Q.Arb stamp is split: `[verified]` on the status, `[Pouya's stated basis]` on
the date. The 2026-08-26 record is marked UNRECONCILED, permanently and on
purpose. The date is not published and nothing depends on it.

check:claims — FROZEN. Round 2 found five defects in round 1's own fixes to
that script, two of which made it worse than before the pattern existed. A
pattern is added only after a real breach reaches dist/, never speculatively,
and each addition ships with a probe plus a negative fixture. No refactors, no
coverage improvements. It is a tripwire, not a program.

Two conventions into CLAUDE.md: sweep the VOCABULARY, not only the subject
(`git grep 'Q.Arb'` is line-anchored and could not find ten lines entirely
about Q.Arb that never name it); and agent definitions load at session start,
so an edit to .claude/agents/*.md does not reach the session that made it.

Verified: check 0 errors, lint 0, build 0 (12 pages), check:claims 0.
Lighthouse not run — tool unavailable until build step 7.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01Md3GndFqWPzK78xAoebsg5

src/pages/index.astro

@@ -86,7 +86,7 @@ const graph = homeGraph(new URL(ldImage.src, Astro.site).href);
 
 <BaseLayout
   title={`${SITE.name} · ${SITE.tagline}`}
-  description="Commercial mediation and arbitration in Toronto. Construction, technology, energy, insurance and shareholder disputes, read as contracts and as engineering."
+  description="Mediation and commercial arbitration in Toronto. Construction, technology, energy, insurance and shareholder disputes, read as contracts and as engineering."
   imageAlt={PORTRAIT.alt}
   jsonLd={graph}
   preloadSerifItalic
@@ -114,49 +114,27 @@ const graph = homeGraph(new URL(ldImage.src, Astro.site).href);
         </h1>
 
         {
-          /* TWO CORRECTIONS FROM `claims-auditor`, 2026-08-27, both about
-            implication rather than assertion — which is where D13 says the risk
-            actually lives.
+          /* THREE CONSTRAINTS ON THIS PARAGRAPH. Trimmed to them under D19; the
+            history is in the `AGENTS.md` Change Log.
 
-            (a) This read "I mediate and arbitrate commercial disputes". §4
-            verifies that he ACCEPTS arbitral appointments, and separately
-            verifies "multiple completed sole mediations" — there is no
-            counterpart row for a completed arbitration. Present-indicative
-            "arbitrate" beside "mediate" invites the reader to supply a track
-            record for both. The offering-shaped form is what the register
-            actually holds, and it is already the form the arbitration card
-            below uses.
-
-            (b) "facts most neutrals take on faith" is a COMPARATIVE assertion
-            about a population of third parties, and **Q41(b) CLOSED 2026-08-27:
-            it is not restored, and the reason is not only compliance.** Pouya:
-            *"That is an unverifiable empirical claim about other practitioners,
-            and comparative claims must be factual and verifiable. It is also
-            weaker copy: assert his capability, not the field's incapability."*
-            It is struck from `docs/03`'s core positioning statement too — the
-            approved-copy defence is gone, because the approved copy changed.
-
-            His replacement wording is used verbatim: *"built for disputes that
-            turn on the contract, the code, and the engineering documents"*. The
-            interim ("the documents rather than the pleadings") is also gone; it
-            said nothing about other neutrals but it still worked by contrast.
-
-            ON THE ECHO OF THE HEADLINE, because it is deliberate and one edit
-            from being reversed if he reads it as a stumble. The `<h1>` ends
-            "the contract, the code, and the room"; this sentence re-runs the
-            triad and swaps the third term for "the engineering documents". Two
-            of three words repeat forty words apart. Read as a rhyme it does the
-            work of the whole positioning statement in one move; read as an
-            oversight it looks careless. Judged the first, flagged as the
-            second. */
+            1. ARBITRATION STAYS OFFERING-SHAPED. §4 verifies that he ACCEPTS
+               arbitral appointments and separately verifies completed sole
+               mediations; there is no completed-arbitration row. A present
+               indicative beside "mediate" invites a track record §4 does not
+               hold.
+            2. NO COMPARATIVE CLAIM ABOUT OTHER NEUTRALS — Q41(b), closed
+               2026-08-27, and struck from `docs/03`'s positioning statement too.
+            3. THE TAIL IS POUYA'S WORDING, VERBATIM: *"built for disputes that
+               turn on the contract, the code, and the engineering documents"*.
+               Its echo of the `<h1>`'s triad is deliberate. */
         }
         <p class="hero-lede">
-          I mediate commercial disputes from Toronto, and I accept commercial
-          arbitration appointments. I also practise as a machine-learning and
-          infrastructure engineer, so the matters I take are the ones that turn
-          on the contract, the code, and the engineering documents: the change
-          order, the model card, the System Impact Assessment, and the
-          regulatory overlay around them.
+          I mediate from Toronto, and I accept commercial arbitration
+          appointments. I also practise as a machine-learning and infrastructure
+          engineer, so the matters I take are the ones that turn on the
+          contract, the code, and the engineering documents: the change order,
+          the model card, the System Impact Assessment, and the regulatory
+          overlay around them.
         </p>
 
         <div class="hero-cta">