fix: sweep D3 amendment through the specs; correct inverted DKIM table

The re-audit of the deploy-guard change surfaced defects well outside the
diff, including one that would have broken production mail.

docs/05-backend-spec.md had the two SES DKIM sets exactly inverted, labelling
the three records that resolve as "orphans" and the three NXDOMAIN records as
"Live. Never delete". Entry (j) corrected this in AGENTS.md §7 and the
correction never reached docs/05. Since SES has no custom MAIL FROM, DKIM is
the only thing satisfying DMARC, so acting on that table would have silently
broken intake mail authentication.

Also in this change:

- .gitea/workflows/deploy.yml gains a guard as steps[0] that fails the run,
  naming the variable, if AWS_REGION, S3_BUCKET or CLOUDFRONT_DISTRIBUTION_ID
  is empty — how a Gitea too old for the vars context manifests. Verified
  fail-closed under bash -e, sh -e and bash -euo pipefail.
- AGENTS.md Current Truth: SPF and DMARC recorded as present (Q20), the
  matching §10 High risk row retired, three duplicate Q rows removed.
- docs/reference/AWS-Hosting-Guide.md tracked and given a do-not-execute
  banner; it was an executable procedure for the architecture D1/D3 replace.
- Copy decks: "a working litigator" and "an active litigation practice"
  replaced with the register's own wording; LegalService JSON-LD replaced with
  ProfessionalService; tribunal-secretary offers removed per D14; nine stale
  question blockers swept.
- astro.config.mjs: prefetchAll disabled — it injected JS into every page
  against the zero-JS convention with no decision recorded.
- src/data/site.ts: unregistered response-time commitment nulled (Q27);
  OBA section names downgraded to [assumed] (Q28).
- s3:AbortMultipartUpload reasoning corrected to measure ./dist, not the repo.

Opens Q27, Q28, Q29. AGENTS.md entry (q) records the full resolution,
including the findings declined and why.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_012XquaEq4BgWMCwUqLEyNkF

docs/08-execution-protocol.md

@@ -47,9 +47,19 @@ approve elegant code containing a claim that should never have been published,
 because professional-conduct compliance is not what it is looking at. On this
 project that is the highest-stakes failure mode, so it gets its own pass.
 
+**Verifying they are loaded.** `.claude/agents/` is the correct location. To
+confirm the agents are live, invoke one directly:
+
+```
+Use the claims-auditor agent to audit README.md against AGENTS.md §4.
+```
+
+A verdict table back means both are wired. "No such agent" means the frontmatter
+needs looking at.
+
 **Both are instructed to treat uncertainty as a defect.** They will sometimes be
 wrong. That is the intended trade: explaining why a finding is mistaken costs
-minutes, and a missed defect on a licensed professional's public marketing page
+minutes, and a missed defect on this project's public marketing pages
 costs a great deal more.
 
 ## The rule that makes it work