decisions, vikunja-setup: 113 (row 61 field table follows the code, edited in the row); #154 comment; #218 close-verdict follow-up

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <[email protected]>

docs/plans/2026-09-26_lead-decisions.md

@@ -2514,3 +2514,36 @@ which stay with him. Each item names who decided it and what happened.
     - Mos does the one reinstall after the row lands: `copy`, stop,
       `install --copy ID` with the uid, start, then status, `/healthz`
       and the anonymous 302.
+113. **Row 61: the slice 1 field table follows the code, edited in the
+    row (2026-10-12).** Darkwing, on row 61 (#1550), stopped as its
+    brief says and listed five places where `docs/plans/2026-10-04_slice-1.md`'s
+    field table and the task verbs disagree, each checked against the
+    code and a probe on the tasks test world. None changes who may
+    write a field; each records what the code already does. Decision 90
+    set the rule that the prose moves, not the code, and it applies
+    here.
+    - Priority: pm, with a resolved decision. `roles/pm.json` lists
+      `task.priority.change` cross-role, so the broker returns
+      decision-required (verbs.test.mjs:170 asserts it).
+    - Due date and priority: `task.create` sets both at create
+      (verbs.mjs:176-181), so it joins that row's actions.
+    - Title and description afterwards: any role through
+      `task.scope.change` with a resolved decision. The arbiter decides
+      for a role that lists it cross-role (pm, cto and coder today) and
+      Jason for any other, since an unlisted action is gated. Decision
+      90's wording named only the first path.
+    - Percent, state and comments: the assigned role, and a role
+      without `task.update.assigned` (the researcher today) needs
+      Jason's decision even when assigned.
+    - Done: pm, citing a review verdict. `task.close` records the
+      verdict without checking it (verbs.mjs:334); the table says so.
+      Whether close should check it is Vikunja #218, not row 61.
+    - Darkwing makes the edit inside row 61, so Dewey and Filbert see it
+      beside the code-match test. Row 61's files owned gain the field
+      table section of `docs/plans/2026-10-04_slice-1.md`, and only
+      that section. The edit adds a line citing this decision, as
+      decision 90's did.
+    - The table ships in two layers, as Darkwing proposed: the
+      verb-level writer `packages/tasks` enforces (pm by definition, the
+      assigned role, or any role), and whether a decision is needed,
+      which the test reads from `roles/*.json` instead of copying.