docs: api-artifacts contract revision 2 (luna review F1-F5)

F1: declared route-metadata layer as complete generator input; generator
fails closed on any route lacking extractable metadata; migration of
local-DTO/inline-typed/raw-handler routes named as implementing-PR scope.
F2: coverage closed over raw framework mounts, delegated surfaces,
tier-conditional controllers, SSE, and both-direction Socket.IO events;
explicit exclusion and delegation lists.
F3: ENDPOINTS.md structured entry format with operationId links; the
no-duplication rule reattributed as new disclosed policy with a
mechanical boundary witness.
F4: witnesses added for OpenAPI 3.1 validity, family coverage in
ENDPOINTS.md, per-entry required content, fail-closed generator control,
and a defined retirement equivalence algorithm.
F5: section 8 disclosure completed (10 items); Authority paragraph
restated in the sitemap's own terms.

docs/requirements/api-artifacts.md

@@ -7,12 +7,30 @@ HTTP/WebSocket contract and `docs/API/ENDPOINTS.md` as the
 human-readable endpoint, authentication, permission, and error index —
 both declared, neither present (the webui-audit REPORT's prerequisite
 9). `docs/SITEMAP.md` records that canonical scope requires maintainer
-approval; this contract's ratification is that approval path. Contract
+approval; ratification of this contract by the repository maintainer
-5 (`tool-gateway-mapping.md`) §4 binds the per-operation
+supplies that approval for these two artifacts. Contract 5
+(`tool-gateway-mapping.md`) §4 binds the per-operation
 request/result/error/audit envelope; this contract binds only how the
 two artifacts are produced, what they must cover, and how they are
 kept true.
 
+Revision 2 (luna review F1–F5): the generation model now defines its
+complete input — a declared route-metadata layer every production
+route must carry, with the generator failing closed on any route
+lacking extractable metadata, and the migration of today's local-DTO,
+inline-typed, and raw-handler routes named as implementing-PR scope
+(F1). The §7.2 inventory is closed over the real surface: raw
+framework mounts, delegated surfaces, conditional/tier-gated
+controllers, SSE, and Socket.IO events in both directions, with an
+explicit delegation/exclusion list (F2). The `ENDPOINTS.md`
+no-duplication rule is reattributed as a new disclosed policy with a
+structured entry format and a mechanical checker (F3). Witnesses are
+added or made executable for 3.1 validity, family coverage in
+`ENDPOINTS.md`, per-entry required content, and the retirement
+equivalence algorithm (F4). §8 discloses every untraced binding rule,
+and the SITEMAP approval claim is restated in the sitemap's own terms
+(F5).
+
 This contract binds the artifact definitions (§2), the production
 model (§3), coverage obligations (§4), legacy migration (§5), phase
 timing (§6), witnesses (§7), and disclosed drafting additions (§8).
@@ -24,39 +42,63 @@ documentation placement rules stay with the docs atlas
 
 1. **The artifacts**: `docs/API/OPENAPI.yaml` and
    `docs/API/ENDPOINTS.md`, exactly as declared by `docs/API/README.md`.
-2. **Coverage**: the set of Gateway HTTP routes and Socket.IO events
+2. **Coverage**: the set of Gateway HTTP routes (however registered),
-   the artifacts describe.
+   SSE routes, and Socket.IO events (both directions) the artifacts
+   describe.
 3. **Drift**: any difference between an artifact and the production
-   surface it documents — an undocumented live route, a documented
+   surface it documents — an undocumented live route or event, a
-   phantom route, or a divergent schema/auth/error description.
+   documented phantom, or a divergent schema/auth/error description.
+4. **Delegated surface**: a mounted path prefix whose request handling
+   is delegated wholesale to an embedded third-party engine (for
+   example an auth engine's own route tree): the Gateway registers the
+   mount; the engine defines the routes.
 
 ## 2. Artifact contract
 
-1. **`OPENAPI.yaml`** is one file, valid OpenAPI 3.1, and the canonical
+1. **`OPENAPI.yaml`** is one file, valid OpenAPI 3.1 (witness §7.6),
-   machine-readable contract for the Gateway's HTTP surface. Socket.IO
+   and the canonical machine-readable contract for the Gateway's HTTP
-   events, which OpenAPI cannot express natively, are documented in
+   surface. Socket.IO events, which OpenAPI cannot express natively,
-   `ENDPOINTS.md` and referenced from the OpenAPI description block;
+   are documented in `ENDPOINTS.md` and referenced from the OpenAPI
-   inventing a pseudo-path encoding for them inside `OPENAPI.yaml` is
+   description block; inventing a pseudo-path encoding for them inside
-   non-conformant.
+   `OPENAPI.yaml` is non-conformant.
-2. **`ENDPOINTS.md`** is the human index: per endpoint family, the
+2. **`ENDPOINTS.md`** is the human index, in a structured entry
-   behavior, authentication requirement, permission/authorization rule
+   format: one entry per endpoint family, carrying (a) the family's
-   (naming the owning contract — contract 2 for chain authorization,
+   behavior summary, (b) its operations referenced by `operationId`
-   the SOT for workspace membership), and error semantics including
+   link into `OPENAPI.yaml` — never by restated definition, (c) the
-   the contract 5 §4.2 taxonomy. It links to owning contracts and to
+   authentication requirement, (d) the permission/authorization rule
-   `OPENAPI.yaml`; it does not duplicate endpoint definitions (the
+   naming the owning contract (contract 2 for chain authorization, the
-   `docs/API/README.md` authoring boundary).
+   SOT for workspace membership), (e) error semantics including the
+   contract 5 §4.2 taxonomy, and (f) Socket.IO event entries (both
+   directions) for event families. `ENDPOINTS.md` MUST NOT contain
+   request/response schema definitions for any operation that exists
+   in `OPENAPI.yaml` (mechanical rule: no `requestBody`/`responses`/
+   schema-fragment blocks for such operations — witness §7.5). This
+   no-duplication rule and the entry format are new policy disclosed
+   in §8 (the `docs/API/README.md` boundary as written binds guide
+   books, not `ENDPOINTS.md` itself).
 3. Both artifacts are committed repository files, reviewed in PRs like
    any contract text; neither is a build output that exists only in CI.
 
 ## 3. Production model
 
 1. **Generation (per the ruling).** `OPENAPI.yaml` is GENERATED from
-   the Gateway source (route decorators plus the shared request/result
+   the Gateway source by a deterministic repository script whose input
-   DTOs of contract 5 §4.1) by a deterministic repository script; the
+   is a **declared route-metadata layer**: every production HTTP/SSE
-   generated output is committed, and CI regenerates and byte-compares
+   route carries machine-extractable metadata — route decorators plus
-   it (§7.1). Hand edits to `OPENAPI.yaml` are non-conformant — a
+   typed request/response schemas (the contract 5 §4.1 shared DTOs
-   description that cannot be expressed from source annotations goes
+   where the operation is a mapped tool family; declared per-route
-   into the annotations, or into `ENDPOINTS.md`.
+   schemas elsewhere) and its error-code set. **The generator fails
+   closed:** a production route lacking complete extractable metadata
+   is a generation error, never a silently omitted or partially
+   emitted operation. Today's local-DTO, inline-typed, and
+   raw-handler routes therefore migrate to declared metadata in the
+   implementing PR — that migration is in the implementing PR's
+   scope, and §7.2's independent inventory is the cross-check that no
+   route escaped it. The generated output is committed, and CI
+   regenerates and byte-compares it (§7.1). Hand edits to
+   `OPENAPI.yaml` are non-conformant — a description that cannot be
+   expressed from source annotations goes into the annotations, or
+   into `ENDPOINTS.md`.
 2. **Normative direction.** Generation documents the code; it does not
    ratify it. The S2 contracts and their witnesses remain the
    normative gates on what the surface may be; the artifacts make the
@@ -65,14 +107,25 @@ documentation placement rules stay with the docs atlas
    that route's owning contract, not authority for it.
 3. `ENDPOINTS.md` is hand-authored (its content — permission
    rationale, cross-contract links, event semantics — is judgment, not
-   extraction), against the §7.2 coverage witness.
+   extraction), against the §7.2 coverage and §7.3 content witnesses.
 
 ## 4. Coverage obligations
 
-1. Every production Gateway HTTP route appears in `OPENAPI.yaml`; every
+1. **Closure over the real surface.** Coverage extends to every
-   route family appears in `ENDPOINTS.md`. Test-only and
+   production route however registered: framework-decorated
-   development-only surfaces are excluded and the exclusion list is
+   controllers and gateways AND raw framework mounts registered
-   explicit in the generation script, not implicit.
+   outside them (the bootstrap's own route/hook registrations), SSE
+   routes, and conditionally registered (deployment-tier-gated)
+   controllers — documented in the union, each conditional route
+   marked with its condition. **Delegated surfaces** (§1.4) are
+   documented as delegated-surface entries naming the mount, the
+   delegating engine, and that engine's own contract — not
+   re-documented route-by-route. **Socket.IO events are covered in
+   both directions:** subscribed (inbound handler) events and
+   server-emitted events. Test-only and development-only surfaces are
+   excluded via an exclusion list that is explicit in the generation
+   script and enumerated in `ENDPOINTS.md`, never implicit. The
+   exclusion and delegation lists are new policy disclosed in §8.
 2. Every documented operation carries: its authentication requirement;
    its authorization rule by reference to the owning contract; its
    error responses drawn from the contract 5 §4.2 closed taxonomy.
@@ -83,7 +136,7 @@ documentation placement rules stay with the docs atlas
    choice.
 3. New surface ships documented: a PR that adds or changes a Gateway
    route or event lands with the regenerated `OPENAPI.yaml` and any
-   needed `ENDPOINTS.md` row in the same PR, enforced by the §7.1
+   needed `ENDPOINTS.md` entry in the same PR, enforced by the §7.1
    drift gate — there is no "docs to follow" state.
 
 ## 5. Legacy migration
@@ -93,23 +146,28 @@ documentation placement rules stay with the docs atlas
    demonstrably covers it: the `docs/API/README.md` retirement rule
    (verify paths, schemas, authentication, permissions, error
    behavior, and generated/client references) is binding, witnessed by
-   §7.4.
+   §7.4's equivalence algorithm.
 2. Retirement is deletion in a reviewed PR after the §7.4 witness
    passes; until then no consumer may treat the legacy artifact as
-   canonical for anything beyond its own 17 paths.
+   canonical for anything beyond its own 17 paths. (The
+   deletion-in-reviewed-PR form and the interim-consumer restriction
+   are disclosed in §8.)
 
 ## 6. Phase timing
 
-1. The artifacts and the generation script are produced by an
+1. The artifacts, the metadata migration (§3.1), and the generation
-   implementing PR after this contract is ratified; they are S4-phase
+   script are produced by an implementing PR after this contract is
-   platform work, not part of any S2 ruling PR.
+   ratified; they are S4-phase platform work, not part of any S2
+   ruling PR.
 2. From the first commit of `OPENAPI.yaml` onward, the §7.1 drift gate
    is a required CI check on the integration trunk; the §4.3
    same-PR rule binds every subsequent surface-changing PR.
 3. The build-first tool families (A5 ranks, contracts 1–3, 5, 8) are
    documented as they land, under the same rule — the roll-up query,
    for example, ships with its OpenAPI operation and its
-   `ENDPOINTS.md` row in its implementing PR.
+   `ENDPOINTS.md` entry in its implementing PR.
+4. The phase placement and rollout sequencing in this section are
+   disclosed in §8.
 
 ## 7. Verification requirements
 
@@ -119,51 +177,93 @@ scanned source roots, and compared files.
 1. **Drift witness:** CI regenerates `OPENAPI.yaml` with the
    repository script and fails on any byte difference from the
    committed file; the witness proves it can fail by a control run
-   against a mutated copy.
+   against a mutated copy. A second control proves the generator's
-2. **Coverage witness:** an independent route inventory (static
+   fail-closed rule (§3.1): a fixture route stripped of its metadata
-   enumeration of Gateway controllers and gateways over `apps/`,
+   makes generation fail, not emit a partial document.
-   production code, tests excluded — the A5 §1.2 inventory style)
+2. **Coverage witness:** an independent surface inventory — static
-   equals the documented path set in both directions: no undocumented
+   enumeration over `apps/` production code, tests excluded (the A5
-   live route, no documented phantom. Socket.IO events are inventoried
+   §1.2 inventory style), covering framework-decorated controllers
-   the same way against `ENDPOINTS.md`.
+   and gateways, raw mount/hook registrations in the bootstrap
-3. **Taxonomy witness:** every error response documented in
+   path, SSE routes, conditional registrations (evaluated per
-   `OPENAPI.yaml` uses a code from the contract 5 §4.2 closed enums,
+   deployment profile and unioned), and delegated-surface mounts —
-   and each family's documented codes exactly match the enum in the
+   equals the documented set in both directions: no undocumented live
-   shared types package; where the no-oracle rule applies, the
+   route, no documented phantom, each conditional route carrying its
-   documented refusal and not-found responses are identical in code,
+   condition, each delegated surface present as a delegated-surface
-   status, and shape.
+   entry. Socket.IO events are inventoried in both directions —
+   inbound subscription handlers by handler scan, server-emitted
+   events by emit-call scan over production code — and compared to
+   `ENDPOINTS.md`'s event entries in both directions. Additionally,
+   every HTTP route family in `OPENAPI.yaml` has an `ENDPOINTS.md`
+   entry, and every `ENDPOINTS.md` operation reference resolves to an
+   existing `operationId` — both directions, mechanical.
+3. **Content and taxonomy witness:** every `ENDPOINTS.md` entry
+   carries the §2.2 required fields — behavior, operation links,
+   authentication requirement, owning-contract link, error semantics
+   — presence-checked mechanically against the structured entry
+   format; every error response documented in `OPENAPI.yaml` uses a
+   code from the contract 5 §4.2 closed enums, and each family's
+   documented codes exactly match the enum in the shared types
+   package; where the no-oracle rule applies, the documented refusal
+   and not-found responses are identical in code, status, and shape.
 4. **Retirement witness:** before `docs/openapi-tess.yaml` is deleted,
    an automated comparison proves each of its 17 paths is covered by
-   `OPENAPI.yaml` with equivalent schemas, auth, permissions, and
+   `OPENAPI.yaml` under a defined equivalence algorithm: both
-   error behavior, and a repository-wide reference scan shows no
+   documents canonicalized (references dereferenced, keys sorted),
+   then per path — structural schema equality, security/authentication
+   requirement equality, and documented error-code set equality —
+   with permissions compared against the covering `ENDPOINTS.md`
+   entries, and the comparison emitting the exact per-path
+   differences on failure. A repository-wide reference scan shows no
    remaining consumer (including generated clients) resolves the
    legacy file.
-5. **Boundary witness:** `ENDPOINTS.md` contains no endpoint
+5. **Boundary witness:** `ENDPOINTS.md` contains no schema definition
-   definition duplicated from `OPENAPI.yaml` (machine-checkable:
+   for any operation that exists in `OPENAPI.yaml` — mechanically: no
-   no path+verb table row whose content restates the generated
+   `requestBody`/`responses`/schema-fragment block attached to a
-   operation instead of linking it), per the `docs/API/README.md`
+   linked operation, and every operation mention is an `operationId`
-   authoring boundary.
+   link (§2.2's structured format makes this checkable); the witness
+   proves it can fail by a control run against a mutated copy
+   containing an inline schema block.
+6. **Validity witness:** `OPENAPI.yaml` parses and validates as
+   OpenAPI 3.1 under a named validator run in CI; the witness proves
+   it can fail by a control run against an invalidated copy.
 
 ## 8. Drafting additions (PRD §12.1 disclosure)
 
-The two artifacts, their roles, the single-boundary rule, and the
+The two artifacts, their roles, and the retirement verification
-legacy retirement conditions are traced to `docs/API/README.md` and
+dimensions are traced to `docs/API/README.md` and `docs/SITEMAP.md`.
-`docs/SITEMAP.md`. Proposed drafting additions, visible here for
+Proposed drafting additions, visible here for ratification, each
-ratification, each severable:
+severable:
 
-1. The generated-with-committed-output production model and CI drift
+1. The generated-with-committed-output production model, the declared
-   gate (§3.1, §7.1) — the ruling below.
+   route-metadata layer with its fail-closed generator, the metadata
+   migration scope, and the CI drift gate (§3.1, §7.1) — the ruling
+   below.
 2. The same-PR documentation rule for surface changes (§4.3).
-3. The explicit exclusion list for test/development surfaces (§4.1).
+3. The explicit exclusion list and the delegated-surface
+   documentation form (§4.1).
 4. The Socket.IO placement rule (events in `ENDPOINTS.md`, no
-   pseudo-paths) (§2.1).
+   pseudo-paths) and the both-direction event coverage (§2.1, §4.1).
 5. The no-oracle documentation requirement (§4.2).
+6. The `ENDPOINTS.md` structured entry format and its no-duplication
+   rule with the mechanical boundary witness (§2.2, §7.5).
+7. The committed-repository-file rule — neither artifact exists only
+   in CI (§2.3).
+8. The normative-direction rule — generation documents, never
+   ratifies (§3.2).
+9. The retirement deletion-in-reviewed-PR form and the
+   interim-consumer restriction (§5.2), and the §7.4 equivalence
+   algorithm.
+10. The §6 phase placement: implementing-PR-after-ratification, the
+    drift gate as a required trunk check from first commit, and the
+    build-first documentation sequencing.
 
 ## Ruling request
 
 Ruling requested (one decision): shall `OPENAPI.yaml` be generated
-from Gateway source with a committed output and a CI drift gate
+from Gateway source through a declared, fail-closed route-metadata
-(recommended — the 45-controller surface already exists, so
+layer with a committed output and a CI drift gate (recommended — the
-generation is the only route that starts true and stays true) — or
+45-controller surface already exists, so generation is the only route
-hand-authored contract-first, with code conformance to the
+that starts true and stays true, and fail-closed metadata makes
-hand-written contract enforced by witnesses instead?
+incompleteness a build error) — or hand-authored contract-first, with
+code conformance to the hand-written contract enforced by witnesses
+instead?