docs(ruling-4b): round-3 review fixes — SOT Amendment A2, §6.4 outbox predicate

- native-kanban-sot.md gains §9 Amendment A2: expressly extends A1 §8.1.2
  (class data admits companies.visibility) and A1 §8.1.3 (company directory
  as an express, narrow read-only disclosure function; sole existence-oracle
  carve-out to §8.3), grounded on Ruling 4b. §9.2 pins what stays unchanged.
- hierarchy-schema.md §1.1 and the Amendment 1 note now cite A2 instead of
  reinterpreting A1; §6.7 acceptance cites A2 §9.1.2.
- §6.4 gains the explicit outbox predicate (state/event/outbox one
  transaction, rollback leaves neither event nor outbox record, REQ-AUD-001);
  §6.9's cross-reference corrected to match.
- §2.8: 'Ruling 4 §5.2' reference corrected to contract 3 §5.2.

docs/requirements/hierarchy-schema.md

@@ -84,7 +84,10 @@ definition is a follow-up amendment to contract 2 — until it ratifies,
 admin-only); §6.1 and §6.9 add the witnesses; §6.7's existence-oracle
 rule is scoped around the ratified directory carve-out. Top-level
 creation (contract 3 §5.2) is unchanged and always yields a private
-company.
+company. Upstream, SOT Amendment A2 (native-kanban-sot.md §9, this PR)
+expressly extends A1 §8.1.2 to admit the visibility column and A1
+§8.1.3 to admit the directory function — this contract relies on that
+amendment, not on a reinterpretation of A1.
 
 Scope: the tenancy/authorization structure record class — companies,
 estates, platform-projects, workspaces, hierarchy grants, their parentage,
@@ -102,12 +105,11 @@ legacy flat data (future work; see §1.3).
    (payload prohibition, mutation path, audit) binds all five tables. Class
    rows carry parentage, naming, grant, audit-linkage, and visibility-class
    data only — never task, plan, or any business/orchestration payload.
-   Visibility (`companies.visibility`, §2.8) is ratified by Amendment 1 as
+   Visibility (`companies.visibility`, §2.8) is admitted into that
-   authorization/disclosure data: it controls what the class discloses
+   enumeration by SOT Amendment A2 §9.1.1, which expressly extends A1
-   about its own nodes, which sits inside A1 §8.1.2's
+   §8.1.2 for exactly this one column: it is disclosure data about the
-   tenancy/authorization purpose for the class — it is not a payload
+   class's own nodes — not a payload field, carries no business content,
-   field, carries no business content, and widens the payload prohibition
+   and widens the payload prohibition for nothing else.
-   for nothing else.
    References from business/orchestration rows into the class are limited
    to exactly one form: the canonical `workspace_id` tenancy column that
    REQ-TEN-001 requires on every canonical row, referencing
@@ -168,8 +170,8 @@ decision under A1; this contract pins only that they stay distinct tables.)
    one of two classes, carried by `visibility`:
    - `private` (the default): the company is disclosed only to subjects
      holding a grant on it or on a descendant — the resting state every
-     company is created in. Ruling 4 §5.2 open creation survives
+     company is created in. Open creation under contract 3 §5.2
-     unchanged: it creates private companies.
+     (Ruling 4) survives unchanged: it creates private companies.
    - `directory`: the company is listed in the deployment-wide company
      directory. Directory listing discloses **existence, name, and slug
      to every authenticated user — nothing else**: no subtree structure,
@@ -415,8 +417,12 @@ Binding on the implementing PRs (extends A1 §8.3):
 4. Audit witnesses: for each mutation class (create, rename, transfer,
    visibility change, grant create/change/revoke, delete) — the event
    exists after commit
-   with actor/verb/target and same-transaction atomicity; a rolled-back
+   with actor/verb/target and same-transaction atomicity, and the
-   mutation leaves no event (rollback witness); a node delete's cascaded
+   event's outbox record exists after the same commit — state row,
+   audit event, and outbox record are witnessed as one transaction
+   (REQ-AUD-001); a rolled-back
+   mutation leaves no event and no outbox record (rollback witness); a
+   node delete's cascaded
    grant deletions are each covered by events; events survive deletion of
    their target (query the events of a deleted node).
 5. Transfer tests: parent-FK update moves the subtree resolution and
@@ -436,7 +442,8 @@ Binding on the implementing PRs (extends A1 §8.3):
    endpoints mutate no canonical state anywhere (assert zero writes across
    hierarchy AND workspace tables, not hierarchy only); readers see
    aggregates only over workspaces they are authorized on, with no
-   cross-tenant existence oracles (A1 §8.3 acceptance 3) beyond the one
+   cross-tenant existence oracles (A1 §8.3 acceptance 3, as narrowed by
+   A2 §9.1.2) beyond the one
    ratified carve-out — the §2.8 company directory, witnessed in §6.9.
 8. Real-PostgreSQL coverage for every constraint witness (unique/CHECK/
    RESTRICT/NULLS NOT DISTINCT behavior), using the `ci-postgres` service
@@ -454,8 +461,9 @@ Binding on the implementing PRs (extends A1 §8.3):
    yields `visibility = 'private'` and accepts no visibility argument;
    each visibility change emits its §5.2 audit event carrying old and
    new values — the full audit pattern for the mutation class
-   (same-transaction atomicity, rollback leaving no event,
+   (same-transaction atomicity of state row, audit event, and outbox
-   actor/verb/target, outbox delivery) is §6.4's, which enumerates
+   record; rollback leaving no event and no outbox record;
+   actor/verb/target) is §6.4's, which enumerates
    visibility change; this item adds only the old/new-value payload
    assertion.
 

docs/requirements/native-kanban-sot.md

@@ -456,3 +456,54 @@ this line is weakened.
 - Negative tests prove roll-up endpoints cannot mutate state and that a
   reader sees aggregates only over workspaces they are authorized on
   (no cross-tenant existence oracles).
+
+## 9. Amendment A2 — company visibility classes and the company directory
+
+**Status:** amendment to Amendment A1, added by reviewed PR under Ruling 4b
+(operator ruling, 2026-08-27; decision owner Jason; recorded in the webui-audit
+lane RULINGS.md). Everything in §§1–8 remains binding verbatim, with exactly
+the two express modifications below. Nothing else is weakened. The detailed
+contract text lives in the hierarchy schema contract
+(`hierarchy-schema.md` §2.8, §5.5, §6.9); this amendment changes only what A1
+itself permits, so that contract does not stretch A1 by interpretation.
+
+### 9.1 What A2 modifies in A1
+
+1. **Class data (extends §8.1.2's first constraint).** The tenancy/authorization
+   structure record class additionally carries **visibility-class data**: the
+   single column `companies.visibility`, values `private` | `directory`
+   (hierarchy schema §2.8). Visibility is disclosure data about the class's own
+   nodes — what a company row reveals about its own existence — and is part of
+   the class's tenancy/authorization purpose. It is not business or
+   orchestration payload. §8.1.2's payload prohibition is widened for nothing
+   else: hierarchy tables still MUST NOT carry task, plan, or any other
+   business/orchestration payload, and this amendment admits exactly this one
+   column.
+2. **The company directory (extends §8.1.3's function enumeration).** The
+   hierarchy serves one additional, express, narrow runtime function: the
+   **company directory** — a read-only disclosure listing of exactly the
+   companies whose `visibility = 'directory'`, revealing existence, name, and
+   slug to every authenticated user of the deployment and nothing else. It
+   mutates nothing, confers no authority, evaluates no grant down the chain,
+   and aggregates nothing (it is not a roll-up). §8.3's
+   no-cross-tenant-existence-oracle acceptance is narrowed by exactly this one
+   ratified carve-out: the directory is the sole permitted existence
+   disclosure, and it discloses only directory-class companies (witnessed in
+   hierarchy schema §6.7 and §6.9). Private companies remain undisclosed to
+   non-granted subjects everywhere, including the directory.
+
+### 9.2 What A2 explicitly does not change
+
+1. Content access stays grant-only under the RBAC grant model contract:
+   directory listing discloses existence, never content, membership, or any
+   authority (Ruling 3 unchanged; hierarchy schema §2.8).
+2. Visibility changes are hierarchy mutations on the existing §8.2.3 audited
+   mutation path — audited maintenance of the class's own structure in
+   §8.1.3's sense, not a further runtime function. Authorization for them is
+   defined in hierarchy schema §5.5 (platform admins plus the future
+   company-CRUD capability; owner-as-such cannot publish).
+3. Company creation is unchanged and always yields `visibility = 'private'`
+   (onboarding wizard §5.2); this amendment adds no creation path and no
+   default-open disclosure.
+4. Every other constraint of A1 — §8.1.2's remaining bullets, §8.2 in full,
+   and §8.3's other acceptance criteria — is untouched.