docs: idle-stop race brief records the 10-run diagnostic (not-holder seen once, run r846b8d083502); docs only

docs/plans/2026-10-23_idle-stop-race-row.md

@@ -11,7 +11,7 @@ Owner Gizmoduck. Reviewer Dewey. Gate owner Sage. After row 292 is done.
 The cli suite's `packages/cli/tests/compactions-launch.test.mjs:206` failed once at `:229`. The
 first run ended `['session-invalid', 22, null]` where `['stopped', 0, null]` was expected. Product
 and test were unchanged since the test last passed 5/5. Gizmoduck's reading of the code, which Mos
-and Sage checked, but no run has reproduced it yet:
+and Sage checked:
 
 - `packages/bus/src/broker.mjs` `threadIdle` releases the run's claim inside the call. The comment
   above it records that ordering as deliberate (row 121 r2, Dewey's F3).
@@ -42,9 +42,12 @@ Until this row lands, a gate whose only red is that exact `:229` signature may r
 suite once, unedited (mos-1411 point 4). Each hit is logged on Vikunja 588. The rule does not
 apply to this row's own gate.
 
-Evidence first: in Gizmoduck's slot, after 294, `compactions-launch.test.mjs` whole runs 10 times
-on 292's head, recording each run's `ends[0]` and the runner log's `session stopped working:
-<code>` line (mos-1411 point 1).
+Evidence (mos-1411 point 1): on 292's head 0d0021454, 05:01-05:03Z, `compactions-launch.test.mjs`
+ran whole 10 times. All 10 passed, so `:229` held each time. But one runner log, in run 2 in the
+clear test at `:305` (run r846b8d083502), reads `claimed`, then `session stopped working:
+not-holder`, then `exiting 22`. That test doesn't compare ends, so it passed. Of the other runner
+logs, 72 show `exiting 0` and 27 were deleted before their last lines could be copied. So the code
+that fires is `not-holder`, as predicted. Receipts are in Gizmoduck's row 292 packet.
 
 Gate: Dewey approves the design and then the manifest. The new forcing test, then
 `compactions-launch.test.mjs`, then the bus, cli and harness suites whole, then every