docs/remediation/MISSION.md

@@ -69,6 +69,11 @@ orphaned context loader, a fail-open bypass. **Work = wire + consolidate + retir
   (WRAPPER), auto-sync sweep (WORKFLOW), #1018 stale-consumed (INBOX). The fleet is its own test bed.
 - **Orchestration tracking → DB**, hard cutover ("rip off the bandaid"), NO flat-file interim. jarvis-brain
   PDA flat-files untouched. Current flat-file tracking runs as-is/unhardened until DB tracking is real, then one clean replace.
+  - ⚠ **QUALIFIED 2026-07-31 (DECISION-2, Mos):** the DB spine **must NOT be a single-point hard-stop.**
+    A broker-independent / degraded mode **and** a rehearsed rollback artifact are **design requirements**
+    (P-RECOVERY-001), binding now on RM-12, RM-13, RM-23, RM-36 and RM-53. This **supersedes** the earlier
+    orchestrator recommendation to pre-commit "no DB ⇒ the fleet stops" — that answer is _not_ on record.
+    Only the specific availability _target_ remains open, queued for Jason; it does **not** block current work.
 
 ## The 15 decisions (one-line; full rationale in the checkpoint)
 

docs/remediation/TASKS.md

@@ -121,6 +121,18 @@ mission state is DB-backed (RM-53 / the P-MISSION cutover):
 Until then, the interim rule: **the same commit that records a ruling updates every document that
 states it.** Interim rules are exactly what the DB cutover exists to replace.
 
+**The rule found a second instance within minutes of being written.** Auditing the charter against all
+rulings to date (rather than waiting to be bitten again) surfaced that **DECISION-2 had also not
+propagated**: `MISSION.md`'s standing directives still stated the DB hard-cutover with no mention of
+Mos's binding qualification that _the spine must not be a single-point hard-stop_ (degraded mode +
+rollback artifact required). A seat reading the charter would have designed toward an availability
+posture the coordinator had explicitly rejected — and would have found the superseded
+"no DB ⇒ the fleet stops" recommendation nowhere contradicted. Now corrected in place.
+
+**Two un-propagated rulings out of two rulings that touched charter text.** The propagation gap is not
+an oversight that happened once; without a mechanism it is the _default outcome_. That is the argument
+for making this a requirement rather than a discipline.
+
 ### D-13 — two credential registries that can disagree (why the `--draft` fallback fired at all)
 
 Diagnosing D-12's root cause surfaced a distinct defect. There are **two parallel credential