[FIX] PENDING-10: record the scope extension that has been live since June

Seb's issue CapableMind-ai/betterMemories_app#176 cites PENDING-10 as the
replay-contract audit question -- "does any BMF surface hold state not
reconstructible by replay from the logchain?" The item as recorded says nothing
of the kind; it is a March performance proposal about deferring embedding.

Checked before calling it a miscitation, and it isn't one. The steward framed the
audit question as PENDING-10's in his own 2026-06-06 cover note and its addendum;
Seb picked it up from there. Both parties have meant the larger thing for two
months.

What never happened is the write-back. The extension lived in cover notes and
never reached the item, so the register -- and the wake digest that surfaces it by
title -- has been serving the March scope ever since.

Third shape of record-vs-reality divergence found today, after the digest's
ID-matching bug and a REVIEWED disposition clause read as status. This one is a
stable ID whose content moved with no marker that it moved.

Amendment records the live scope, the evidence accumulated since March (Pebbles,
memory-os/PMB, the MemPalace forensic, and the mindfabric-00 backup finding), and
flags that these are probably two items rather than one. Splitting is the
steward's call and is not done here.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01WuMjg3ipEVa3n8CoSzoyvc

PENDING.md

@@ -38,6 +38,14 @@ does not.
 **Summary:** Currently implemented as simple early return in handleEvent. For production: should be a formal replay contract where vector stores content metadata during replay without embedding, then a background re-embed pass populates the HNSW index. Paired with Bug D idle stall fix, this makes Phase 1 fast by design.
 **Awaiting:** Steward + Seb architectural review.
 
+**Amendment 2026-08-02 — the item's live scope is larger than its 2026-03-22 body, and has been since June.** This entry describes a *performance* proposal (skip embedding during replay, background re-embed). Both parties now use "PENDING-10" to mean something broader: the **replay-contract audit question** — *"does any BMF surface hold state not reconstructible by replay from the logchain?"* — framed by the steward in `CapableMind-AI/docs/thinking/David/l1-reliability/cover-note-seb-reply-l1-arc-2026-06-06.md` (*"PENDING-10's replay contract, now with a body of evidence"*) and its same-day addendum, and echoed by Seb in the 2026-06-07 reply and again in **issue `CapableMind-ai/betterMemories_app#176`** (2026-08-01), which states the audit is *blocked* on the backup pipeline.
+
+**Evidence accumulated since March, none of it recorded here until now:** three convergent datapoints from the steward's scan work (Pebbles' independent reinvention of authoritative-log + derived-disposable-index; memory-os and PMB deep-reads showing the fragile class is always a mutable index as *primary* store; the MemPalace forensic as empirical casualty) — and the concrete trigger, `backup.last_success: null` on mindfabric-00, meaning the instance holding the steward's accumulated memory has single-copy state whose *designed* mitigation is precisely logchain rebuildability.
+
+**Why this amendment exists.** The extension was written in cover notes and never written back into the item. Anyone reading this register — including the wake digest, which surfaces PENDING-10 by its title — got the March scope. Same class as the two record-vs-reality divergences found the same day (the digest's ID-matching bug; a REVIEWED disposition clause read as status): **a stable ID whose content has drifted, with no marker that it moved.**
+
+**Consequence for the split:** these are two separable pieces of work and should probably be two items. The performance proposal is architectural and awaits review; the audit question is load-bearing for the provenance story and is now scoped inside Seb's #176 restore drill. Splitting them is the steward's call — flagged, not done.
+
 ## PENDING-11 — Approve I15 (ICP-9 Pilot Registry Entry: The Accusative Default)
 **Date:** 2026-03-23
 **Tag:** [PROPOSAL]