docs: correct claims left stale by today's apm-only commits

A five-agent review of today's seven commits found no executable
regressions and no dangling references, but a set of documents still
asserting, in present tense, machinery that ADR-0024 and its commits
removed. This corrects them in place, keeping the original text as the
historical record wherever the repo's amendment convention applies.

LESSONS.md: the 2026-06-21 entry prescribed a `claude plugin validate`
sweep that now fails on every plugin, so it is marked superseded with
the surviving gates named. The 2026-08-09 entry gained a recurrence
note: today's manifest deletion broke apm's MCP propagation exactly as
that lesson describes, and its prescribed repo-local grep could not
have caught it, because `plugin_parser.py` ships in the apm toolchain
installed outside this repository.

ADR-0019, ADR-0011 and ADR-0021: amendments extended to passages the
earlier correction passes stepped over -- a dead native-consumer guard,
Consequences bullets still calling for a `plugins/gitea/.mcp.json` that
must not be recreated, and a drift-gate list naming a deleted script.
ADR-0021's list is down to one gate, not two: `apm audit --ci` never
read `description` and was never a drift gate.

architecture.md and enrichments.md: the self-containment constraint is
restated on its live source, the agentskills.io APM package-mode spec,
rather than on Claude Code's plugin cache-install, which ADR-0024
consequence 6 pins as a superseded rationale. releasing.md's pointer to
the deleted sync script is rewritten as history.

tests/run-bats.sh and scripts/lib/batch-run.sh: comment-only. The
`.claude/skills/` exclusion comment claimed a duplication that is not
live yet; apm does not strip `tests/`, and the deployed tree is empty
of them only because the lockfile still resolves the six dependencies
to a pre-ADR-0024 commit carrying the flat mirror. The exclusion is
correct but forward-looking, and now says so.

SIMPLIFICATION-AUDIT.md: reconciled against what the commits actually
did. Two closed findings recorded conclusions that ADR-0024 reversed
hours later; findings 1, 3, 31 and 35 carried prescriptions voided the
same day; finding 28 is now recorded as having moved backwards, with
docs/adr/ measured at +336 lines over the day. The section 1 headline
table is re-measured at a6434e0 and labelled with its basis. The
ADR-0012 contradiction between finding 2b and section 8 is resolved in
2b's favour after reading the ADR: only finding 24 is governed by it.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01YR2CjVumUbEGWcMikcoXBD

docs/spec/architecture.md

@@ -25,9 +25,11 @@ Skills are **not** deployed by `install.sh`. They are distributed as plugins and
 
 ## Plugin model
 
-Skills, agents, MCP servers, and hooks are distributed as self-contained plugin units under `plugins/`, installed independently via `apm install`, here and in any consuming repo (ADR-0018). Self-contained is a hard constraint, not a description: a plugin is copied to a cache on install, so nothing inside it may reference a file outside its own directory. That is why the Vale styles are duplicated across two skills rather than shared (ADR-0014), and why ADR-0020's constants are copied into three validators rather than sourced from one. Each plugin is an **apm package**: `plugins/<name>/apm.yml` plus a hand-authored `plugins/<name>/.apm/{skills,agents,hooks,commands,instructions,extensions}/` tree (ADR-0015). There is no per-plugin `plugin.json` at all — apm reads `apm.yml`, and the repo's one generated manifest, `.claude-plugin/marketplace.json`, is compiled from that source.
+Skills, agents, MCP servers, and hooks are distributed as self-contained plugin units under `plugins/`, installed independently via `apm install`, here and in any consuming repo (ADR-0018). Each unit is an **apm package**: `plugins/<name>/apm.yml` plus a hand-authored `plugins/<name>/.apm/{skills,agents,hooks,commands,instructions,extensions}/` tree (ADR-0015). There is no per-plugin `plugin.json` at all — apm reads `apm.yml`, and the repo's one generated manifest, `.claude-plugin/marketplace.json`, is compiled from that source.
 
-Which plugin a new skill belongs in follows from what each one is scoped to. The boundary that matters most in practice is `core` vs `kyberforge`: `core` is the home for cross-cutting, repo-agnostic utility skills that a consumer would want against *their* repo, while `kyberforge` is meta-tooling for the holocron marketplace itself. A skill that authors a target repo's `AGENTS.md` is `core`; a skill that audits a `SKILL.md` against this marketplace's contract is `kyberforge`.
+Self-contained is a hard constraint, not a description: a file reference inside `.apm/skills/<name>/` may not reach outside that skill's own directory, and there is no cross-skill sharing mechanism to reach for instead. That is why the Vale styles are duplicated across two skills rather than shared (ADR-0014), and why ADR-0020's constants are copied into three validators rather than sourced from one. The constraint used to be explained by Claude Code's plugin cache-install copying a plugin to a cache; that is no longer the reason and never was the only one. It is stated independently for APM package mode by the agentskills.io spec (`plugins/kyberforge/.apm/skills/skill-author/references/deployment-modes.md`), which is why ADR-0024 consequence 6 pins it as a negative result: ending native install did not relax it, and it is not to be re-litigated on the assumption that it did.
+
+Which apm package a new skill belongs in follows from what each one is scoped to. The boundary that matters most in practice is `core` vs `kyberforge`: `core` is the home for cross-cutting, repo-agnostic utility skills that a consumer would want against *their* repo, while `kyberforge` is meta-tooling for the holocron marketplace itself. A skill that authors a target repo's `AGENTS.md` is `core`; a skill that audits a `SKILL.md` against this marketplace's contract is `kyberforge`.
 
 The second boundary worth stating is `git` vs `gitea`, because both own things called branches and both touch pull requests: `git` is whatever works over the git wire protocol against a local clone, `gitea` is whatever goes through the forge's HTTP API. That is why `git-branches` and `gitea-branches` both exist and are not duplicates.