Folded one queued candidate from flush run 20260903-213946-4161 into this branch (commit 4bc6de8) instead of opening a sibling PR:

• checkable-claims-in-an-adopted-plan: new Do-this item 6, finding-table row, instead-of row and when-this-applies sentence — before implementing any task of an adopted multi-task plan, cross-check its "Task order / Depends on" table against each task's own Steps/Inputs prose; a Steps reference to another task's not-yet-built symbol is the real dependency, and a table row in the opposite direction is a plan defect to escalate. Field evidence: wt-t4-event-push 2026-08-29, Task 03's Steps called Task 04's formatReminderBody while the table listed 04 as depending on 03.

Also: a second queued candidate (multi-name command -v in a preflight script) was found already carried verbatim by this PR's path-resolution edit and was retired as a pending duplicate, nothing to add. Index load-when cell updated; log.md appended; wiki-structure-checks and wiki-lint-prohibitions both clean on the branch.

Folded from the 2026-09-04 knowledge-flush (candidate 412141e74acbc743): checkable-claims-in-an-adopted-plan +Do item 7 (a plan copied from a sibling repo's plan under the same gate must have its manifest-field premise read from the target before dispatch), +1 Finding row, +1 field-evidence source (dev-loop mpa1 dl-version-gate re-plan). No new page; pending-duplicate avoided per the open-PR check.

Fold from flush 20260906-003715-45485 (commit 821fdc0): one queue candidate overlapped checkable-claims-in-an-adopted-plan, so it was added here instead of as a sibling PR.

• New edge-case row for the plan's author: before writing "reuse existing component X" / "token Y supports Z", grep the implementation and consumer count and record the command beside the claim, so the adopter's step-1 check is a re-run (field: LinklyModal.swift was a bottom sheet with one consumer; LinklyCalendarRangeLozenge had zero consumers).
• The page's load-when line in wiki/infrastructure/index.md gained the author-side trigger.

Lint on this branch: structure 0 findings, prohibitions 0 violations.

Fold from flush 20260906-013758 (3 queue candidates, no sibling PR opened):

• checkable-claims-in-an-adopted-plan: two author-side edge rows — grep both ends of a value threaded between call sites / an id-keyed lookup and confirm the call path reaches the target (field: linkly lower.py/wsgi.py, 2026-08-26); enumerate every (role, surface) contrast pair the contract test file enforces before pre-computing WCAG ratios (field: linkly-calendar t1, muted-on-surfaceSoft 4.41:1). Index load-when line extended.
• responsive-layout: edge + Instead-of rows for a CJK label + pill flex row that wraps the pill vertically after a padding/min-height change (white-space: nowrap; flex-shrink: 0 / flex: 1; min-width: 0, measure with real strings); sources MDN word-break, MDN flex-shrink, CSS Text 3.

Lint on this branch: structure findings 0, prohibitions 0.

Wiki agent gate: fail

Review of PR #181 (choiyounggi/dev-loop) was interrupted before completion. The PR touches 26 files: 6 new wiki pages, 4 merged/extended existing pages, and several cross-link-only edits. I dispatched three parallel review agents to run the transferability, duplication, and fact-check (source WebFetch verification) passes across all 10 substantive pages, per .github/wiki-agent-gate-prompt.md. All three agents were still running (started 12-36s prior) when this response was forced, so none of the required WebFetch source verifications, wiki-wide duplication greps, or transferability reads had completed or reported back. No findings below are confirmed - this is not a clean pass, it is an incomplete audit. Per the gate's own rule, a verdict cannot be responsibly given as "pass" without the checks actually running to completion, so this is reported as failing pending a re-run that allows the agents to finish and report real findings.

• blocker [fact] N/A (process) — The review process was cut off by a forced structured-output requirement before the three dispatched sub-agents (covering all new/changed wiki pages) could complete their WebFetch source verification, wiki-wide duplication search, and transferability read-through. Re-run the review and allow it to finish before trusting any verdict.