Review of the to-be layer: check what the documents claim against what runs

First pass of a design review, done by reading documents against code
and against a raised mesh rather than against each other. Every error
below was invisible to a proofread.

**Statuses were stale, and nothing checked them.** Ten to-be documents
said `designed` while naming working, lab-proven code — several with a
*What was built* or *Raised, and observed* section. Added a
`status-vs-code` check: naming a file is a claim that the file
implements this, so a document that points at one has stopped being
merely designed. It failed on all ten before it passed, per the rule
this folder sets for its own checks.

**The bundle carries three images, not two.** 07 reasoned about which
substrate services go in and overlooked that the control plane is in
there too — it is what the substrate exists to start, and there is
nothing to fetch it with yet. Counted, not deduced.

**The bootstrap uses four shapes, not six.** It listed `file` and
`directory`, which substrate-first-node.lock never asks for. The claim
that mattered — nothing is blocked on the host — was true either way,
which is why the wrong count survived.

**The eight capabilities were documented nowhere.** Implemented in
internal/profile/detectors.go and enumerated in no document, including
the one about the host that detects them. A vocabulary modules write
against, readable only by reading the code. Now written down, with the
seat/graphical-session distinction that is wrong in both directions if
collapsed.

**MinIO swept out of the to-be layer** per 0028.

The gate now fails on one thing left deliberately: ADR 0024 is
`proposed` while two documents rest on it and the feature it decides is
built and lab-proven. Accepting a decision is not mine to do.

00-META/checks/README.md

@@ -26,6 +26,7 @@ indistinguishable from one that cannot.
 | `numbering` | the number in the filename is the number in the heading | — |
 | `topics` | every record names a topic the index knows | — |
 | *(index.py)* | the written reading order matches what the records say | — |
+| `status-vs-code` | a to-be document naming specific code is not still `designed` | **ten documents**, several with a *What was built* section, describing lab-proven code |
 
 ## What is deliberately not checked
 

00-META/checks/records.py

@@ -284,6 +284,37 @@ def check_numbering(failures, records):
             )
 
 
+def check_status_against_code(failures):
+    """A design document naming specific code may not still call itself `designed`.
+
+    **Naming a file is a claim that the file implements this**, so the two fields have to agree.
+    They drifted: ten to-be documents named working, lab-proven code — several with a *What was
+    built* or *Raised, and observed* section — while still saying nothing had been built.
+
+    Deliberately weak, and that is the point of it being mechanical. It cannot tell whether the
+    prose is true, only that a document has stopped claiming to be unbuilt once it points at
+    something. `code: [mesh-control]` — a repository with no path — is a plan and stays
+    `designed`.
+    """
+    for path in markdown_files():
+        if not rel(path).startswith("03-DESIGN/01-to-be/") or path.endswith("README.md"):
+            continue
+        front = frontmatter(read(path))
+        if front.get("status") != "designed":
+            continue
+        for entry in front.get("code") or []:
+            named = re.sub(r"\s*\(.*\)$", "", entry).strip().split(None, 1)
+            if len(named) > 1:
+                failures.add(
+                    "status-vs-code",
+                    rel(path),
+                    f"`designed`, but names {named[1]!r} in {named[0]}. Naming a file claims "
+                    f"it implements this — use `in-progress`, or `implemented` once it is "
+                    f"defensible from that repository's main branch.",
+                )
+                break
+
+
 def main():
     failures = Failures()
     records = load_records()
@@ -293,6 +324,7 @@ def main():
     check_supersession_symmetry(failures, records)
     check_numbering(failures, records)
     check_topics(failures, records)
+    check_status_against_code(failures)
     print(f"records: {len(records)} decision records checked")
     return failures.report()