Order the records the way the system is learned

Jochen asked whether the order made sense. It did not -- it followed when
things happened to be decided, which after consolidation is fictional anyway
since record 5 alone folds decisions taken across a week.

Concretely wrong before: the domain statement sat at 8, after five engineering
rules; the constitution was scattered across 5, 12 and 17; the tiers landed at
15, 16, 21 and 22 with process records in between.

Now it walks: what the mesh is (1-3), its tiers from the bottom up (4-8), what
runs on them and how it gets there (9-10), how it is built (11-16), how it is
checked (17-18), how we work (19-23).

Two things made this safe rather than free. It is a permutation, not a
compaction, so the renames go through temporary names -- otherwise two files
want one slot and one is lost. And the reference rewrite is a single
simultaneous pass, because almost every number moved into a slot another number
was vacating; replacing one at a time would have cascaded and pointed things at
the wrong record while still resolving.

Verified: 284 [ADR NNNN](path) links across the repository, all with matching
text and target.

The ordering principle is now stated in 19 rather than left implicit -- the
repository already said "the numbering is the flow" about its folders, and
there was no reason for the records to be the exception.

01-RESEARCH/006-mesh-from-scratch/skeleton.md

@@ -80,12 +80,12 @@ mesh-surfaces/                 TIER 3 — thin; no logic lives here
     cli/                     the shell-facing interface
 
 mesh-catalog/                  TIER 4 — what the mesh hosts
-    <domain>/                grouped per ADR 0017, list per research 005
+    <domain>/                grouped per ADR 0022, list per research 005
 
 mesh-lab/                     the whole mesh, disposable, on one machine
 mesh-sdk/                     contracts shared across tiers — types, not behaviour
 
-hq/                           company-scoped, not a mesh repository — ADR 0011
+hq/                           company-scoped, not a mesh repository — ADR 0019
 ```
 
 ## The dependency rule
@@ -97,7 +97,7 @@ a second surface would have to reimplement.
 This is the whole of the bootstrap answer, and per this repository's own rule it must say how
 it is checked: a dependency-direction lint in the build, failing on an upward import. A tier
 rule enforced by intention is the same as no tier rule — that is
-[ADR 0023](../../02-DECISIONS/0023-delivery.md) applied to architecture.
+[ADR 0010](../../02-DECISIONS/0010-delivery.md) applied to architecture.
 
 ## Move 1 — the substrate is applied, not delivered
 
@@ -144,7 +144,7 @@ assumption that every node is equivalent — already false, and today handled by
 
 ## Move 3 — connectivity becomes a context
 
-[ADR 0008](../../02-DECISIONS/0008-mesh-brokers-nodes-host-agents-think.md) names nine contexts
+[ADR 0001](../../02-DECISIONS/0001-mesh-brokers-nodes-host-agents-think.md) names nine contexts
 and none of them owns the overlay, the resolver, the firewall or the ingress. `config` owns
 PKI, which is the closest thing, and it is not close.
 
@@ -162,8 +162,8 @@ So the evidence and the gap point the same way. `connectivity` owns:
 - certificates for both name spaces
 
 This is an addition to an accepted record, so it is a decision, not a drafting choice. It
-belongs in a new record that extends ADR 0008 the way
-[ADR 0019](../../02-DECISIONS/0019-modules-and-the-graph.md) does —
+belongs in a new record that extends ADR 0001 the way
+[ADR 0009](../../02-DECISIONS/0009-modules-and-the-graph.md) does —
 not written here.
 
 ### Where the networking actually lives
@@ -195,7 +195,7 @@ The invitation was to check whether the concept survives. It does not, in one pi
 
 Today a **feature** means both *a thing built once* and *a thing selected per node*, and the
 delivery pipeline is hard to reason about precisely because those have different cardinality
-and one word ([ADR 0023](../../02-DECISIONS/0023-delivery.md)
+and one word ([ADR 0010](../../02-DECISIONS/0010-delivery.md)
 is the pipeline half of the same confusion).
 
 Split it:
@@ -230,7 +230,7 @@ the fact that it runs its own development on them is dogfooding, not architectur
 ## What agents are, structurally
 
 Self-improvement and self-healing are not a tier. Agents are participants
-([ADR 0007](../../02-DECISIONS/0007-agents-are-persistent-employees.md)) that hold identity in
+([ADR 0003](../../02-DECISIONS/0003-agents-are-persistent-employees.md)) that hold identity in
 tier 2, act through tier 3 like any other caller, and run as workloads in tier 4.
 
 This matters for one reason: **an agent must not have a privileged path**. Anything an agent
@@ -241,7 +241,7 @@ no human checkpoint.
 
 ## How this is tested
 
-The lab ([ADR 0009](../../02-DECISIONS/0009-the-lab.md)) raises the
+The lab ([ADR 0016](../../02-DECISIONS/0016-the-lab.md)) raises the
 tree above on one machine: virtual machines as nodes, a real overlay between them, the real
 substrate bundle, the real control plane, the real delivery path.
 
@@ -254,7 +254,7 @@ being the one thing nobody exercises until it breaks.
 
 - Where the record lives. It is infrastructure by shape and domain by content, and putting it
   in the substrate risks recreating a circularity in the one place the design just removed one.
-- Whether tier 2's contexts are one repository or several. Open from ADR 0008 already.
+- Whether tier 2's contexts are one repository or several. Open from ADR 0001 already.
 - Whether an `edge` node is in the inventory or merely present — which decides whether "node"
   is one concept or two.
 - The migration. Nothing here says how today's mesh becomes this, and the skeleton is worth
@@ -266,13 +266,13 @@ The tier-0 binary was first called `mesh-agent`, because "node agent" is the ref
 else in the industry. That is wrong here, and wrong in the specific way
 [`how-we-build.md`](../../00-META/how-we-build.md) §4 exists to catch: **Agent** is a
 first-class concept in this mesh — a participant, some of whom are human, holding identity and
-memory ([ADR 0007](../../02-DECISIONS/0007-agents-are-persistent-employees.md)). One document
+memory ([ADR 0003](../../02-DECISIONS/0003-agents-are-persistent-employees.md)). One document
 carried both meanings.
 
 It is the same failure as the anatomy naming in the current runtime: an evocative domain word
 pointing at infrastructure.
 
-[ADR 0008](../../02-DECISIONS/0008-mesh-brokers-nodes-host-agents-think.md) supplies the fix in
+[ADR 0001](../../02-DECISIONS/0001-mesh-brokers-nodes-host-agents-think.md) supplies the fix in
 its own title — *the mesh brokers capabilities; nodes host; agents think.* Three verbs, three
 components: the control plane **brokers** (`mesh-control`), the tier-0 binary **hosts**
 (`mesh-host`), the participant **thinks** (`agents`, untouched).