Correct CR-DD-016 capability-observation semantics

[coreytshaffer]

What this is

A corrective amendment to the already-merged CR-DD-016 (#155). Not a new CR — no new
policy or design decision is proposed here. CR-DD-013 remains the governing runtime
semantics; this PR brings CR-DD-016's description of those semantics back into
agreement with what resolve_capability() actually does.

Why

Post-merge, read-only reconciliation against resolve_capability()
(triage_core/capability_evidence.py) and this repository's own tracked
triagecore.toml found that CR-DD-016's causal account of its own motivating evidence
was factually wrong: a [capability] declaration with a resolved model binding
authorizes route consideration without any probe. The repo's own checked-in
triagecore.toml is in exactly that state right now (declare_local_fast = true,
declare_local_heavy = true, both with model bindings, no probe record path set), and
test_declaration_without_observation_is_configured_not_observed pins
local_fast_available is True for exactly this case.

What this PR does

• Corrects factual/causal claims in Problem Statement, Motivating Evidence, and
  Determination that were discovered wrong after CR-DD-016: Document capability-probe operator workflow discoverability #155 merged.
• Does not change CR-DD-013 runtime semantics. No file under triage_core/ is
  touched; no schema, CLI, routing, or capability-resolution behavior changes.
• Withdraws the Aug-8 trial (task_id 12fe348e-94fd-43da-8bb8-2aa61a3eb949) as
  evidence for a probe-absence-causes-blocking claim. Its own runner_selected record
  shows both routes fully available (capability_state: configured, bindings resolved
  for local_fast and local_heavy); the actual block traces to a separate,
  sensitivity-driven human_handoff selection in choose_resilience_route, unrelated to
  capability evidence. Day-1 Trial 001 (which ran before CR-DD-014 added those
  declarations) remains the genuine no-declaration/no-probe example.
• Corrects Invariant 4, which was itself falsified by the same finding, and the
  future operator-documentation contract (In Scope item 1, Acceptance Criterion 1) to
  describe the real three-case behavior instead of a "Configured-not-Observed block"
  that the code doesn't actually produce on its own.
• Grants no implementation authority. Status: Proposed and
  Implementation authority: Not authorized are unchanged. The Provisional
  Implementation Allowlist, Explicitly Out of Scope, Non-Goals, and Sequencing sections
  are untouched.

Scope

One file, docs-only:

• Changed: docs/change/requests/CR-DD-016-capability-probe-operator-workflow-discoverability.md
• Not touched: any file under triage_core/, docs/daily_driver_quickstart.md, any
  schema, test, backlog, or changelog file.

This correction is deliberately its own PR, landing before any implementation
authorization is considered for CR-DD-016, rather than being folded into that future
implementation work.

Verification

Check	Result
git diff --stat	1 file changed, 96 insertions(+), 44 deletions(-)
git diff --check	no whitespace errors
git status --short	single M entry, no residue

Tests not run: no executable, schema, or test surface changed.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

[netlify]

✅ Deploy Preview for poetic-quokka-0fd859 ready!

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	65dca1e
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/projects/poetic-quokka-0fd859/deploys/6a7ab158430ecb0008102e41
😎 Deploy Preview	https://deploy-preview-156--poetic-quokka-0fd859.netlify.app
📱 Preview on mobile	Toggle QR Code... Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

---

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify project configuration.