docs(catalog): name what the retired setting projection actually carries

[NIU-123370]

Goal And Delivered Outcome

• Goal/source and gap: docs(catalog): add IP-037 a retired setting is not an absent setting #5043 was approved on head a270a55bd and merged as
  bea36ae46 with one non-blocking wording finding: the IP-037 index row says
  the projection must "carry its reason", but the retired-setting summary
  actually carries status: "retired" (or invalid when malformed) plus
  replacement (loopx/control_plane/coordination/runtime_shadow.py:53-63).
  The standalone reason code exists only in the rejection message (:72) and in
  the migration row (loopx/state_migration.py:236-241). As written, that cell
  invites a reader to look for a reason field the summary never had.
• Observable before → after, with the validation row that proves it: before, the
  row overstates what the projection carries; after, it names the two things
  that are actually there — retired status and replacement. Proven by the
  manual row below, which re-reads each cited source.
• Issue/task and intended base: follow-up wording on the merged GH-C37 entry
  ([Task]: GH-C37 add IP-037 a retired setting is not an absent setting #5042, docs(catalog): add IP-037 a retired setting is not an absent setting #5043). Base main.

Scope And Continuation

• Completed scope and remaining work: one table cell. The detail section needed
  no change: its three "reason" mentions point at the rejection message, the
  migration reason_code, and the reward-memory retirement_reason, and all
  three fields exist as cited.
• Slice boundary / successor: N/A; complete within this scope.

Validation

Public-safe summaries only.

• Tested revision: fe9b2f54b
• Run state: finished
• Input classes: none

Check kind	Result	Public-safe evidence / limitation
static	passed	python3 examples/interaction-pattern-catalog-smoke.py → interaction-pattern-catalog-smoke: ok.
static	passed	loopx check --scan-path docs/concepts/interaction-pattern-catalog.md → public boundary scan clean: 1 files, errors=0. Its two warnings are this scratch worktree having no local registry, not a finding about the diff.
manual	passed	Re-read of the three cited sources on this base: the summary returns status/enabled/configured/replacement and no reason; the reason code appears in the rejection text and in the migration notice. The corrected wording matches all three.
regression_parity	passed	The smoke's structural gates (row↔heading pairing, one-id-one-family) still pass; this edit changes no id, heading or family registration, so it introduces no new drift surface. git diff --check clean.

• Coverage and gaps: documentation-only, one cell; no runtime path exists to
  cover, so no unit/integration/real_backend row applies. Interpreter note:
  the checks ran with repository-relative commands against a locally installed
  Python 3.12 environment (an editable install from another worktree on this
  machine), not uv sync --extra test.

Frontend / Visual Evidence

• UI impact: none
• Before: N/A
• After: N/A
• States and viewports shown: N/A
• Source data: none
• Attention review: N/A

Type of Change

• Bug fix
• New feature
• Breaking change
• Refactoring (no functional changes)
• Documentation update
• Test update

LoopX Area

• Control plane (goals, todos, quota, scheduler, registry, runtime)
• Benchmark boundary (adapters, runners, verifiers, scoring, evidence)
• Capability or extension (providers, adapters, skills)
• Public docs or presentation surface (README, protocols, dashboard)
• Build, packaging, installer, or CI
• Host or runtime integration

Technical Direction

• Direction / acceptance reference, when applicable: Architecture and research
  incubator — wording accuracy on the GH-C37 catalog entry. No roadmap S/G/R id
  claimed.

Shared-authority RFC fixture impact

• Production-scale fixture schema: N/A — no fixture or envelope changed.
• Semantic dimensions changed, or reviewed no-impact rationale: N/A.
• Provider conformance arms run: N/A — one documentation cell changed.
• Read-only legacy/file/PostgreSQL three-arm rehearsal: N/A — no behavior,
  routing or projection code is touched.

Boundary Checklist

• Neither the diff nor this PR body/comments/attachments disclose private state, credentials, raw traces or verifier output, internal links, or local machine paths (including .loopx/, .codex/goals/, and live ACTIVE_GOAL_STATE.md).
• I did not duplicate maintainer-owned benchmark work unless a maintainer split out a public issue for it.
• I kept the change scoped to the linked issue/task.
• I completed the visual evidence section for UI changes, or marked UI impact none.
• Every commit includes a DCO Signed-off-by trailer (git commit -s).

[huangruiteng]

English verdict: APPROVE — the catalog row now names the fields the retained-setting projection actually exposes; no blocker found on this exact head.

动机

合并后的 IP-037 索引行说投影会携带“reason”，但实际的保留配置摘要没有 reason 字段。这个错位会让读文档的维护者或集成方去寻找不存在的数据，并可能把拒绝消息或迁移通知中的原因码误当成配置投影的一部分。本 PR 只修正该索引行的字段描述，属于能独立交付的文档纠偏，不声称改变运行时行为。

改动思路

沿用现有 catalog 的一行一模式结构，只替换该行的目标表述，不引入新协议或第二份迁移规则。核对了 local_authority_shadow_summary 的返回值：合法保留项有 status: retired 和 replacement: coordination_runtime_shadow，格式不合法时 status 为 invalid；拒绝启用时的原因只在错误文本中，迁移通知另有 reason_code。这样能把“显示的状态”和“拒绝原因”分开，避免索引说明越权定义字段。

具体改动

关键内容讲解

唯一改动是 docs/concepts/interaction-pattern-catalog.md 的 IP-037 索引行：原句“carry its reason in the projection”改为“carry its retired status and replacement in the projection”。它仍要求在写入前拒绝已退役设置的激活、保留旧条目可见且只读，并明确清除旧设置不等于启用或 bootstrap 替代功能。索引行的模式编号、所属类别和详情节均未变；详情节提到的拒绝信息、迁移 reason_code、reward-memory retirement_reason 各自指向不同契约，不能把其中一个字段挪到摘要。该精度提升也不影响 catalog smoke 所守护的一号一族和索引/标题配对。

对主干的风险

风险低且局限于公开文档的一处措辞：不会改变配置解析、持久化、读回、CLI 或默认开关。可能的边界是 status 在损坏的保留配置中会是 invalid 而非 retired；此句描述的是有效退役项，详情与实现并未把异常态隐藏，因此不构成阻断。如果将来继续精修，可以写成“status (retired/invalid) and replacement”，但不应为此扩大本 PR。独立在 exact head 运行 catalog smoke 通过，git diff --check 通过；未查询远端 CI，按本次 review packet 的本地验证策略处理。

我的整体评价

APPROVE。它消除了一个真实的文档/实现歧义，并保持文档层边界：长期看减少集成方依据不存在字段实现逻辑的风险，阅读体验更准确；无新增运行时维护负担。当前 head 为 fe9b2f54b4a54f0bbc7919bf9cd6e31b5be97674，此结论只适用于该 head，不代表代替合并就绪或授权合并。