@@ -0,0 +1,24 @@
+---
+'@objectstack/service-automation': minor
+---
+
+fix(service-automation)!: re-enabling a packaged flow is refused while a packaged subflow it calls is disabled, and the refusal names a remedy that subflow's state admits (#20678)
+
+Clause-②: no (narrowing)
+
+<!-- adr-0087: not-required (no-migration-prescription) No metadata changes shape and nothing an author wrote is renamed or removed, so `objectstack migrate meta` has nothing to rewrite. What moves is which enable calls the activation switch accepts. -->
+
+**BREAKING**: shipped as `minor` under the launch-window convention. `toggleFlow(name, true)` on the automation service, and so `POST /api/v1/automation/:name/toggle` with `{"enabled": true}`, now refuses an enable it used to accept.
+
+**What changed.** A packaged flow switched off in the activation ledger could be switched back on while a packaged flow it calls (the `flowName` of a `subflow` node, or of a `map` node) was itself disabled. The enable was accepted, and every run of the flow then failed at that node on the child's `FLOW_DISABLED` refusal. That enable is now refused with `RESOURCE_CONFLICT` / `409`, before anything is written: the ledger row still reads off, the trigger stays unbound, and runs are still refused. The message names each disabled subflow and what holds it off, and the remedy follows from that:
+
+- **Switched off in the activation ledger**: enable that subflow first, then this flow.
+- **Disabled by its own definition's `status`** (`obsolete` or `invalid`): the activation switch never changes a status, so enabling the subflow through it would change nothing. Publish the subflow with status `active` (for a package that is read-only in this environment, that takes a package version that ships it active), then enable this flow.
+
+**Not refused:**
+
+- Enabling a flow that is already enabled. Nothing is re-armed.
+- A flow the customer authored, or a subflow the customer authored.
+- A subflow in a cycle of switched-off flows with the flow being enabled, including a flow that calls itself. Each flow in such a cycle would refuse the others, so no order could complete.
+
+Disabling a subflow is unchanged.
@@ -4580,13 +4580,17 @@ export class AutomationEngine implements IAutomationService {
     }
 
     /**
-     * [ADR-0126 §7.3] Packaged flows that invoke `name` as a subflow.
-     *
-     * A DEFINITION SCAN, run at disable time — ⛔ deliberately not an index.
-     * ADR-0126 §9 records that no reference index exists and that building one
-     * is not chartered (#11665 §3.2); the flow map is small, this runs once per
-     * disable, and an index would be a durable structure to keep correct
-     * forever for a check that happens when an administrator clicks a switch.
+     * [ADR-0126 §7.3] The flow names `flow` invokes as a subflow — the ONE
+     * reading of "flow A calls flow B" that both directions of the subflow
+     * guard share ({@link packagedSubflowCallers} on disable,
+     * {@link disabledPackagedSubflows} on enable), so the two can never
+     * disagree about which pairs exist.
+     *
+     * A DEFINITION SCAN — ⛔ deliberately not an index. ADR-0126 §9 records
+     * that no reference index exists and that building one is not chartered
+     * (#11665 §3.2); the flow map is small, the guard runs once per flip, and
+     * an index would be a durable structure to keep correct forever for a
+     * check that happens when an administrator clicks a switch.
      *
      * Two node types invoke another flow by name, and BOTH count: `subflow`
      * (config.flowName) and `map`, whose own descriptor calls its per-item
@@ -4599,29 +4603,169 @@ export class AutomationEngine implements IAutomationService {
      * at load, so only the canonical key reaches a registered definition;
      * re-reading the alias in this consumer would be a tolerant fallback
      * papering over a producer that is already correct.
+     */
+    private subflowTargets(flow: FlowParsed): string[] {
+        const nodes = (flow as { nodes?: unknown }).nodes;
+        if (!Array.isArray(nodes)) return [];
+        const targets: string[] = [];
+        for (const node of nodes) {
+            const n = node as { type?: unknown; config?: { flowName?: unknown } } | null;
+            if (!n || (n.type !== 'subflow' && n.type !== 'map')) continue;
+            if (typeof n.config?.flowName === 'string') targets.push(n.config.flowName);
+        }
+        return targets;
+    }
+
+    /**
+     * [ADR-0126 §7.3] Packaged flows that invoke `name` as a subflow — the
+     * callers the DISABLE direction of the guard refuses on.
      *
      * Only PACKAGED callers are reported: §7.3's rationale is that a VENDOR
      * flow would break mid-run at its subflow node. A caller the customer
      * authored is theirs to fix, and refusing on it would make the packaged
      * artifact hostage to a tenant's own flow.
+     *
+     * A caller counts whatever its own activation state. Switching a caller
+     * off stops its NEW runs only: a run it had already parked — at a `wait`,
+     * an `approval`, a `screen`, or between two items of a `map` — resumes
+     * through {@link resume}, which does not consult activation, and walks on
+     * into its subflow node. So a switched-off caller is not yet an inert one,
+     * and skipping it here would reopen the mid-run failure §7.3 refuses.
      */
     private packagedSubflowCallers(name: string): string[] {
         const callers: string[] = [];
         for (const [callerName, flow] of this.flows) {
             if (callerName === name) continue;
             if (describeFlowContender(flow).source !== 'package') continue;
-            const nodes = (flow as { nodes?: unknown }).nodes;
-            if (!Array.isArray(nodes)) continue;
-            const invokes = nodes.some((node) => {
-                const n = node as { type?: unknown; config?: { flowName?: unknown } } | null;
-                if (!n || (n.type !== 'subflow' && n.type !== 'map')) return false;
-                return n.config?.flowName === name;
-            });
-            if (invokes) callers.push(callerName);
+            if (this.subflowTargets(flow).includes(name)) callers.push(callerName);
         }
         return callers;
     }
 
+    /**
+     * [ADR-0126 §7.3, the enable direction] The packaged subflows a packaged
+     * flow `name` calls that may not run now ({@link isFlowEnabled}), each
+     * with the disable dimension(s) holding it off — the enable direction of
+     * the guard refuses on these, because a caller re-armed onto a disabled
+     * child fails at its subflow node on the child's `FLOW_DISABLED`: the same
+     * late, inexplicable failure the disable direction refuses to cause.
+     *
+     * Both dimensions are reported, not just the verdict, because the remedy
+     * differs and a refusal must prescribe one the caller can complete: the
+     * activation switch moves only the LEDGER bit, so "enable the subflow
+     * first" re-arms a ledger-disabled child and does nothing for one whose
+     * definition's `status` disables it.
+     *
+     * ⛔ A child in a CYCLE of switched-off flows with `name` is not reported.
+     * Enabling that child goes through this same guard, which would refuse it
+     * on the chain leading back to `name` — so every order is refused and no
+     * sequence the refusal could name completes. Only a chain of LEDGER-
+     * disabled flows closes that loop: a status-disabled link is re-armed by
+     * publishing its definition, a door this guard does not sit on, and an
+     * enabled link does not refuse at all.
+     */
+    private disabledPackagedSubflows(name: string): Array<{ name: string; ledger: boolean; status?: string }> {
+        const flow = this.flows.get(name);
+        if (!flow) return [];
+        const disabled: Array<{ name: string; ledger: boolean; status?: string }> = [];
+        for (const target of new Set(this.subflowTargets(flow))) {
+            const child = this.flows.get(target);
+            if (!child || describeFlowContender(child).source !== 'package') continue;
+            if (this.isFlowEnabled(target)) continue;
+            const ledger = this.flowLedgerDisabled.has(target);
+            if (ledger && this.ledgerDisabledChainReaches(target, name)) continue;
+            const status = this.flowStatusDisabled.get(target) === true
+                ? String((child as { status?: unknown }).status)
+                : undefined;
+            disabled.push({ name: target, ledger, ...(status !== undefined ? { status } : {}) });
+        }
+        return disabled;
+    }
+
+    /**
+     * Whether `to` is reachable from `from` along packaged subflow calls
+     * whose every intermediate flow is ledger-disabled — the loop
+     * {@link disabledPackagedSubflows} must not guard on.
+     */
+    private ledgerDisabledChainReaches(from: string, to: string): boolean {
+        const seen = new Set<string>([from]);
+        const pending = [from];
+        while (pending.length > 0) {
+            const flow = this.flows.get(pending.pop()!);
+            if (!flow) continue;
+            for (const target of this.subflowTargets(flow)) {
+                if (target === to) return true;
+                if (seen.has(target) || !this.flowLedgerDisabled.has(target)) continue;
+                const next = this.flows.get(target);
+                if (!next || describeFlowContender(next).source !== 'package') continue;
+                seen.add(target);
+                pending.push(target);
+            }
+        }
+        return false;
+    }
+
+    /**
+     * [ADR-0126 §7.3, the enable direction] Refuse re-arming a packaged caller
+     * onto a packaged subflow that may not run, naming each child and the
+     * remedy its real state admits.
+     *
+     * Only a RE-enable is judged: a flow the ledger holds off. Enabling a flow
+     * that is already armed re-arms nothing, and refusing it would report a
+     * running flow as one that "cannot be enabled". Only a PACKAGED caller is
+     * judged, for the disable direction's reason: a flow the customer
+     * authored is theirs to arm.
+     *
+     * ADR-0112 envelope: code AND status. `RESOURCE_CONFLICT` (409) is the
+     * standard catalog's generic "the request conflicts with the resource's
+     * current state" member — ⛔ no new ledger entry is minted. Not the
+     * disable direction's `DELETE_RESTRICTED`: its `DELETE_` prefix rests on
+     * disabling a shipped flow being equivalent to deleting it, and enabling
+     * is the opposite act.
+     */
+    private refuseEnableOntoDisabledSubflow(name: string, flow: FlowParsed): void {
+        if (!this.flowLedgerDisabled.has(name)) return;
+        if (describeFlowContender(flow).source !== 'package') return;
+        const disabled = this.disabledPackagedSubflows(name);
+        if (disabled.length === 0) return;
+
+        const quote = (names: string[]) =>
+            names.length === 1
+                ? `'${names[0]}'`
+                : `${names.slice(0, -1).map((n) => `'${n}'`).join(', ')} and '${names[names.length - 1]}'`;
+        const reasons = disabled.map((d) => {
+            const why = [
+                ...(d.ledger ? ['switched off in the activation ledger'] : []),
+                ...(d.status !== undefined ? [`its definition's status is '${d.status}'`] : []),
+            ].join(', and ');
+            return `'${d.name}' (${why})`;
+        });
+        // The remedy follows each child's REAL state: the switch re-arms the
+        // ledger bit, and only the definition moves a status.
+        const byStatus = disabled.filter((d) => d.status !== undefined).map((d) => d.name);
+        const byLedger = disabled.filter((d) => d.ledger).map((d) => d.name);
+        const remedy = [
+            ...(byStatus.length > 0
+                ? [
+                      `publish ${quote(byStatus)} with status 'active' (this switch never changes a definition's ` +
+                          `status; for a package that is read-only here, that takes a package version that ships ` +
+                          `${byStatus.length === 1 ? 'it' : 'them'} active)`,
+                  ]
+                : []),
+            ...(byLedger.length > 0 ? [`enable ${quote(byLedger)}`] : []),
+        ].join(' and ');
+        const many = disabled.length !== 1;
+        throw Object.assign(
+            new Error(
+                `Flow '${name}' cannot be enabled while ${disabled.length} packaged subflow${many ? 's' : ''} it calls ` +
+                    `${many ? 'are' : 'is'} disabled: ${reasons.join(', ')}. Enabled, it would fail at its subflow node ` +
+                    `on a disabled child — the late, inexplicable failure ADR-0126 §7.3 refuses to cause. ` +
+                    `${remedy.charAt(0).toUpperCase()}${remedy.slice(1)} first, then enable this flow — or leave it disabled.`,
+            ),
+            { code: 'RESOURCE_CONFLICT', status: 409 },
+        );
+    }
+
     /**
      * [ADR-0126 §7.2] Flip a flow's activation — THE sanctioned off-switch.
      *
@@ -4647,19 +4791,26 @@ export class AutomationEngine implements IAutomationService {
      * every other service method; the wire is the untrusted surface, and the
      * wire goes through the gate.
      *
-     * @throws when the flow is unknown, when §7.3's subflow guard refuses, or
-     *   when the durable write fails — a reported flip that did not persist is
-     *   the failure mode this whole leg exists to remove.
+     * @throws when the flow is unknown, when §7.3's subflow guard refuses in
+     *   either direction, or when the durable write fails — a reported flip
+     *   that did not persist is the failure mode this whole leg exists to
+     *   remove.
      */
     async toggleFlow(name: string, enabled: boolean): Promise<void> {
         const flow = this.flows.get(name);
         if (!flow) {
             throw new Error(`Flow '${name}' not found`);
         }
 
-        // [ADR-0126 §7.3] The subflow cascade guard, on DISABLE only. Enable is
-        // never guarded — arming a flow cannot break a caller.
-        if (!enabled) {
+        // [ADR-0126 §7.3] The subflow guard runs in BOTH directions, because
+        // a subflow pair breaks from either end. Disabling a child breaks the
+        // callers that still reach it; re-arming a caller whose child is off
+        // breaks the caller itself, at its subflow node, on the child's
+        // refusal. Arming a flow never breaks the flows that call IT, so
+        // enabling a child is not guarded by its callers.
+        if (enabled) {
+            this.refuseEnableOntoDisabledSubflow(name, flow);
+        } else {
             const callers = this.packagedSubflowCallers(name);
             if (callers.length > 0) {
                 const list = callers.map((c) => `'${c}'`).join(', ');