docs(front-page): the gate numbers the gate actually prints, and a breaking point that was measured

Four claims on the front page were false on this commit, and one of them was a
number no division ever produced.

**The retrieval gate.** README reported it RED on rows 3, 4, 5, 7, 8 and 9,
with row 3 at 2 of 5 and row 4 at 3 of 6. Run on this commit it is RED on rows
5, 7, 8 and 9, with row 3 at 5 of 5 and row 4 at 6 of 6: `f81683e` made a
withheld concept carry the rule that actually decided it, and `05cb190` gave
the payload a `coverage` block, and neither updated the table. Row 8 is `0 of 3
| NOT RUN` on the default run and was published as `44 of 64 questions`, which
is what it scores the day all three private sets are handed to it -- now
labelled with the day and the machine rather than printed as a row. The same
four figures were stale in `CLAUDE.md`.

**The breaking point in a generated skill.** `int(LIMIT / per_withheld) if
per_withheld else 0` printed `At roughly 0 concepts the bookkeeping alone
reaches the 120000-byte limit` whenever the generation run withheld nothing --
the absence of a measurement, rendered as one, and read as a bundle that breaks
before it holds anything. A run with no withheld entry has no slope to
extrapolate from, so the sentence is withheld with its reason. The shipped
`skills/okf-consume/SKILL.md` is generated with the question its
`references/README.md` names, withholds nothing, and carried exactly that `0`;
it is regenerated. Two arms in the test, because one would pass on an empty
set: the bundles that withhold something must still state a positive figure.

The sentence for that arm also stopped saying `**4 bytes** for 3 concepts`
where the 4 bytes were the cost of 0 withheld entries. It is now `for N of M
concepts`, which moves two generated skills' line counts and therefore the
published comparison: 280 of 312 and 310 -> 281 of 313 and 311, re-measured,
with the 62 differing lines unchanged.

**Four tools.** A single-bundle server exposes three: `okf_list` is absent
where there is nothing to list. README's table already said so in a cell; the
heading and the CHANGELOG did not.

**What `--accounting` accounts for.** The account is over the element classes
each format's vocabulary names, verified against `accounting._READERS` rather
than against the report: a file whose suffix has no reader is accounted at file
level only, `.docx` reads `document.xml` and `footnotes.xml` (so headers,
footers, endnotes and comments are outside), `.pptx` reads the slides (so
speaker notes are outside), `.xlsx` reads the worksheets (so cell comments are
outside and a cell contributes its cached value, never its formula), and `.rtf`
skips its header and footer groups. A hidden slide or sheet IS counted -- it
lives in the same part as a visible one. Nothing is built for this; the list is
what `0 unaccounted` does not claim.

Gates re-run on the commit: retrieval `GATE RED: rows 5, 7, 8, 9` (exit 1),
MCP `GATE RED: rows 2` (exit 1), both matching what is now written.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>

docs/2026-09-20-mcp-to-varianter.md

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 # An MCP surface over OKF bundles, in two shapes
 
-2026-09-20. Order `20260918T163400Z-6303812376-from-.claude`. Capability loop:
+2026-09-20. Capability loop:
 the eval was written RED at `5f1772e`, before any server existed; the capability
 follows in its own commit.
 
@@ -75,7 +75,9 @@ and that number is not measurable from inside this machine.
 The order cited 227 of 285 lines identical between two generated skills,
 measured 2026-09-18. Measured again here, on two different bundles
 (`examples/ingest-golden-segmented-okf-v0-2` and `tests/fixtures/consume-bundle`):
-**280 of 312 and 310 lines identical, 62 lines differing**. Neither number
+**281 of 313 and 311 lines identical, 62 lines differing**
+(re-measured 2026-09-20 after the breaking-point sentence was repaired; it was
+280 of 312 and 310, with the same 62). Neither number
 contradicts the other -- they are different pairs of bundles -- and the shape of
 the finding is the same: what differs is identity, concept count, the
 conditional-field table, the whole-bundle cost and the breaking point.
@@ -137,6 +139,14 @@ refused by the second, as `path_escape` instead of `concept_unknown`. A mutant
 removing both is killed. That survival is the redundancy working and is reported
 as such rather than as a kill.
 
+**A note added 2026-09-20, after this round:** that sentence was true of
+`okf_fetch` and of no other tool. `okf_ask` and `okf_describe` made only the
+first of the two checks -- the index rule, which is a string rule and cannot
+see a symlink -- and read whatever the joined path pointed at. The second check
+now lives in `consume.resolve_in_bundle` and every reader here goes through it;
+the tests are `tests/test_read_path_containment.py`, red on 8 of 11 rows before
+the repair with `okf_fetch`'s two rows green as the control.
+
 ## Mutants
 
 13 mutants, applied in a scratch copy of the tree and never in the working tree,