what the prototype did

we have an open draft, not a live lane. the pinned documentation specifies admission bounds, uncertain-send reservations, stop behavior and candidate harvesting. these are client policy controls, not measured provider capacity.

the draft pr reports 64 passed in 2.00s. we did not rerun that suite for this article.

real git, simulated product

the pr receipt reports synthetic launches with real waits of at least 20 seconds. the smoke exercised actual temporary git worktrees, patch application, fast-forward and revert. the success reached now_testing; the injected preview error reached reverted, restoring the original tree.

the build was a stub. the preview log was fake. the screen fixtures were synthetic. no live app launch, send, inference or actual preview change was performed. the documentation explicitly leaves selectors, multiline paste, quotas and physical refresh unqualified.

freeze the prototype, not the architecture

the later issue decision keeps this as a source prototype and separates lane-eligibility cognition from worker coordination, device execution and preview integration. that is a migration proposal, not a completed transfer.

we keep the historical test receipt without presenting the old component boundary as the deployment plan.

what this does not prove

offline state-machine evidence is not live phone evidence, physical preview acceptance or sustained throughput. owner opt-in is not a platform-terms clearance. no measured fan-out speedup, unlimited quota or safe unattended consumer-app automation follows from this draft.