fix(spec,docs): check-react-blocks-conformance 比的是两份声明，不是声明↔实现 (#4472) (#4491)

它的文件头原话是"confirms the objectui components ACTUALLY implement the props the
spec protocol declares"。它做不到，也从来没做过。它 diff 的两边都是**声明**：左边是
spec zod schema 的 props，右边是 objectui 注册表配置声明的 inputs——由
`manifestFromConfigs` 原样抄进 sdui.manifest.json。整条链路里没有渲染器。所以一个
**两边都声明、没有任何东西读**的 prop，在这道门禁眼里是完美一致。

#4413 就是代价：四个 record:* 块发布了没人读的 objectName/recordId，在
kind:'react' 页面上渲染成 "bind a record to preview" 占位符，而 baseline 里
`{ "frontendOnly": [], "missing": false }` 稳稳绿了整个缺陷存续期。最后是人肉读
objectui 渲染器发现的。**一道报绿的假门禁比没有门禁更危险**——没有门禁时人会去核对。

Prime Directive #10（declared ≠ enforced）落在本该抓 #10 的东西自己身上，和 #1475
「spec 声明 9 种校验规则、执行器只认 3 种」同形。

- 改名到它真正做的事，名字和文件头一起改（名字本身是误信任的一部分）：
  check-react-blocks-declaration-parity.ts、react-declaration-parity.baseline.json，
  baseline 键 frontendOnly → registryOnly（是"注册表声明了"，不是"前端实现了"）。
- 作用域说明随**每一次**输出走，包括绿的那次。对这道门禁形成判断的人读的是 CI 日志，
  不是文件头。
- 它现在真的 gate。gen-sdui-manifest.sh 调用时没传 --strict，还把退出码吞进一个 ⚠，
  所以连它看得见的那部分也只是被记录、从未被拦住（#4472 次要发现 1）。ratchet 只对
  相对 baseline 的**新增**分歧开火，所以失败必定是一次有意的注册表改动。
- 声明由测试钉住。check-react-blocks-declaration-parity.test.ts 断言它能看见的两个
  方向、caveat 确实被打印、以及那句"实现"声明不会回来——Prime Directive #10 可执行的
  那一半。

它看得见的东西没变，也仍然值得留着：spec-only（palette 缺口，软信号）、registry-only
（未文档化的扩展，被 ratchet）、missing（没注册/非 public）。看不见的只有一类：两边都
声明了，没人读。

渲染路径上的证据只能从渲染路径上取，那是 objectui 那侧。那里的
public-block-binding-reach.test.tsx 把每个声明了 objectName 的 public block 挂在一个
会记录调用的 dataSource 下，断言绑定确实到达了数据层；首跑就把五个绑上的和三个没绑上
的分开，并暴露两个同形真缺陷（objectui#3144）——这恰好证明这类证据在 spec 侧从来取不到。

ADR-0082 带 addendum；2026-06 那份 audit 顶上加了更正横幅，指出那句让整件事看起来安全的
假设（"the component reads its full config from the spec schema at render"）是预期，
从未被测量。

Closes #4472


Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01S3cP1eY1novcNhQEDBrSZD

Co-authored-by: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>

Author: os-zhuang

.changeset/react-blocks-declaration-parity-not-conformance.md

@@ -0,0 +1,50 @@
+---
+'@objectstack/spec': patch
+---
+
+`check:react-conformance` → `check:react-declaration-parity` — the gate compares two declarations, and said it compared a declaration to an implementation.
+
+Its header opened by claiming it "confirms the objectui components **ACTUALLY implement**
+the props the spec protocol declares". It never could. Both sides of its diff are
+declarations: the spec zod schema's props on the left, and on the right the `inputs` the
+objectui *registry config* declares — copied verbatim into `sdui.manifest.json` by
+`manifestFromConfigs`. No renderer appears anywhere in the chain. So a prop **both sides
+declare and nothing reads** is, to this gate, perfect agreement.
+
+That is not hypothetical. #4413's four blocks (`record:details` / `record:highlights` /
+`record:related_list` / `record:path`) published `objectName`/`recordId` that no renderer
+read, rendered a "bind a record to preview" placeholder on a `kind:'react'` page, and sat
+behind `{ "frontendOnly": [], "missing": false }` in the committed baseline for the whole
+life of the defect. A human reading the objectui renderers found it. A gate reporting
+green on a promise it cannot keep is worse than no gate — without one, someone checks by
+hand.
+
+Prime Directive #10 (declared ≠ enforced), landing on the thing whose job is to catch it.
+Same shape as #1475's "spec declares 9 validation rules, the executor honors 3".
+
+- **Renamed to what it does**, name and header together, because the name was load-bearing
+  in the misreading: `check-react-blocks-declaration-parity.ts`,
+  `react-declaration-parity.baseline.json`, and `frontendOnly` → `registryOnly` in the
+  baseline ("the registry *declared* it", not "the frontend *implements* it").
+- **The scope caveat is emitted on every run, clean ones included.** Whoever forms a
+  belief about this gate is reading a CI log, not a source header.
+- **It actually gates now.** `gen-sdui-manifest.sh` ran it without `--strict` and swallowed
+  the exit code behind a `⚠`, so even the divergence it *could* see was recorded and never
+  stopped (#4472 secondary finding 1). The ratchet fires only on divergence new since the
+  accepted baseline, so a failure is always a deliberate registry change.
+- **The claim is pinned by a test.** `check-react-blocks-declaration-parity.test.ts`
+  asserts both directions of what the gate can see, that the caveat rides along, and that
+  the implementation claim does not come back.
+
+What it sees is unchanged and still worth having — `spec-only` (palette gap, soft),
+`registry-only` (undocumented extension, ratcheted), `missing` (not registered / not
+public). Exactly one class is invisible: both sides declare it, nothing reads it.
+
+Evidence about the render path has to come from the render path, which is objectui's side.
+`public-block-binding-reach.test.tsx` there mounts every public block declaring an
+`objectName` under a recording `dataSource` and asserts the binding reaches it; its first
+run separated five bound blocks from three unbound and surfaced two real defects of the
+same shape (objectui#3144) — the confirmation this evidence was never obtainable here.
+ADR-0082 carries the addendum; the 2026-06 audit carries a correction banner over the
+assumption that carried the mistake ("the component reads its full config from the spec
+schema at render" — an expectation, never measured).

AGENTS.md

@@ -342,10 +342,20 @@ removals" this way while writing this section; `check:generated` now prints this
 inline when that gate is the one failing.)
 
 `check:liveness`, `check:empty-state`, `check:skill-examples`,
-`check:react-conformance` and `check:exported-any` are pure checks with no generator — a
-failure there is a real finding to fix, not an artifact to regenerate. `check:generated`
-names them as deliberately not run, so its "all up to date" never reads as "everything
-passed".
+`check:react-declaration-parity` and `check:exported-any` are pure checks with no
+generator — a failure there is a real finding to fix, not an artifact to regenerate.
+`check:generated` names them as deliberately not run, so its "all up to date" never reads
+as "everything passed".
+
+⚠️ **`check:react-declaration-parity` compares two DECLARATIONS, not a declaration against
+an implementation.** Left: the props a block's spec zod schema declares. Right: the inputs
+the objectui *registry config* declares. Both are declarations — `manifestFromConfigs`
+copies `config.inputs` verbatim — so a prop **both sides declare and no renderer reads**
+is, to this gate, perfect agreement. It was named `check:react-conformance` and opened by
+claiming it confirmed the components "ACTUALLY implement" the spec props; it never could,
+and #4413 shipped four dead blocks straight through a green run of it. Renamed and
+re-scoped in #4472. The gate is still worth having (`spec-only`, `registry-only` and
+`missing` are real signals) — just don't read it as proof anything renders.
 
 `check:exported-any` is the one of those that also reads the built `dist/*.d.ts`, so the
 stale-`dist` caveat above applies to it too. It asks the other half of the