board: the CI gap was the trigger, not the coverage

Codex P2 on #82, verified against .github/workflows/lint.yml: the claim that
no CI job here compiles the native crate is false -- the clippy and rust-test
jobs check out the lance-graph sibling and run cargo clippy --all-targets and
cargo test from native/lgj-abi on every push and PR to this repo.

The real gap is the trigger: on {pull_request, push} fires for this repository
only, so an upstream-only merge in lance-graph cannot start the workflow and
the break stays invisible until someone pushes here. Corrected in place in the
unmerged #81 arc entry, and by prepend for the merged epiphany.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01HScwwezRdMxFfTs3WLG19d

Author: claude

.claude/board/EPIPHANIES.md

@@ -1,3 +1,25 @@
+## E-THE-CI-GAP-WAS-THE-TRIGGER-NOT-THE-COVERAGE-1 (2026-09-19)
+
+⊘ **Corrects `E-THE-VALHALLA-FLIP-COST-ONE-WORD-SIX-TIMES-…-1` below**, which
+says the `RangeOutOfBounds` break went unseen *"because no CI job here compiles
+the native crate."* **That is false, and checkable in one file.**
+`.github/workflows/lint.yml` runs `clippy` and `rust-test` jobs that check out
+sibling `AdaWorldAPI/lance-graph` (and `ndarray`, and `OGAR`) and then run
+`cargo clippy --all-targets -- -D warnings` and `cargo test` from
+`native/lgj-abi`. The native crate is compiled against the real sibling on
+every push and PR **to this repository**.
+
+**The actual hazard is the TRIGGER.** The workflow is `on: {pull_request,
+push}`, which fires for events in *this* repo only. An upstream-only merge in
+lance-graph — exactly what added `ExecError::RangeOutOfBounds` — cannot start
+it, so the break stayed invisible until the next push here. Coverage was never
+missing; the *event* was.
+
+**Why the wrong diagnosis was worse than no diagnosis:** it would have sent the
+next session to add a CI job that already exists, and left the real gap — no
+upstream-change notification — untouched. Found by Codex P2 on #82; I verified
+it against the workflow rather than accepting or dismissing the finding.
+
 ## E-PANAMA-TIMES-VALHALLA-IS-ONE-MEMBRANE-AND-THE-LAB-FINALLY-HAS-ONE-VARIABLE-1 (2026-09-19)
 
 **Operator reframing, and it is the correct one:** this was never a JDK 26→28

.claude/board/PR_ARC_INVENTORY.md

@@ -30,10 +30,19 @@
   `Pred::Range` work and `exec_error_to_status` matches exhaustively. Mapped
   into the documented *"bug in THIS file"* family — no new public status, no
   ABI bump — and fenced by the falsifier above, **disable-verified
-  red-then-green**. *Standing hazard worth the sentence: an exhaustive match
-  across a repo boundary turns an upstream ADDITIVE change into a downstream
-  build failure, and no CI job here compiles the native crate, so nothing saw
-  it.*
+  red-then-green**. *Standing hazard, corrected before merge (Codex P2 on #82,
+  verified against `.github/workflows/lint.yml`): an exhaustive match across a
+  repo boundary turns an upstream ADDITIVE change into a downstream build
+  failure. ⊘ The first draft blamed the wrong thing — it said "no CI job here
+  compiles the native crate", which is FALSE: the `clippy` and `rust-test`
+  jobs check out sibling `AdaWorldAPI/lance-graph` and run
+  `cargo clippy --all-targets` / `cargo test` from `native/lgj-abi`, so CI
+  compiles it on every push and PR **to this repo**. The real gap is the
+  TRIGGER, not the coverage: `on: {pull_request, push}` fires on this
+  repository only, so an upstream-only merge in lance-graph cannot start this
+  workflow and the break stays invisible until someone pushes here. Naming it
+  as missing coverage would have sent the next session to add a job that
+  already exists.*
 - **Measured** (Temurin `28+16-ea`, fresh `liblgj_abi.so` abi 0.11 avx512):
   **183 native tests**; **`ALL PASSED (409 checks)`** — byte-for-byte the same
   409 as the unflipped baseline **on the same JDK**, which is the comparison