audit: cycle 0103 tidy (drift-clean after three doc-mirror alignments)

Architect review of b672a37..HEAD. What holds: emitted templates match
the settled contracts (Aura.toml paths-only per C17, cdylib + empty
[workspace] per C16, ::-namespaced ids per the charter, the C14 exit
partition in dispatch_new); the load-bypass guard is narrow and sound
(only the new-project verb exempted, the load arm byte-unchanged for
every other verb); e2e coverage is real (scaffold -> build -> run twice
byte-identical, namespace stamped, introspection, four refusals, the
unbuilt-tree bypass, plus the additive namespace-override test).

Regression: cargo build --workspace rc=0; cargo test --workspace 873
passed / 0 failed (project_new 6/6); clippy --workspace --all-targets
-D warnings rc=0; cargo doc --workspace --no-deps 0 warnings. No
baselines exist to move, so nothing to ratify.

Drift resolved in this commit: three doc mirrors still framing the
scaffolder as future — project-layout.md's 'the future aura new
scaffolder will emit this line; until then, add it by hand', the C24
status paragraph's 'what remains open is the aura new scaffolder (the
milestone's next cycle)', and the #109 open-thread bullet's 'the aura
new scaffolder and the experiment-builder API remain open' — all
rewritten to the landed reading (only the experiment-builder API stays
open in that layer).

Carried debt, filed forward: the scaffold templates and the
demo-project fixture encode one project shape twice with no lockstep
guard and deliberate cosmetic divergences (#181, idea — needs a design
pass, not a mechanical edit).

Process note: one mid-cycle plan-fix commit (derive(Debug) on a
plan-prescribed struct whose own test code required it) — the
implement loop's spec gate correctly blocked the necessary deviation;
resolution followed the fix-plan/commit-subset/re-run path.

Ephemeral cycle artifacts removed per convention: spec 0103, plan 0103.

refs #180

docs/design/INDEX.md

@@ -1986,10 +1986,11 @@ construction-arg builders (`LinComb` / `CostSum` / `SimBroker` / `Session` —
 structural-axis args, a C20 concern), additively addable later (#156). The
 **project-as-crate load boundary landed in cycle 0102** (`Aura.toml` discovery +
 `cdylib` loading + merged project ∪ std vocabulary — see the C13 realization
-note); of the two layers this paragraph used to name as sequencing-coupled,
-what remains open is the `aura new` scaffolder (the milestone's next cycle) and
-the **composable-orchestration** thread (#109): topology-as-data is the
-substrate both stand on.
+note; the `aura new` scaffolder followed in cycle 0103 — one command emits a
+buildable project whose blueprint runs through the merged vocabulary); of the
+two layers this paragraph used to name as sequencing-coupled, what remains
+open is the **composable-orchestration** thread (#109): topology-as-data is
+the substrate it stands on.
 
 **Op-script grammar (`aura graph build`, the #157 wire surface).** The construction
 op-script is a JSON **array of ops**, each object internally tagged by `"op"`,
@@ -2088,8 +2089,9 @@ artifact, and any run is deterministic once instantiated" (C1).
   a user wires into an analysis workflow, rather than today's hard-wired CLI verbs
   (`sweep_family` / `walkforward_family` in `aura-cli`) — still open; and (2) the
   project-as-crate authoring layer above — its **load boundary landed in cycle 0102**
-  (`Aura.toml` discovery + cdylib loading + merged vocabulary, C13 realization note;
-  the `aura new` scaffolder and the experiment-builder API remain open, C16/C17).
+  (`Aura.toml` discovery + cdylib loading + merged vocabulary, C13 realization note)
+  and the **`aura new` scaffolder in cycle 0103**; of that layer only the
+  experiment-builder API remains open (C16/C17).
   On the meta-level, authoring a strategy is *wiring
   existing nodes* (C9 composition) + *defining the analysis framework* (C21), not
   writing new nodes; the user wants it driven via the CLI, later the interactive