chore(aiwg): adopt shared BT6 maintainer workflow (#148)

* docs(policy): allow low-impact contributor courtesy cleanup

* chore(aiwg): migrate to shared BT6 maintainer plugin

* chore: reconcile delivery validation

.aiwg/reports/abm-gate-report.md

@@ -1,15 +1,42 @@
 # Architecture Baseline Milestone Gate Report
 
-**Status:** PASS  
-**Date:** 2026-07-20
+## Gate Metadata
 
-| Criterion | Status | Evidence |
-| --- | --- | --- |
-| SAD exists and is baselined | PASS | `architecture/software-architecture-doc.md`; current-state, >1,000 words |
-| At least three ADRs | PASS | ADR-001 through ADR-005 |
-| Use-case architectural coverage | PASS | SAD traceability covers UC-001 through UC-005 |
-| Test strategy exists | PASS | `testing/test-strategy.md` |
-| No unmitigated blocking architecture risk | PASS | R-01 has enforced controls; weakening them is explicitly release-blocking |
-| Vision/current-state separation | PASS | ADR-005 and `architecture/vision-alignment.md` |
+- **Decision:** PASS WITH CONDITIONS
+- **Evaluation date:** 2026-07-21
+- **Scope:** Current-state brownfield architecture and construction-readiness evidence
+- **Evaluator:** Artifact standards audit; named maintainer approval pending
 
-The architecture is baselined for maintenance and controlled evolution. “Construction ready” means the brownfield team can prioritize alignment work; it does not relabel experimental features as stable.
+## Criteria and Evidence
+
+| Criterion | Threshold | Status | Citable evidence |
+| --- | --- | --- | --- |
+| SAD completeness | v3 sections, context/container/component/data/sequences/API/deployment/cross-cutting/technology/traceability/open questions | PASS | Software Architecture Document |
+| Architectural decisions | At least three decisions with context, alternatives, consequences, risks, implementation/tests, references | PASS | ADR-001 through ADR-005 |
+| Requirement architecture coverage | Every UC, story group, and NFR maps to a component/tactic and verification | PASS | SAD §§12–14 |
+| Test strategy | Levels, environments, metrics, risk mapping, and blocking gates are explicit | PASS | Test strategy |
+| Risk control | No accepted release path weakens blocking safety controls | PASS | R-001/R-002/R-008; ADR-003 |
+| Vision/current-state separation | Maturity evidence and promotion gates are explicit | PASS | ADR-005 and vision alignment |
+| Review approval | Named architecture/safety/evaluation approval recorded | CONDITION | Roles defined; named sign-off pending |
+| Open architecture work | Gaps have owners/target phase and do not masquerade as implemented claims | PASS | SAD Appendix B; Iteration 001 |
+
+## Conditions
+
+1. Maintainers must review the SAD/ADRs and record named accept/amend/supersede outcomes.
+2. Complete the adapter safety inventory and maturity-consistency automation before claiming those controls are complete.
+3. Establish measured workload/startup/shutdown baselines before making performance or disposability claims.
+
+## Decision Rationale
+
+The current-state architecture is sufficiently detailed and traceable for controlled brownfield construction. “Pass” does not promote experimental features, prove hosted-service readiness, or fabricate stakeholder approval. The conditions are explicit construction work and release-review prerequisites where applicable.
+
+## References
+
+- @.aiwg/architecture/software-architecture-doc.md — Architecture baseline and matrices.
+- @.aiwg/architecture/adr-001.md — Local-first modular structure.
+- @.aiwg/architecture/adr-003.md — Deterministic safety boundary.
+- @.aiwg/architecture/adr-005.md — Maturity boundary.
+- @.aiwg/architecture/vision-alignment.md — Evidence and promotion criteria.
+- @.aiwg/testing/test-strategy.md — Verification strategy.
+- @.aiwg/planning/iteration-001-plan.md — Condition closure plan.
+- @.aiwg/team/team-profile.md — Pending named ownership.

.aiwg/reports/construction-ready-brief.md

@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
 # Construction Ready Brief
 
-**Project:** T3MP3ST  
-**Date:** 2026-07-20  
-**Status:** CONSTRUCTION READY — brownfield architecture alignment
+**Project:** T3MP3ST
+**Date:** 2026-07-20
+**Status:** CONDITIONALLY CONSTRUCTION READY — brownfield architecture alignment
 
 ## Executive Summary
 
@@ -42,3 +42,20 @@ Scope bypass, secret/evidence leakage, maturity overstatement, nondeterministic
 2. Execute Iteration 001 architecture-alignment work.
 3. Preserve current CI gates while adding traceability/maturity checks.
 4. Update the alignment matrix whenever a vision capability changes maturity.
+
+## Readiness Conditions
+
+- Named maintainers must review and record accept/amend/supersede outcomes for the SAD and ADRs.
+- The adapter safety inventory, maturity consistency audit, and workload baselines remain Iteration 001 work; they are not described as complete controls.
+- Any implementation change follows the test and deployment gates; documentation-only readiness does not waive runtime verification.
+
+## References
+
+- @.aiwg/reports/lom-gate-report.md — Lifecycle objective gate and conditions.
+- @.aiwg/reports/abm-gate-report.md — Architecture baseline gate and conditions.
+- @.aiwg/architecture/software-architecture-doc.md — Current architecture baseline.
+- @.aiwg/architecture/vision-alignment.md — Maturity evidence.
+- @.aiwg/requirements/nfr-register.md — Quality constraints.
+- @.aiwg/testing/test-strategy.md — Construction/release verification.
+- @.aiwg/planning/iteration-001-plan.md — First construction-alignment iteration.
+- @.aiwg/intake/risk-screening.md — Residual risks.

.aiwg/reports/lom-gate-report.md

@@ -1,14 +1,38 @@
 # Lifecycle Objective Milestone Gate Report
 
-**Status:** PASS  
-**Date:** 2026-07-20
+## Gate Metadata
 
-| Criterion | Status | Evidence |
-| --- | --- | --- |
-| Problem statement defined | PASS | `intake/intake-form.md` |
-| Success metrics defined | PASS | Five measurable criteria in intake |
-| Stakeholders identified | PASS | Five stakeholder groups in intake |
-| Initial risk screening complete | PASS | Seven risks in `intake/risk-screening.md` |
-| Solution approach viable | PASS | Existing operational codebase; no infeasible constraint |
+- **Decision:** PASS WITH CONDITIONS
+- **Evaluation date:** 2026-07-21
+- **Scope:** Brownfield lifecycle objectives, owner context, initial risk, and solution viability
+- **Evaluator:** Artifact standards audit; named maintainer approval pending
 
-The gate authorizes brownfield elaboration. Unknown adoption, staffing, and SLO facts remain owner inputs but do not prevent documenting current architecture.
+## Criteria and Evidence
+
+| Criterion | Threshold | Status | Citable evidence |
+| --- | --- | --- | --- |
+| Problem and outcomes | Problem, stakeholders, scope, measurable success criteria | PASS | Intake form and project intake |
+| Owner intent | Priority, scale context, failure posture, commitments recorded | PASS | Option matrix owner answers and decision record |
+| Initial risk | Impact/likelihood/exposure/owner/status/residual risk for critical domains | PASS | Risk register R-001–R-010 |
+| Quality constraints | Critical NFRs are measurable with repeatable verification | PASS | NFR-01–NFR-12 register |
+| Solution viability | Implemented brownfield path exists; no infeasible constraint identified | PASS | Codebase report, SAD, current CI |
+| Ownership | Named owners/reviewers assigned | CONDITION | Roles defined, assignments pending |
+
+## Conditions and Residual Uncertainty
+
+1. Assign named architecture, safety, evaluation, test, and release owners before a release/maturity decision relies on role approval.
+2. Treat the thousands-to-tens-of-thousands scale as owner-supplied planning context, not measured telemetry.
+3. Do not infer hosted SLOs, general support commitments, or certification from the current local/open-source baseline.
+
+## Decision Rationale
+
+The gate authorizes brownfield elaboration/construction-alignment work because the problem, current solution, success criteria, risks, owner intent, and critical quality constraints are explicit. The ownership condition affects review evidence but does not prevent documenting or testing the implemented baseline.
+
+## References
+
+- @.aiwg/intake/intake-form.md — Concise objective and owner context.
+- @.aiwg/intake/project-intake.md — Detailed brownfield baseline.
+- @.aiwg/intake/option-matrix.md — Owner answers and trade-offs.
+- @.aiwg/intake/risk-screening.md — Prioritized risks.
+- @.aiwg/requirements/nfr-register.md — Measurable constraints.
+- @.aiwg/team/team-profile.md — Pending role assignment.