docs: plain-English pass over the active specs

Ran the humanizer rules over 79 prose files in the active specs (brief,
design, requirements, research and narrative docs). Removed em dashes,
significance inflation, forced rule-of-three, bold-label list items and
filler. Skipped tasks.md checklists and the retired specs (harnessx-*,
openrouter-sast-harness, unseen-repo-evaluation).

Every number, path, command, hash and identifier was preserved: checked
each file against HEAD for drift in numbers, inline code and code fences,
zero drift across all 79 files.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <[email protected]>

.kiro/specs/learned-decision-engine/fix-mechanisms-plan.md

@@ -25,29 +25,29 @@ money.
 
 ## Requirements (proposed)
 
-1. **Mining.** From each fix pair, extract what the fixed function adds on the vulnerable flow: new calls,
+1. Mining. From each fix pair, extract what the fixed function adds on the vulnerable flow: new calls,
    new conditions guarding the sink, new or changed sink arguments. Record each as a candidate fact with its
    language, family, form (sanitizer call, guard predicate, safe argument, sink restriction) and the pairs
    that propose it. Mining is deterministic (tree-sitter diff of the two function bodies). No model calls.
-2. **Generalisation is explicit.** A candidate is a pattern, not a repository name: a callee name, an
+2. Generalisation is explicit. A candidate is a pattern, not a repository name: a callee name, an
    argument key, a predicate shape. Candidates naming project-specific identifiers are rejected (Req 8: no
    application-specific trees).
-3. **Admission by held-out separation.** Folds are by repository, as in the decision engine. A candidate is
+3. Admission by held-out separation. Folds are by repository, as in the decision engine. A candidate is
    admitted for a fold only if, on that fold's held-out pairs, adding it to the fact tables:
    - increases pairs where the vulnerable side keeps a path and the fixed side loses it or becomes
      sanitized;
    - and does not remove any held-out vulnerable-side path (no recall loss).
    A candidate proposed by fewer than 2 distinct repositories in the training folds is not tried.
-4. **No train-on-test.** Mining and admission never read held-out pairs; the closed-loop leak recorded in
+4. No train-on-test. Mining and admission never read held-out pairs; the closed-loop leak recorded in
    memory (`closed-loop-train-on-test-leak`) is the failure this rule exists to prevent. Population v3 is
    never read.
-5. **Measurement by the trace runner.** Each admission round re-runs the engine on the affected pins only
+5. Measurement by the trace runner. Each admission round re-runs the engine on the affected pins only
    (the runner's resume and selection already support this; on k3s the worker Deployment runs them in
    parallel). The outcome is the pair-asymmetry table per family, before and after, on held-out folds.
-6. **Gate before production.** An admitted fact enters `src/openultrasast/ruleset/semantic/*.toml` only after
+6. Gate before production. An admitted fact enters `src/openultrasast/ruleset/semantic/*.toml` only after
    the detection gates (`gate`, `map_gate`, `pair_gate`) show no regression, and only as a registered
    experiment whose decision rule was fixed before the run.
-7. **Coverage second.** After discharge facts, the same loop proposes source and sink additions from pairs
+7. Coverage second. After discharge facts, the same loop proposes source and sink additions from pairs
    where neither side has a path (91 of 105 today), admitted under the same held-out rule.
 
 ## How it relates to what exists