Planning: record M2 closeout decisions

M2's review reported six planning recommendations rather than applying them,
three marked before M3. All six are applied here, plus three additions drawn
from the same evidence. No implementation file is touched.

The endpoint policy was the gap that mattered. It is the most consequential
setting in the application — the storyteller sends the player's prose, the
context, the memories and the embedding inputs to whatever address it names —
and it existed only as a module docstring. It is now ADR 011 and a new §10A in
the threat model, which also retires the assumption in §71A that the inherited
guard was a starting point. It was not: AI-DnD's SSRF guard blocked private
addresses to stop a hosted server reaching its own internal network, which is
the exact opposite of what a local storyteller needs. It was removed, not
adapted.

Both documents state the rule as implemented — an allowlist of explicit
local-network CIDRs, every resolved address checked, enforced on save and again
before every outbound request, TLS never traded against it — and both state the
two residual limits plainly rather than implying they are covered: a hostile
host already on the trusted LAN is inside the permitted boundary, and a
rebinding interval exists between the policy's resolution and the client's
connection. Accepted risks, not M3 work.

The CIDRs are spelled out rather than derived from is_private/is_reserved, and
the ADR records why: is_private is true of the documentation ranges and
0.0.0.0/8, and is_reserved is true of IPv6 loopback, so a rule built on it
refuses an ordinary same-host Ollama on [::1].

TECHNICAL-DESIGN §5.1 items 3 and 4 are marked done, closing all five hardening
items. A new §5.2 records the M1/M2 architecture as fact rather than intention,
so later milestones inherit what the code does. A new §18.1 carries the lesson
of M2's two regressions: when removing a setting, test a real consumer
construction path; when adding one, prove it reaches the component that uses
it. Both defects hid behind a green suite because the tests at that boundary
were mocks.

BUILD-MILESTONES records M2 complete, with the capabilities later milestones
inherit and the debt carried forward. Two notes go to milestones that would
otherwise misread what M2 left them. M5 is told that eight rollback tests now
use the world-state engine as instrumentation and not as endorsement — the
instrumentation moves when the protocol does, and those tests are reworked
rather than deleted. M6 is told that the memory bank died silently under a
green suite, so background failure must be observable and at least one real
provider-construction path must be tested.

The security contract gains what M2 demonstrated. H10 now names the two
conditions that were defects during M2: a wildcard origin must be refused at
startup, and an unknown /api path must 404 rather than returning the SPA with
200. New H12 covers endpoint enforcement, and its fourth pass condition is the
one that matters — a public endpoint written into the database behind the
settings API must still be refused at the wire. A build passing the first three
and failing that one has configuration validation only.

SPECIFICATION.md is deliberately unchanged. M2 altered no product requirement;
it removed capability the specification never asked for.

The two M2 reports gain appended closeout notes rather than edits. Their
original wording about an uncommitted working tree was true when written, and
the note records what happened afterwards: the six-file correction is 8652fe7,
8c65ae9 remains the implementation commit, and the two were never squashed.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01HsZBU8sWRuYTyLgWsu2oQ6

planning/README.md

@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 # Adventure Storyteller Planning Package
 
-**Status:** Phase 0 complete; architecture selected; **Milestone M1 implemented and accepted (2026-09-02)**.  
-**Production coding:** Underway, milestone by milestone. M1 is done; M2 is the next milestone to brief.
+**Status:** Phase 0 complete; architecture selected; **Milestones M1 and M2 implemented and accepted (2026-09-02)**.  
+**Production coding:** Underway, milestone by milestone. M1 and M2 are done; M3 is the next milestone to brief.
 
 This package contains the current product requirements, final Phase 0 architecture decisions, detailed subsystem designs, acceptance tests, research evidence, and the production milestone plan for the local-only interactive-story project.
 
@@ -163,7 +163,13 @@ Milestone M1                       COMPLETE (2026-09-02)
   fork + offline baseline          see planning/reports/M1-*.md
         |
         v
-Milestone M2                       NEXT — brief not yet prepared
+Milestone M2                       COMPLETE (2026-09-02)
+  local-only surface + endpoint    see planning/reports/M2-*.md
+  policy
+        |
+        v
+Milestone M3                       NEXT — brief not yet prepared
+  non-destructive undo/redo
         |
         v
 Implement and review milestone-by-milestone
@@ -173,10 +179,33 @@ Implement and review milestone-by-milestone
 
 **One milestone at a time. Do not begin a milestone before its brief exists.**
 
-M1 is complete and accepted; its evidence is in `reports/M1-BASELINE-REPORT.md`
-and `reports/M1-IMPLEMENTATION-REPORT.md`. **No M2 brief has been prepared.**
-The current action is to review the post-M1 planning corrections below before
-writing one.
+M1 and M2 are complete and accepted; the evidence is in `reports/M1-*.md` and
+`reports/M2-*.md`. **No M3 brief has been prepared.** The current action is to
+write one, informed by the post-M2 corrections below and by
+`reports/M2-IMPLEMENTATION-REPORT.md` §Q, which records that M3's chokepoints
+were left untouched or simplified by M2 and that the Phase 0B undo/redo spike
+still applies.
+
+### Post-M2 corrections applied (2026-09-03)
+
+M2's review recommended six planning changes and reported rather than applied
+them. All six are now applied, plus three additions drawn from the same evidence:
+
+| Document | Correction |
+| --- | --- |
+| `SECURITY-THREAT-MODEL.md` | New §10A records the inference endpoint policy **as implemented** — address allowlist, enforced on save and before every request, TLS never traded against it — with both residual limits stated. §71A item 5 marked resolved; §77 notes the required defaults are now met. |
+| `TECHNICAL-DESIGN.md` §5.1 | Items 3 and 4 marked done; all five hardening items are now resolved. |
+| `TECHNICAL-DESIGN.md` §5.2 | New: the M1/M2 production architecture recorded as fact — SQLite, Ollama-only, loopback storyteller, trusted-LAN inference accepted, public endpoints refused. |
+| `TECHNICAL-DESIGN.md` §18.1 | New wiring rule from the M2 regressions: test a real consumer path when removing a setting, and prove a new setting reaches its component. |
+| `DECISIONS/011-local-inference-endpoint-policy.md` | **New ADR.** Address-based allowlist over hostname matching, deny by default, checked twice, mandatory TLS — with the `ipaddress`-classification finding as the reason the CIDRs are spelled out. |
+| `BUILD-MILESTONES.md` M2 | Marked COMPLETE with the capabilities it delivered and the debt it carried forward. |
+| `BUILD-MILESTONES.md` M5 | Note: eight rollback tests now use the world-state engine as *instrumentation*, not as endorsement; move the instrumentation when M5 replaces the protocol, and rework rather than delete those tests. |
+| `BUILD-MILESTONES.md` M6 | Note: background memory failure must be observable, at least one real provider-construction path must be tested, and derived-memory failure must not corrupt accepted story state. |
+| `V1-ACCEPTANCE-TESTS.md` H10 | Strengthened: a wildcard origin must be rejected at startup, and an unknown `/api/...` path must 404 rather than returning the SPA with HTTP 200. |
+| `V1-ACCEPTANCE-TESTS.md` H12 | **New.** Inference endpoint enforcement, including the defence-in-depth case: a public endpoint written into the database behind the settings API must still be refused at request time. |
+
+`SPECIFICATION.md` was deliberately **not** changed. M2 altered no product
+requirement; it removed capability the specification never asked for.
 
 ### Post-M1 corrections applied (2026-09-02)