Promote: mirror-clarifier + grammar consistency fix

AGENTS.md

@@ -19,7 +19,7 @@ This is the developer-facing git policy. The branch rulesets that enforce it (me
 - **`develop` is forward-only**: no `main -> develop` back-merges. Historical back-merge commits in `git log` predate this rule and must not be repeated.
 - All commits on both branches are cryptographically signed (see Git and Commit Rules). Squash and merge commits created in the GitHub UI are signed by GitHub's web-flow key.
 - **Bots target both `main` and `develop` directly.** Dependabot and codegen open PRs against each branch independently. This is deliberate: running a bot on one branch and merging its changes across to the other causes endless conflicts as the feature -> develop -> main flow moves underneath it, whereas landing the same dependency or data update directly in each branch keeps bot changes conflict-free regardless of what else is in flight, and keeps the `main` package fresh without waiting on a promotion. Dependabot security PRs open against `main`. The mechanics (Dependabot's per-target-branch config, codegen's per-branch matrix) are in [`WORKFLOW.md`](./WORKFLOW.md) D8.
-- **Mirror to `develop` any change that lands on `main` outside the feature -> develop -> main flow.** A reconciliation-branch fix made to resolve a `develop -> main` promotion conflict, or a security PR that merges only to `main`, leaves `develop` behind on that content - and forward-only `develop` never back-merges to catch up (the same parallel-target principle as the bots). Before basing new work on `develop`, or diagnosing a defect from it, compare content and not commit history: run `git diff origin/main origin/develop` and inspect its `-` lines - the `main`-side of each difference, to check for staleness. A `-`/`+` pair within one hunk is usually just `develop` modifying that code as normal unpromoted work (occasionally `develop` reworking a `main`-side fix differently - worth a glance). The stronger staleness signal is a deletion-only hunk (`-` lines, no `+` lines): content on `main` that `develop` lacks entirely, i.e. a `main`-only fix `develop` never received, so the defect may already be fixed on `main`. Prefer this over a commit-log check like `git log origin/develop..origin/main`, which is noisy here because it also lists routine promotion merges and the `main`-direct bot commits whose content `develop` already carries via its own parallel bot PRs.
+- **Mirror to `develop` any change that lands on `main` outside the feature -> develop -> main flow.** "Mirror" means landing the same fix directly on `develop` via a follow-up PR targeting `develop` - never a `main -> develop` back-merge, which the forward-only rule forbids. A reconciliation-branch fix made to resolve a `develop -> main` promotion conflict, or a security PR that merges only to `main`, leaves `develop` behind on that content - and forward-only `develop` never back-merges to catch up (the same parallel-target principle as the bots). Before basing new work on `develop`, or diagnosing a defect from it, compare content and not commit history: run `git diff origin/main origin/develop` and inspect its `-` lines - the `main`-side of each difference, to check for staleness. A `-`/`+` pair within one hunk is usually just `develop` modifying that code as normal unpromoted work (occasionally `develop` is reworking a `main`-side fix differently - worth a glance). The stronger staleness signal is a deletion-only hunk (`-` lines, no `+` lines): content on `main` that `develop` lacks entirely, i.e. a `main`-only fix `develop` never received, so the defect may already be fixed on `main`. Prefer this over a commit-log check like `git log origin/develop..origin/main`, which is noisy here because it also lists routine promotion merges and the `main`-direct bot commits whose content `develop` already carries via its own parallel bot PRs.
 - **Put issue-closing keywords (`Closes #N`) where they fire on merge to the default branch (`main`).** GitHub closes an issue from a *PR description* only when that PR merges to `main`, so a `Closes #N` in a PR that targets `develop` never fires - put it in the `develop -> main` promotion PR instead. A closing keyword in a *commit message* does close the issue once that commit reaches `main` via promotion, but that is fragile across squash-merges, so prefer the promotion PR's description or close the issue manually once the fix lands on `main`.
 
 ## Release Model