diff --git a/docs/decisions/records/testing/mutation-claims-are-executed.md b/docs/decisions/records/testing/mutation-claims-are-executed.md
index b447d13c3..c52b34386 100644
--- a/docs/decisions/records/testing/mutation-claims-are-executed.md
+++ b/docs/decisions/records/testing/mutation-claims-are-executed.md
@@ -134,7 +134,10 @@ file with a wider hole.
 
 **The seed set found a shipped claim already false, which is the calibration.**
 `scripts/post-review-verdict.sh` asserted that the array-TYPE test in its read-back was
-unwitnessable — that "the absent-entry check catches every case on its own". Executed 2026-09-04,
+unwitnessable, on the grounds that the absent-entry check below it caught every case on its own —
+lines 316-317 at `efadbec29`, which this change replaces. The wording is paraphrased and the source
+pinned, not quoted: the sentence wraps across a comment line break, so a quotation of it resolves to
+nothing anywhere, which is #812's second defect exactly. Executed 2026-09-04,
 disarming that test feeds a `null` `.statuses` to `map(select(...))`, jq refuses to iterate it and
 the script dies with the PARSE message instead of the shape one, reddening
 `test_a_readback_whose_statuses_array_is_NULL_is_refused`. Note what the shape costs to detect: the
@@ -150,7 +153,8 @@ the declared outcome. The direction that is not is *every claim is declared* —
 mutation outcome and declares nothing stays invisible, because finding it means recognising a
 sentence by its shape, and `docs/defect-shapes-773.md` §4 names that class ("no check can tell that a
 sentence is stronger than the evidence behind it") as review responsibility. The withdrawn
-`test_review_verdict_vocabulary_parity.py` is the empirical case for not trying. So the remaining
-population above is a backlog and not a hole this rule closes; each entry needs a judgement about
-whether its claim is still executable, and declaring them in bulk would manufacture exactly the
-unverified coverage the rule exists to refuse.
+`test_review_verdict_vocabulary_parity.py` is the empirical case for not trying. So the candidates
+counted above are a place to look and not a hole this rule closes — nor a backlog, since nobody has
+established how many of them are claims at all; each real one needs a judgement about whether it is
+still executable, and declaring them in bulk would manufacture exactly the unverified coverage the
+rule exists to refuse.