docs: preserve consensus validation intent before deletion

Record the feature intent, symbol-level inventory, wire-blockers, and git
recovery path for teaagent/consensus/consensus_validation.py before any
runtime deletion. This keeps Option D reversible as archaeology while making
clear that restore-from-history is not authority to rewire the module.

Action: G-P2-8
Roadmap-Status: unchanged
Constraint: documentation and guard test only; no consensus code deletion or behavior change in this commit; unrelated .omo work orders left untracked
Tested: ruff format --check tests/test_docs_consistency.py; ruff check tests/test_docs_consistency.py; scripts/validate_docs_consistency.py (29/29 risk, 21/21 ticket); pytest tests/test_docs_consistency.py -q (45 passed); docs-inventory and OKF catalog --check clean
Not-tested: consensus module deletion, full acceptance/nightly suite, live providers, real dogfood
Confidence: high

Author: johnteee

docs/adr/0029-consensus-validation-deferred.md

@@ -46,6 +46,12 @@ deletion checklist — import-graph guard, remove the module and its
 roadmap/backlog — and may land at or before the 2026-12-10 review. Until
 executed, the module stays `experimental — unwired`.
 
+Preservation requirement before deletion: keep the feature intent, symbol-level
+inventory, wire-blockers, and git recovery commands in
+`../specs/consensus-validation-disposition-spec-2026-07-11.md` §2. Deletion may
+remove runtime files and tests, but it must not remove the historical record
+needed to recover or evaluate the design from git history.
+
 ## References
 
 - [Work Direction Decomposition (WDA-006)](../plans/work-direction-decomposition-2026-06-10.md)

docs/generated/docs-inventory.md

@@ -39,7 +39,7 @@ Do not edit this file manually — regenerate instead.
 | `adr/0026-cli-execution-abstraction-layer.md` | working | 560 | `2498fb2f04a4` |
 | `adr/0027-context-bus-architecture.md` | working | 543 | `6fa1d2ced665` |
 | `adr/0028-tournament-swarm-architecture.md` | working | 594 | `ee8dec0fdb60` |
-| `adr/0029-consensus-validation-deferred.md` | working | 2288 | `f3aeee58e959` |
+| `adr/0029-consensus-validation-deferred.md` | working | 2641 | `cf627c48c05f` |
 | `adr/0030-root-module-freeze.md` | working | 1297 | `bee25422e85f` |
 | `adr/0031-shadow-mode-exit-criteria.md` | working | 3598 | `46a9a0d5eaac` |
 | `adr/0032-run-event-taxonomy.md` | working | 16065 | `b9f0c0d7c30a` |
@@ -564,7 +564,7 @@ Do not edit this file manually — regenerate instead.
 | `specs/architecture-spec.md` | working | 5496 | `1bc7809ba2a7` |
 | `specs/automation-lifecycle-spec-2026-06-01.md` | archive | 5311 | `e27fe2b64798` |
 | `specs/background-lifecycle-acceptance-spec-2026-07-11.md` | archive | 9352 | `d064d1f8c46b` |
-| `specs/consensus-validation-disposition-spec-2026-07-11.md` | archive | 9509 | `ebc1215f76a8` |
+| `specs/consensus-validation-disposition-spec-2026-07-11.md` | archive | 13873 | `41deb85d9e3b` |
 | `specs/daily-driver-persona-journey-maps-2026-06-01.md` | archive | 7676 | `a63800c54c69` |
 | `specs/daily-driver-tui-controller-migration-spec-2026-06-01.md` | archive | 6486 | `b10ee8d93a62` |
 | `specs/daily-driver/approval-scope-contract-2026-06-02.md` | archive | 869 | `6e8964afe6e6` |

docs/specs/consensus-validation-disposition-spec-2026-07-11.md

@@ -59,6 +59,77 @@ third parallel consensus surface. Destructive actions flow through the
 approval queue + JIT approval coordinator only. Nothing here changes that;
 this spec exists so the expiry review is a decision, not an investigation.
 
+### 2.1 Pre-deletion preservation record (2026-07-22)
+
+This section exists so `consensus_validation` remains recoverable after Option D
+deletes the code. Deletion must remove the runtime surface, not the historical
+intent, feature inventory, or revival path.
+
+#### 2.1.1 Original intent
+
+`consensus_validation` was intended as a **post-approval multi-agent consensus
+validator** for collaborative or destructive actions that had already passed the
+normal approval queue. It was never supposed to replace ADR-0022's centralized
+approval queue; the safe wiring shape was a second key behind the queue for a
+narrow action class.
+
+The surviving design question, if revived, is: "Do we need a separate N-of-M /
+role-based sign-off gate after the existing queue has approved a destructive
+action?" Absent that owner friction or governance-gap evidence, DR-006 favors
+deletion over preserving dormant code.
+
+#### 2.1.2 Feature inventory to preserve in history
+
+The module at `teaagent/consensus/consensus_validation.py` contained:
+
+| Area | Symbols / behavior | Revival note |
+| --- | --- | --- |
+| Status model | `ConsensusStatus`: `pending`, `approved`, `rejected`, `expired`, `cancelled` | Keep terminal-state semantics explicit if rebuilt. |
+| Rule model | `ConsensusRuleType`: `N_OF_M`, `UNANIMOUS`, `MAJORITY`, `SUPERMAJORITY`, `ROLE_BASED`; `ConsensusRule.check_consensus()` | Rebuild only the rule types needed by real policy; do not automatically restore `SUPERMAJORITY`. |
+| Role-based voting | `ROLE_BASED` rules consult `voter_roles`; absent a mapping, `voter_id` is treated as the role | This was the 2026-06-30 A-P2-7 fix; keep it if role-based consensus returns. |
+| Request model | `ConsensusRequest`: action, context, requester, votes, voter roles, timestamps, expiry, metadata | Revote currently overwrote silently; audited revote events are required before destructive-action wiring. |
+| Storage | `ConsensusStore`: tenant-scoped JSON under `.teaagent/consensus-rules` and `.teaagent/consensus-requests` using `atomic_write_text` | Reuse only if file-backed request state is still desired; otherwise prefer the approval queue's store. |
+| Validator facade | `ConsensusValidator`: `create_rule`, `request_consensus`, `cast_vote`, `get_consensus_status`, `create_default_rules` | Facade was not imported by production paths. A revived version must integrate through the approval queue. |
+| Policy bridge | `create_rule()` created `PolicyType.CONSENSUS` allow policies with `rule_id` metadata | Bridge was inert without a queue hook; rebuild with a real policy condition contract or delete it. |
+| Default rules | 2-of-3 production deploy, unanimous destructive action, majority operational decision | Treat as examples, not product requirements. |
+
+Known wire-blockers that history must not hide:
+
+- `SUPERMAJORITY` counted only votes cast, not `total_voters`; a single YES vote
+  could approve. Destructive-action revival must use quorum semantics or remove
+  this rule type from wireable policy.
+- `ConsensusRequest.add_vote()` overwrote prior votes silently. Revival needs an
+  audited revote or immutable-vote contract.
+- The module emitted no ADR-0032 audit events and had no approval-queue hold
+  hook. Any revival starts with the event/queue integration, not the old facade.
+- The CLI `consensus *` commands used the separate ADR-0019 federated engine;
+  they were not proof that this validation module was live.
+
+#### 2.1.3 Git recovery path
+
+Known-good code anchor when this preservation record was written:
+`7a7799d` (`docs: record owner-ratified intent decisions and intent-roadmap survey`).
+The deletion commit's parent should also contain the final pre-deletion code.
+
+To find the deleted module later:
+
+```bash
+git log --all --follow -- teaagent/consensus/consensus_validation.py
+git show 7a7799d:teaagent/consensus/consensus_validation.py
+git show <deletion_commit>^:teaagent/consensus/consensus_validation.py
+```
+
+To restore the last pre-deletion implementation for investigation, not automatic
+re-adoption:
+
+```bash
+git restore --source=<deletion_commit>^ -- teaagent/consensus/consensus_validation.py
+git restore --source=<deletion_commit>^ -- tests/test_consensus.py tests/test_consensus_disposition_spec.py
+```
+
+Then re-run the decision matrix in §3.3. Restoring from history is evidence
+recovery, not authority to wire the module.
+
 ## 3. Future contract — both options
 
 ### 3.1 Option W: wire behind the approval queue

tests/test_docs_consistency.py

@@ -354,6 +354,26 @@ def test_intent_review_candidate_adoption_state() -> None:
     assert 'a new strategy doc, separate execution-plan doc' in review
 
 
+def test_consensus_validation_deletion_preserves_recovery_record() -> None:
+    root = Path(__file__).resolve().parents[1]
+    spec = (
+        root / 'docs' / 'specs' / 'consensus-validation-disposition-spec-2026-07-11.md'
+    ).read_text(encoding='utf-8')
+    adr = (root / 'docs' / 'adr' / '0029-consensus-validation-deferred.md').read_text(
+        encoding='utf-8'
+    )
+    assert '### 2.1 Pre-deletion preservation record (2026-07-22)' in spec
+    assert '`ConsensusRuleType`: `N_OF_M`, `UNANIMOUS`, `MAJORITY`' in spec
+    assert '`ConsensusValidator`: `create_rule`, `request_consensus`' in spec
+    assert '`SUPERMAJORITY` counted only votes cast' in spec
+    assert 'Revival needs an\n  audited revote' in spec
+    assert 'git show 7a7799d:teaagent/consensus/consensus_validation.py' in spec
+    assert 'git restore --source=<deletion_commit>^' in spec
+    assert 'Restoring from history is evidence\nrecovery, not authority' in spec
+    assert 'Preservation requirement before deletion' in adr
+    assert 'symbol-level\ninventory, wire-blockers, and git recovery commands' in adr
+
+
 def test_doc_cross_references_fail_for_non_historical_docs(tmp_path: Path) -> None:
     docs = tmp_path / 'docs'
     docs.mkdir()