The press release lists `/abcd:run` as in-scope operator wiring; the scope page says it is not built and its intent is superseded

The press release lists /abcd:run as in-scope operator wiring; the scope page says it is not built and its intent is superseded

A premise contradiction (severity minor) found by the cross-document consistency pass.

• End A: .abcd/development/brief/01-product/01-press-release.md:27 — "plus operator-internal command wiring (e.g. /abcd:run, the itd-29 autonomous-run operator surface — read-mostly status/pause/resume/preflight over the pluggable autonomous-run seam; not part of the user-facing command set)"
• End B: .abcd/development/brief/01-product/04-scope.md:19 — "is not built: itd-29 is superseded (by itd-2609201916151817, planned), and no run verb or commands/run.md is on any shipped surface."

The press release's 'What's In Scope' lists /abcd:run, the itd-29 operator surface with status/pause/resume/preflight, as operator-internal wiring. The scope page says /abcd:run is not built, itd-29 is superseded, and no run verb or command page is on any shipped surface. A superseded surface cannot also be part of the plumbing the press release delivers.

Evidence: .abcd/work/reviews/2026-10-26-consistency/00-summary.md, finding 8.