The scope page says an intent ships when its linked spec closes, but the spec verb ships it only when no open spec still names it

The scope page says an intent ships when its linked spec closes, but the spec verb ships it only when no open spec still names it

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

• End A: .abcd/development/brief/01-product/04-scope.md:40 — "It reaches shipped/ when its linked spec is closed: closing the spec is what ships the intent, and there is no separate ship command."
• End B: .abcd/development/brief/04-surfaces/README.md:275 — "closes a spec and ships its linked intent (planned/ → shipped/) only when no open spec is left naming it"

The scope page says an intent reaches shipped/ when its linked spec is closed, so closing the spec is what ships it. The surfaces index's spec verb says spec close ships the linked intent only when no open spec is left naming it, because an intent owns one or more specs, and a --remainder close leaves it planned. Under the 1:n relation, closing a linked spec does not by itself ship the intent.

Evidence: .abcd/work/reviews/2026-10-26-consistency/00-summary.md, finding 103.