CB-WP-0024/0025: what play reported, split into a renderer and a search

Five remarks from the maintainer's test games, checked against the code
before being written down — two had already reached ground-game on wrong
premises, so a claim now names the line that makes it true.

Three of the five turned out to be data the projection already carries,
drawn as text: solution_deck_len, solution_discard, and OutcomeView's
personal/mastery/winners. One control (`close — I have read this`) is
labelled as a reading but shuts the server down, and leaves a live-looking
page pointing at a dead port. One number does not exist at all: table.rs
loops run_game and keeps only the last summary.

CB-WP-0024 (S, chaos d8=6, declaration 7 of window 2) — the piles and the
other seats' plays as objects on the table, the ending control saying what
it does, and a tally that survives "play again".

CB-WP-0025 (L, chaos d8=6, declaration 8) — "could we have won" and "how
hard is this" are the same search asked twice. Tier L because the
information boundary is the whole design problem: a solver reading
GroundState sees the deck the rules hide, and would tell the maintainer he
could have won by playing a card he had no way to know was there. Also
unblocks GROUND-WP-0005, active with both tasks waiting on a measured
difficulty baseline.

Also: CB-WP-0022 T07's evidence file moves to CB-EV-0021 — CB-WP-0023
shipped CB-EV-0020 first.

loop-lint: no findings.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>

workplans/CB-WP-0022-the-design-instrument.md

@@ -294,7 +294,9 @@ priority: high
 state_hub_task_id: "4fb77911-486d-4d9e-a53d-c4e486c74ce2"
 ```
 
-`evidence/CB-EV-0020-*.md`.
+`evidence/CB-EV-0021-*.md`. *(Was CB-EV-0020 when written; CB-WP-0023
+shipped that number first — `evidence/CB-EV-0020-solve-legality.md` — so
+this one moves rather than collides.)*
 
 - **Whether backfilling changed the design** — if all six findings fit the
   first taxonomy, say so and be suspicious of it.