Ship the live-registration check both blocked tasks depend on

KEY-WP-0013-T02 and KEY-WP-0014-T04 stay blocked on custody and on ops-warden,
but each contains a KeyCape-owned piece that had been left as prose. T02 requires
proving "live JWKS verification and denied excess scopes without logging values";
T04 step 4 requires verifying a rotated secret, refusing its predecessor and
refusing excess scope. Both were describable and neither was runnable, so the
proof would have been improvised by hand against production at the moment custody
lands -- the worst possible time for it.

keycape verify-client does it in one command. Per registration it checks
discovery origin, the client_credentials exchange and its RS256 signature against
the deployed JWKS, exact sub/tenant/roles/principal_type, that every -deny-scope
is refused, and that the token carries no scope that was not requested. That last
check is a real gap: the caller commands prove every requested scope was granted,
never that nothing extra came back. -previous-secret-env additionally requires
the predecessor to be refused, and treats an unchanged secret as a rotation that
did not happen.

Nothing is written to disk and no value is printed. Failures name the claim, not
the observed value, so running this against production cannot turn a verification
into a disclosure. Every check runs before it reports, so one failure does not
hide the rest.

The exact invocation for each approval client is recorded in the verification
block of the provisioning packet, so custody admission hands back a command
rather than a description.

Tests cover the passing case, an over-broad registration, a live predecessor, an
identical rotation and output non-disclosure; neutering mustFail makes the suite
fail, so the checks have teeth.

Also recorded in KEY-WP-0014: read from ops-warden's catalog rather than waiting
for a reply, key-cape-oidc-login is asked-and-waiting on us since 2026-08-28 and
is a pointer lane with no programmatic consumers, and the rapp-qonto-keycape-client
blocker citing an absent native exchange command went stale when service-token
shipped on 2026-09-05.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_016uV8zoCKpA1WRAxsKRYbdH

Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 1182213@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: 966597b9-ae61-46a4-8b9e-1594ab3ec4ad

workplans/KEY-WP-0014-native-credential-lane-handoff.md

@@ -105,3 +105,34 @@ The KEY-WP-0009 handoff ops-warden reported missing has also now been delivered
 
 Task remains `wait` — no route was changed and no rotation command ships until
 ops-warden answers (1) and an execution/rollback authority is admitted for (2).
+
+2026-09-08, second pass — read ops-warden's own catalog rather than waiting for a
+reply, and it changes the shape of both questions.
+
+`registry/routing/catalog.yaml`, lane `key-cape-oidc-login`: `intended_owner` was
+already corrected to key-cape, and `verified: asked-and-waiting` since
+2026-08-28. **ops-warden is waiting on us, not the other way round.** The lane is
+also `warden_executes: false` with a `wiki_ref` into `CredentialRouting.md` — a
+pointer, per their ADR-0001, not a code path with programmatic consumers. So the
+consumer-contract risk behind question (1) is smaller than assumed: adding
+`keycape login` alongside retires nothing, and the acceptance we owe them is a
+statement of ownership, not a cutover.
+
+Lane `rapp-qonto-keycape-client`: `rotation.owner: key-cape`,
+`automatable: true`, and `blocked_on` reads "still no key-cape-native
+exchange/rotation command", `verified: source-read` 2026-08-28. **That blocker is
+stale.** `keycape service-token` (T03) shipped 2026-09-05 and is exactly the
+native `client_secret_basic` exchange they record as absent. It does not clear
+the lane, and should be narrowed rather than closed.
+
+Shipped here: `keycape verify-client`, which is rotation step 4 and the denial
+checks step 5 rests on — new exchange verified against deployed JWKS, predecessor
+refused, excess scope refused, no value printed or written. See
+`docs/native-authentication.md`, "Verifying a live registration". The identical
+predecessor case is treated as a failure, because an unchanged secret is a
+rotation that did not happen.
+
+Steps 1-3 remain custody's and are deliberately not automated. Task stays `wait`
+on exactly two answers: which option ops-warden takes for the login proxy, and
+who executes the successor generation and CAS update under what authority. No
+route changed.