Declare layer machine-readably (§11); adopt v0.6 corrections

The standard moved v0.4 -> v0.6. All four findings from our v0.4 review
were adopted in v0.5, and v0.6 went further on two of them.

§11 now requires a machine-readable declaration — prose cannot
distinguish a declaration from a transcribed review. We had none.
Added layer.yaml (form adapted from ops-warden's reference
implementation), scripts/check_layer_conformance.py, and
tests/test_layer_conformance.py.

The check makes our central claim mechanical rather than asserted: no
direct Tooling client in src/. The test exercises the negative case on a
synthetic tree, so it fails if the checker goes blind. pyyaml is added as
a DEV dependency only — `dependencies = []` is load-bearing for the §5
claim and stays empty.

Adopted from v0.6:
- containment is no longer ours (§9.2). Actuation is an Engine concept,
  unowned and held at zero; kings-guard proposes containment and never
  performs it. The register row is now a dependency, not our gap.
- observation is scoped to Staff-reachable sources, with identity and
  secret observation pending — our finding 1, adopted near-verbatim.
- access-engine DECLINED the authentication-evidence gap; owner is now
  the identity layer plus audit-core, reproposed and unassented.
- §11 blocked-clean recorded, with the rule that it must not rank below
  conforming — our finding 2.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01UEtvmYUBP2fDtirJGWn5MW

Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 4014379@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: 4af9e20f-1768-4afc-951b-b507784e382b

specs/NetKingdomImmuneArchitecture.md

@@ -15,7 +15,7 @@ classification: Public
 # NetKingdom Immune Architecture
 
 > **Layer note (2026-08-28).** kings-guard is a **Staff**-layer repository
-> under the NetKingdom Security Layer Model v0.4 (assented in
+> under the NetKingdom Security Layer Model v0.6 (assented in
 > `decisions/decisions.md` KG-DEC-2026-001). Where this document uses "control
 > plane", read it as naming an **estate-wide, Engine-layer** arrangement of
 > deterministic authorities — never as a self-description of `kings-guard`,