diff --git a/intakes/intakes.md b/intakes/intakes.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..4a15a2a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/intakes/intakes.md
@@ -0,0 +1,33 @@
+# Intake records
+
+## KG-IN-0001 — Assent requested: Staff layer placement, control-plane vocabulary, and the posture asymmetry
+
+```yaml
+id: KG-IN-0001
+kind: intake
+title: 'Assent requested: Staff layer placement, control-plane vocabulary, and the
+  posture asymmetry'
+status: open
+origin: cross-repo
+origin_ref: gate-house GH-DEC-2026-001
+priority: medium
+owner: kings-guard
+requested_by: gate-house
+standard: net-kingdom/canon/standards/security-layer-model_v0.1.md
+description: 'gate-house asks kings-guard to assent to its placement in the NetKingdom
+  security layer model. (1) kings-guard is Staff — agentic and non-deterministic —
+  not an Engine. Acting at runtime does not make a repository an Engine; being agentic
+  makes it Staff. (2) Consequently its self-description as an adaptive security control
+  plane needs revisiting: control plane is Engine-layer vocabulary (standard section
+  8). This is not a demotion — it is the reason kings-guard may contain a threat only
+  by calling an engine, never by reaching into OpenBao or a cluster directly (the
+  binding rule, standard section 5: Staff never touches Tooling directly). (3) The
+  posture contract with gate-house and its asymmetry: adaptive systems may reduce
+  authority, require step-up, or request containment; they must never probabilistically
+  manufacture additional authority. kings-guard publishes posture, gate-house defines
+  its authority meaning, access-engine renders it. If the binding rule is impractical
+  for containment in a real incident, say so — that is exactly the kind of finding
+  that should change the doctrine rather than be worked around.'
+created: '2026-08-28T19:30:17.201213Z'
+updated: '2026-08-28T19:30:17.201213Z'
+```