chore: fill derivable placeholders, drop false ARCHITECTURE, surface the rest

[hyperpolymath]

Automated estate top-up. Nothing here invents a value.

Filled — every token with one mechanical answer (owner, repo, forge, author, dates, project name, main branch). Identity from the git remote, dates from the clock, name from the README H1.

Not filled, on purpose — SECURITY_EMAIL (two competing addresses exist in the estate), RESPONSE_TIME, CONDUCT_TEAM (substitutes into "a {{CONDUCT_TEAM}} member", which is not English), WEBSITE, PROJECT_DESCRIPTION, LANG_STACK. More than one defensible answer exists, and a confident wrong value is worse than a visible gap.

Deleted — ARCHITECTURE.md where it is byte-identical to the 346-copy estate boilerplate (blob 607e3d8c). Those 33 lines describe a src/ tests/ docs/ scripts/ config/ tree this repo does not have. Matched by hash, so a genuinely written ARCHITECTURE can never be caught by it.

CODEOWNERS — the solo form from standards/CODEOWNERS-POLICY.adoc Rule 1, which forbids a catch-all where the only owner is the sole maintainer. templates/CODEOWNERS contradicts that policy; the policy is versioned, dated and resolves standards#55, so it wins. Genuine co-owners (Rule 2) are untouched.

Surfaced — REQUIRES_INITIALISATION.md plus a priority action in 0-AI-MANIFEST.a2ml, listing every remaining token, what it means, which files it belongs in, why it was not done already, and that it is to be deleted only when the work is genuinely complete.

Built from a fresh clone of origin/main, never a local checkout — several of those are dirty and hold unpushed commits.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

[sonarqubecloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
0.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud

[gitar-bot]

⚠️ Bug: PROJECT_NAME filled with "Introduction" from README H1

The estate top-up derived PROJECT_NAME from the README's first H1, but that heading is # Introduction, not the project name — the actual name is "AVOW Protocol" (the bold lead-in above the TOC). As a result published security/conduct docs now read "When using Introduction, we recommend…", "help keep Introduction and its users safe", and the CoC pledge "participation in Introduction a harassment-free experience". Replace these occurrences of Introduction with AVOW Protocol (and consider the telegram-bot files, whose own README H1 is "STAMP Telegram Bot").

Use the real project name instead of the README section heading "Introduction".:

When using AVOW Protocol, we recommend:
...
*Thank you for helping keep AVOW Protocol and its users safe.* 🛡️

_{Was this helpful? React with 👍 / 👎}

[gitar-bot]

⚠️ This PR is blocked due to unresolved code review findings.

_{Configure merge blocking · Maintainers can dismiss this review.}

[hyperpolymath]

Closing in favour of a reworked substituter — hyperpolymath/standards#590.

This sweep filled {{TOKEN}} placeholders by plain text replacement across every file. Across the 90 repositories reviewed it drew 141 findings, and one is severe:

sed "s/{{PROJECT_NAME}}/$name/g"  →  sed "s/Conative Gating/$name/g"
sed -e "s/{{DATE}}/$DATE/g"       →  sed -e "s/2026-08-05/$DATE/g"

Those are the scripts whose job is to perform template substitution. Filling the left-hand side of their own sed expressions means template application silently stops working — and the breakage stays invisible until someone mints a repository from the template and gets a half-substituted tree.

Four further shapes came out of the same cause:

• release.sh no longer substitutes {{DATE}} into release notes
• just's own {{ARGS}} reported as an unfilled token, leaving repos permanently "not initialised"
• instructional docs rewritten to "Replace laminar, laminar, {{DEPS}} with actuals"
• documentation describing placeholders had its examples filled in

The rule plain replacement cannot express: a placeholder is sometimes a value to fill and sometimes the subject being discussed. standards#590 encodes that distinction and is tested against this exact corruption (9/9, the first three cases reproducing it).

Nothing here is lost — the placeholder filling will be redone with that tool. Closing rather than fixing forward because repairing 289 branches individually would repeat the mistake at the same scale.