diff --git a/docs/port/DECISIONS.md b/docs/port/DECISIONS.md
index c6f56aec..56fcff61 100644
--- a/docs/port/DECISIONS.md
+++ b/docs/port/DECISIONS.md
@@ -11725,3 +11725,38 @@ changing what it asks would be overstepping.**
 
 ⚠️ `MODDING.md` is still unaudited. I am naming that rather than quietly finishing
 one of two.
+
+### `MODDING.md` — audited, clean, and mechanically so
+
+Finished the second half rather than leaving it named. `MODDING.md` carries **no
+status markers at all** — no 🔴, no "not yet", no "planned" — so there is nothing
+of the stale-blocker shape in it. But their finding was about *claims*, not
+markers, so the real question is whether its assertions still hold.
+
+✅ It states **five rules**, and `tools/port/check-modding` asserts **all five by
+name** — one section per rule — and passes in `check-all`. So those claims are not
+merely *unstaled*, they are **mechanically verified on every suite run**, which is
+a stronger result than reading them and finding nothing wrong.
+
+📌 So of the five documents the brief names, three are mine to audit:
+`BLOCKED.md` (five rows struck, earlier), `PORT-MISSION.md` (**two stale blockers,
+corrected above**), `MODDING.md` (clean, checker-backed). `PROTOCOL.md` and
+`HANDOFF.md` are not mine to correct — and `HANDOFF.md` as I read it is the stale
+`main` copy, which is its own recorded problem.
+
+### Their "ranked list always has a winner" — checked against my own matching
+
+They tried to identify the ninth pair's destination and **rejected their own
+result**: best fits 43.30 (margin 5.88) and 45.74 (margin 2.28) against a
+calibration putting a true match at ~18–20 with margin ~10. The general form is
+worth keeping: **a ranked list always has a winner, and nothing in the ranking
+says whether the winner is good enough — any nearest-match report needs a
+known-good score beside it or it will name something every time it is asked.**
+
+✅ Checked my own instance. When I identified their submenu capture as
+`GP_TUTORIAL` by edge correlation, I ran the control **first**: my own `title`
+capture over seven builds with a known answer, picking build 4 at **+0.2792**,
+1.4× over second. The submenu then scored **+0.4962** with a 1.58× margin —
+*above* the calibrated true-match score, not merely top of a list. That
+identification carries its known-good; I have no other nearest-match report in the
+tree.