diff --git a/docs/port/HANDOFF.md b/docs/port/HANDOFF.md
index fc993a78..85ee9687 100644
--- a/docs/port/HANDOFF.md
+++ b/docs/port/HANDOFF.md
@@ -25,6 +25,89 @@ delivered.
 
 
 
+## ✅ 2026-08-31 (final) — your standing ask, the title, and a coverage claim of mine that was wrong
+
+**`ptframe4`, `pteff21`, `pteff22`, `pteff23` are ADDITIVE.** So is `pteff10`.
+All measured, none inferred. You were right not to take `ptframe4` from the
+pattern — but the reason they were missing was mine, not the game's.
+
+🔴 **They were in a draw all along.** Canary's vertex dump was capped at **8
+vertices = two quads**. `EXTRAS`' 24-index additive batch holds **six**, so the
+log printed `pteff20` and `ptframe3` and silently dropped the other four. Cap
+raised to 64, screen re-captured:
+
+| element | quad px | blend |
+|---|---|---|
+| `pteff20`, `ptframe3`, **`ptframe4`**, **`pteff21`**, **`pteff22`**, **`pteff23`** | one 24-index draw | **ADDITIVE** |
+| **`pteff10`** | 819.2 × 720 | **ADDITIVE** |
+| `ptmsg2`, `pttitle`, `ptbtn11f`, `ptbtn12`, `ptbtn13`, the focus ring | one 24-index draw | alpha-over |
+
+🟡 **One flag on `pteff10` before you adopt it.** You measure it as *nearly
+exact* under alpha-over, and the game draws it additive. Both can be true for a
+dim wholly-semi-transparent glow (max alpha 130) over a dark background, where
+the two nearly coincide — but it is the one row here your renderer does **not**
+independently corroborate.
+
+📌 **`pteff10` also needed the resting SCALE to identify at all**: it ships as
+409 × 144 and is drawn at **200 % × 500 % = 816 × 720**. My matcher's "try 1× or
+2×" rule could not name it at any scale and printed a near miss against something
+else — a failure wearing the clothes of an answer. Now it matches on `pivot × 2 ×
+rest scale` as well as texture size, with the tolerance set to the log's own NDC
+print quantisation.
+
+### The TITLE — and it refutes the obvious generalisation
+
+| element | blend |
+|---|---|
+| `ptbase2`, `ptlogo1`, `ptlogo2`, `ptlogo_tm`, `ptcopyright`, **`ptlogo_back2`**, **`ptlogo_back2eff`**, `ptbtn00` | alpha-over |
+| the two rotated sweep strips, **`ptbtn00f`** | **ADDITIVE** |
+
+🔴 **`ptlogo_back2` and `ptlogo_back2eff` are ALPHA-OVER.** They are the title's
+frame-shaped elements — large, dark, 94 %/87 % transparent, every surface
+property your `ptframe*` have — and the game does **not** draw them additive. So
+*"frame-shaped and mostly transparent ⇒ additive"* is dead on the one screen that
+could test it. Keep reading the table as per-element facts.
+
+📌 **`ptbtn00f` is additive and its own base `ptbtn00` is not.** The `PRESS Ⓐ`
+plate's highlight is composited additively over its base — that is what the
+documented pulse is made of, and a renderer drawing both alpha-over cannot reach
+the pulse's peak by any pacing.
+
+### Your sweep flag: they ARE on screen on the main menu, and they move
+
+You asked whether my capture retains NDC positions. It does.
+
+| session | frame | strip A x | strip B x | vertex alpha |
+|---|---|---|---|---|
+| 1 | 0 | `0.69 … 2.08` | `−0.61 … 1.42` | `EF` / `9A` |
+| 1 | 4 | `0.72 … 2.11` | `−0.64 … 1.39` | `F0` / `9C` |
+| 1 | 5 | `0.76 … 2.15` | `−0.68 … 1.35` | `F2` / `9D` |
+| 2 | — | `0.24 … 1.62` | `−1.67 … 0.36` | `D7` / `C7` |
+
+NDC spans `[−1, +1]`. **Both strips overlap the screen in every captured frame**,
+step ~0.03 NDC (~19 px) per frame in **opposite** directions, and their vertex
+alpha ramps with them. Two sessions catch them at different phases, so they
+free-run. **The leaf group runs on the main menu — "the game does not draw them
+here" is no longer available as an explanation for your phase sweep.**
+
+⚠️ It does not say they *contribute* much: additive, vertex alpha 0.60–0.95, over
+a texture that is overwhelmingly low-alpha. This measures submission and geometry.
+
+### 🔴 And my coverage claim was wrong — you were right
+
+The blend page said everything on both screens was covered but for `pteff10`.
+Counting your way — a per-draw row **or** a prose row — it was **five, not one**,
+and on `EXTRAS` the four extras were exactly the elements you measure as worst.
+Corrected in place. Your smaller point lands too: *"every button"* was a class
+generalisation in the page that tells you not to make them. It is now five
+buttons plus the ring, individually, on the main menu, and `EXTRAS`' buttons
+measured separately above.
+
+### The menu replicates, three sessions
+
+Runs 2 and 3, separate boots, reproduce the main menu's assignment **draw for
+draw**. The "one session" caveat is retired.
+
 ## ✅ 2026-08-31 (later) — **ADDITIVE.** Measured off the GPU. Stop authoring it.
 
 `ptframe1`, `ptframe2` and `ptframe3` are drawn with **`RB_BLENDCONTROL0 =