diff --git a/docs/deployment-runbook.md b/docs/deployment-runbook.md
index 35c23f5..30c2e11 100644
--- a/docs/deployment-runbook.md
+++ b/docs/deployment-runbook.md
@@ -6,6 +6,21 @@ modes are the thing this plan is shaped around rather than a list of hopes.
 `docs/semantic-parity.md` is the gate; this file is what to actually do, in
 order, and what to do when a stage goes wrong.
 
+Three terms used throughout, since they are load-bearing here and opaque cold:
+
+- **the gate** — `semantic-parity.md`, the row-by-row record of which
+  behaviours are *proven* equivalent to upstream Jetstream V2. Nothing deploys
+  on the strength of a passing test alone; the gate is what says a surface is
+  actually settled.
+- **a receipt** — a JSON file under `receipts/` binding one run of the full
+  suite to one **image digest** (`receipts/<sha>.json`). It records each suite's
+  verdict, and a `skipped` verdict blocks admission exactly like a failure —
+  the point is that nothing untested rides along. An **admitted artifact** is an
+  image whose digest has such a receipt with everything passing.
+- **cutover** — the moment the lifecycle leaves merge for steady state and
+  serving stops returning 503. Before it, the archive is still being assembled;
+  after it, clients are being answered.
+
 The rule underneath every stage: **a stage that cannot be measured has not
 succeeded.** All three previous runs ended because something was true that the
 running system could not tell us.
@@ -95,11 +110,22 @@ than trusting:
 | Scoped to a target nobody had measured | Stage 0b feasibility check, with the head-of-list trap named |
 | Experiment 3's tuning deployed unnoticed | `assert_deploy_args.py` refuses backfill flags no receipt covers |
 
-**Admitted artifact for this run:**
-`sha256:4300104135c6fd35bd13a264b744c5f842c41ee9a51e0cf1c57c9a59640551a2`
-(`receipts/eb95c14.json`, 20/20 suites, native linux/amd64).
-
-It carries one fix beyond the previous artifact, and it is the kind this
+**Admitted artifact actually deployed for experiment 6:**
+`sha256:0f45468c2fdba928fb3a9830f79d4693960a9c0ae2174ae042ecb01dfd33e0cd`
+(`receipts/29705cb.json`, 20/20 suites all `pass`, receipt cut 2026-07-28
+04:36 UTC against an 05:01 UTC start, tag `atcr.io/zat.dev/stream:29705cb`).
+
+This superseded `eb95c14`
+(`sha256:4300104135c6fd35bd13a264b744c5f842c41ee9a51e0cf1c57c9a59640551a2`),
+which earlier revisions of this file named as the artifact for the run. Both
+were properly admitted; the runbook simply was not updated when the image moved.
+**Check the receipt against the running digest rather than trusting this
+paragraph** — `docker inspect` the workload container and compare to
+`receipts/<sha>.json`'s `image.registry_digest`. This block is the thing an
+operator reads mid-incident to learn what is deployed, so a stale digest here is
+worse than no digest.
+
+The `eb95c14` fix below is carried forward into `29705cb`. It is the kind this
 runbook exists for: three sites reported `OutOfMemory` as a *structural* verdict
 about a repository's CAR, and the engine retires a repository permanently on
 that verdict. Under whole-network memory pressure — experiment 3's 24.3 GB —