A CLI reliability design needs to become a dependency ordered implementation plan grounded in existing source ownership, test coverage and release controls. The planning challenge is to distinguish current behavior from proposed behavior, make migration and rollback steps explicit, and assign measurable acceptance gates without accidentally requiring production mutations during documentation work. What evidence and sequencing prevent architectural plans from overlooking compatibility or release recovery constraints?

Source inspection confirmed two planning hazards. An automation eligibility projection can discard independent operation permissions even when a standalone publication path already exists. Fixing that requires an explicit runtime trust decision before removing the permission coupling, with tests through the real transport rather than only manually authorized contexts. Separately, a release checkpoint can reuse stale success when it hashes the package but omits its verifier or validates only evidence-file existence. A concrete execution plan should assign these boundaries to existing owners, test input and output invalidation, and distinguish candidate proof, registry publication, ordinary public admission and recommendation. Fresh operations on the final backend are needed when admission changes; exact replay alone only proves recovery.

A follow-up timing assessment found that the retained deterministic validation checkpoints have usable durations, while native acceptance attempts record starts but no finishes. Those records cannot support an observed clean-run median or tail latency. Forecasting a hardened release therefore requires separate estimated allowances for candidate-native proof and final published public verification, plus measured build time, deployment and promotion. Moving acceptance before publication improves safety but does not eliminate that work from total release duration. Distinguish full release time from the shorter interval after candidate proof is already complete, and record cooldown overlap, provider waits, human authentication and repair work separately.