docs: arch-review remediation — component docs sweep, execution log, residuals register

Final consistency sweep per plan §6: verified component docs against shipped
WP1-WP3 + adversarial-review-fix state, corrected drift found in SiteRuntime
(recursion-exempt run cap, stale ScriptExecutionActor/AlarmExecutionActor
references), TemplateEngine (BundleImporter watermark path), DeploymentManager
(phase-2 PendingDeployment staging), CentralUI (shared KPI cache, dedup'd alarm
poll, render coalescing), StoreAndForward (rate-limited drop logging), and
ConfigurationDatabase (documented DbContext-pooling non-adoption). Updated the
docs/components/ developer-reference set (SiteRuntime, SiteEventLogging,
InboundAPI) to drop the deleted per-run actor classes. Amended one known-issue
for the superseding MaxBatchSize:64 read-page pin. Added CLAUDE.md bullets for
stream graceful-completion reconnect, the required site audit DB path, honest
CLI HTTP timeouts, bulk DeploySiteAsync, and LocalDb 0.2.1. New execution log
records the phase→commit map, gate results, adversarial-review tally, the
three test-flake root causes, and the nine-item residuals register.

docs/requirements/Component-ConfigurationDatabase.md

@@ -432,6 +432,7 @@ The `AuditLog` table is append-only and grows by every script-trust-boundary eve
 - Connection strings are provided via the Host's `DatabaseConfiguration` options (bound from `appsettings.json`).
 - EF Core manages connection pooling via the underlying ADO.NET SQL Server provider.
 - The DbContext is registered as a **scoped** service in the DI container, ensuring each request/operation gets its own instance.
+- **`DbContext` pooling (`AddDbContextPool`) is deliberately NOT used (arch-review WP2.2 — verified, not overlooked).** Pooling requires a context with a single public constructor taking only `DbContextOptions<TContext>`; `ScadaBridgeDbContext` has a second, runtime constructor taking `IDataProtectionProvider`, because the encrypting value converter for secret-bearing columns is built during `OnModelCreating` from that provider — and the model itself *differs* between the two constructors (no provider ⇒ no encrypting converter), so a pooled activator could silently produce a context that reads secret columns as ciphertext. Adopting pooling would mean moving the protector out of the constructor into a `DbContextOptions` extension — a change to the secrets-at-rest path, not a performance refactor — so it is deferred rather than folded into this pass.
 - No connection management for the Machine Data Database — that is handled separately by consumers (Inbound API scripts, external system gateway).
 
 ---