diff --git a/docs/WorkerFrameProtocol.md b/docs/WorkerFrameProtocol.md
index 36fe955..3bab2a3 100644
--- a/docs/WorkerFrameProtocol.md
+++ b/docs/WorkerFrameProtocol.md
@@ -88,7 +88,9 @@ priority order. A caller enqueues its frame into the control or event queue
 under a lock, then contends for a single write lock; whichever caller wins
 drains every frame queued at that moment, control frames first and each class
 in FIFO order, so a command reply, fault, heartbeat, or shutdown
-acknowledgement is never delayed behind a backlog of queued events. Priority
+acknowledgement is never delayed behind a backlog of queued events — neither
+in the bytes written nor in the flush that marks them delivered (see the
+class-boundary flush under flush coalescing below). Priority
 only reorders *which frame writes next* — it does not affect the sequence
 value a frame receives (see below), so a caller cannot infer priority class
 from the wire sequence.
@@ -117,13 +119,36 @@ Two failure shapes are distinguished during a drain pass:
   and every frame still queued, then stops draining entirely so no caller
   waits forever on a stream that will not recover.
 
-Flushes are coalesced across a drained batch: each frame in the batch is
-written to the stream without an individual flush, then one `FlushAsync`
-runs after the whole batch, and only then does every successfully-written
-frame's completion resolve — so a caller's `WriteAsync` still does not
-complete until its bytes are both written *and* flushed, but a batch that
-happened to contain several queued frames pays one flush instead of one per
-frame. Note the ordering this implies at the peer: the frames reach the pipe
+Flushes are coalesced across a *run of same-class frames* inside a drain
+pass: each frame in the run is written to the stream without an individual
+flush, then one `FlushAsync` runs — at the end of the pass, and additionally
+at every control-to-event boundary — and only then does every
+successfully-written frame of that run resolve its completion. A caller's
+`WriteAsync` therefore still does not complete until its bytes are both
+written *and* flushed; what changed is *when* that moment arrives
+for a control frame that a pass writes ahead of queued events. It used to be
+the end of the pass, so a heartbeat, command reply, fault, or shutdown
+acknowledgement was written first but only counted as delivered after up to a
+full event batch had been written and flushed behind it. The boundary flush
+closes the control run out before the events are written, so the priority
+class governs the frame's delivery point and not just its byte order. The
+cost stays bounded: a pure-event pass — the event hot path — still pays
+exactly one flush however many frames drain together, a run of control
+frames still pays one for the whole run (never one per heartbeat, the
+syscall-per-frame cost the coalescing removed), and only a pass that actually
+mixes both classes pays a second.
+
+One consequence of the boundary flush is worth stating: a control frame whose
+run has already been flushed and completed is out of the drain's
+written-but-unflushed set, so a *later* failure in the same pass — a broken
+write, or a failed end-of-pass flush — no longer reaches back and fails it.
+That is the honest outcome: its bytes were flushed, so it was delivered. A
+failure of the boundary flush itself is treated exactly like a failed
+end-of-pass flush, and additionally fails the event frame the drain had
+already claimed off its queue (nothing else would ever complete it) along
+with every frame still queued.
+
+Note the ordering all of this implies at the peer: the frames reach the pipe
 before the flush that follows them, so the gateway can read a whole batch
 while the writer has not yet flushed it. Anything observing the flush itself
 (a test counting flushes, for instance) must wait for the flush, not infer it
@@ -134,12 +159,22 @@ drains them together, so a burst of N events costs one flush rather than N —
 the coalescing the batch machinery was built for now engages on the event hot
 path, not only when independent producers happen to queue behind a blocked
 write. Intra-batch order is preserved (FIFO enqueue under one lock), and a
-concurrently queued control frame is still drained ahead of the batch. A
-per-frame rejection inside a batch (for example one oversized event) surfaces
-from the batch's awaited completions as that frame's
+concurrently queued control frame is still drained — and now flushed and
+completed — ahead of the batch's remaining events, which is why a batch a
+control frame cuts into pays one extra flush while an uninterrupted batch
+still pays exactly one. A per-frame rejection inside a batch (for example one
+oversized event) surfaces from the batch's awaited completions as that frame's
 `WorkerFrameProtocolException`; the remaining completions are still observed
 so none faults unobserved.
 
+The completion is the frame's delivery point, not necessarily the instant its
+caller returns. A caller that loses the race for the write lock only observes
+its own completion after the winning drainer releases the lock, so its return
+remains bounded by that drain pass even though its control frame was flushed
+and completed at the class boundary inside it. The boundary flush is what
+makes the delivery point honest; unparking a lock-race loser from the winner's
+pass would be a separate change to the enqueue-then-contend shape.
+
 Cancellation of a `WriteAsync`/`WriteBatchAsync` call that is still waiting
 for the write lock when its token fires tombstones the queued frame: the
 cancelled caller marks its frame under `_gate`, and the draining lock-holder's
diff --git a/src/ZB.MOM.WW.MxGateway.Worker.Tests/Ipc/WorkerFrameProtocolTests.cs b/src/ZB.MOM.WW.MxGateway.Worker.Tests/Ipc/WorkerFrameProtocolTests.cs
index bdeea32..a58fed6 100644
--- a/src/ZB.MOM.WW.MxGateway.Worker.Tests/Ipc/WorkerFrameProtocolTests.cs
+++ b/src/ZB.MOM.WW.MxGateway.Worker.Tests/Ipc/WorkerFrameProtocolTests.cs
@@ -377,6 +377,14 @@ public sealed class WorkerFrameProtocolTests
     /// Verifies the writer coalesces the flush across a batch of frames drained together: four frames
     /// queued behind an in-progress write drain in a single pass and share one FlushAsync, not four.
     /// Every frame still reaches the wire intact.
+    /// <para>
+    /// The burst is all-event on purpose. The control-frame completion decoupling made the drain flush
+    /// at each control-to-event boundary, so a pass that mixes classes legitimately pays one flush per
+    /// class run; the property
+    /// worth pinning is that a run of same-class frames — the event hot path — still costs exactly one
+    /// flush no matter how many frames drain together. The mixed shape has its own count assertion in
+    /// <see cref="DrainPass_MixedClasses_FlushesControlRunBeforeWritingEvents"/>.
+    /// </para>
     /// </summary>
     /// <returns>A task that represents the asynchronous operation.</returns>
     [Fact]
@@ -387,7 +395,7 @@ public sealed class WorkerFrameProtocolTests
         WorkerFrameWriter writer = new(stream, options);
 
         // A blocked first write occupies the writer and holds the lock while more frames queue behind it.
-        Task firstWrite = writer.WriteAsync(CreateGatewayHelloEnvelope(), WorkerFrameWritePriority.Control);
+        Task firstWrite = writer.WriteAsync(CreateEventEnvelope(), WorkerFrameWritePriority.Event);
         await AwaitWithTimeoutAsync(stream.FirstWriteStarted);
 
         Task eventWrite1 = writer.WriteAsync(CreateEventEnvelope(), WorkerFrameWritePriority.Event);
@@ -410,6 +418,179 @@ public sealed class WorkerFrameProtocolTests
         }
     }
 
+    /// <summary>
+    /// Control-frame completion decoupling. A control frame's delivery point must not be charged for
+    /// the event backlog behind it. The priority scheduler already wrote control <em>bytes</em> first,
+    /// but a frame counts as
+    /// delivered only once flushed, and the pass deferred its single flush — and every completion —
+    /// until after the events. The drain now flushes at the control-to-event boundary: with two control
+    /// frames written and the first event write blocked inside the stream, the flush that closes out the
+    /// control run has already run, so the heartbeat or reply is on the pipe rather than waiting behind
+    /// the batch. Exactly two flushes for the pass — one per class run, not one per control frame.
+    /// <para>
+    /// The assertion is on the flush, not on the queued callers' returned tasks, because those tasks are
+    /// still gated by the write lock they lost to the drainer (see the latency contract on
+    /// <c>WorkerFrameWriter.WriteAsync</c>): the completion resolves at the boundary flush, but a
+    /// lock-race loser observes it only once the drainer releases the lock.
+    /// </para>
+    /// </summary>
+    /// <returns>A task that represents the asynchronous operation.</returns>
+    [Fact]
+    public async Task DrainPass_MixedClasses_FlushesControlRunBeforeWritingEvents()
+    {
+        WorkerFrameProtocolOptions options = CreateOptions();
+        // Frame 1 (control) gates the pass open; frame 3 is the pass's first event write, which blocks
+        // so the boundary flush can be observed with the event batch still unwritten.
+        using GatedWriteStream stream = new(secondGateWriteIndex: 3);
+        WorkerFrameWriter writer = new(stream, options);
+
+        Task firstControl = writer.WriteAsync(CreateGatewayHelloEnvelope(), WorkerFrameWritePriority.Control);
+        await AwaitWithTimeoutAsync(stream.FirstWriteStarted);
+
+        Task secondControl = writer.WriteAsync(CreateShutdownAckEnvelope(), WorkerFrameWritePriority.Control);
+        Task eventWrite1 = writer.WriteAsync(CreateEventEnvelope(), WorkerFrameWritePriority.Event);
+        Task eventWrite2 = writer.WriteAsync(CreateEventEnvelope(), WorkerFrameWritePriority.Event);
+        await Task.Delay(50);
+
+        stream.ReleaseFirstWrite();
+
+        // The drain writes both control frames and is now blocked on the first event write.
+        await AwaitWithTimeoutAsync(stream.SecondGateWriteStarted);
+
+        // The control run was flushed before the event batch was written — not after it.
+        Assert.Equal(1, stream.FlushCount);
+        Assert.False(eventWrite1.IsCompleted);
+        Assert.False(eventWrite2.IsCompleted);
+
+        stream.ReleaseSecondGateWrite();
+        await AwaitWithTimeoutAsync(
+            Task.WhenAll(firstControl, secondControl, eventWrite1, eventWrite2));
+
+        // One flush per class run: the control run, then the event run at the end of the pass.
+        Assert.Equal(2, stream.FlushCount);
+
+        stream.Position = 0;
+        WorkerFrameReader reader = new(stream, options);
+        WorkerEnvelope frame1 = await reader.ReadAsync();
+        WorkerEnvelope frame2 = await reader.ReadAsync();
+        WorkerEnvelope frame3 = await reader.ReadAsync();
+        WorkerEnvelope frame4 = await reader.ReadAsync();
+        Assert.Equal(WorkerEnvelope.BodyOneofCase.GatewayHello, frame1.BodyCase);
+        Assert.Equal(WorkerEnvelope.BodyOneofCase.WorkerShutdownAck, frame2.BodyCase);
+        Assert.Equal(WorkerEnvelope.BodyOneofCase.WorkerEvent, frame3.BodyCase);
+        Assert.Equal(WorkerEnvelope.BodyOneofCase.WorkerEvent, frame4.BodyCase);
+        Assert.Equal(stream.Length, stream.Position);
+    }
+
+    /// <summary>
+    /// Control-frame completion decoupling, the inverse guard. An event frame's completion boundary is
+    /// still the end-of-pass flush: a pure-event pass takes no boundary flush, so with two events
+    /// already written and the third
+    /// blocked mid-write, nothing has been flushed and no event can have been reported delivered. Only
+    /// a class transition may move a flush earlier — a plain event backlog may not.
+    /// </summary>
+    /// <returns>A task that represents the asynchronous operation.</returns>
+    [Fact]
+    public async Task DrainPass_PureEventRun_DoesNotFlushBeforeThePassEnds()
+    {
+        WorkerFrameProtocolOptions options = CreateOptions();
+        using GatedWriteStream stream = new(secondGateWriteIndex: 3);
+        WorkerFrameWriter writer = new(stream, options);
+
+        Task eventWrite1 = writer.WriteAsync(CreateEventEnvelope(), WorkerFrameWritePriority.Event);
+        await AwaitWithTimeoutAsync(stream.FirstWriteStarted);
+
+        Task eventWrite2 = writer.WriteAsync(CreateEventEnvelope(), WorkerFrameWritePriority.Event);
+        Task eventWrite3 = writer.WriteAsync(CreateEventEnvelope(), WorkerFrameWritePriority.Event);
+        await Task.Delay(50);
+
+        stream.ReleaseFirstWrite();
+        await AwaitWithTimeoutAsync(stream.SecondGateWriteStarted);
+
+        // Two event frames written, none flushed: no event frame's delivery point has been reached.
+        Assert.Equal(0, stream.FlushCount);
+        Assert.False(eventWrite1.IsCompleted);
+        Assert.False(eventWrite2.IsCompleted);
+
+        stream.ReleaseSecondGateWrite();
+        await AwaitWithTimeoutAsync(Task.WhenAll(eventWrite1, eventWrite2, eventWrite3));
+        Assert.Equal(1, stream.FlushCount);
+    }
+
+    /// <summary>
+    /// Control-frame completion decoupling. The boundary flush is charged per class run, not per
+    /// control frame: a pass carrying nothing but control frames still pays exactly one flush. Flushing
+    /// after every control frame
+    /// would reinstate the syscall-per-heartbeat cost WRK-12 removed.
+    /// </summary>
+    /// <returns>A task that represents the asynchronous operation.</returns>
+    [Fact]
+    public async Task DrainPass_PureControlRun_FlushesOnce()
+    {
+        WorkerFrameProtocolOptions options = CreateOptions();
+        using GatedWriteStream stream = new();
+        WorkerFrameWriter writer = new(stream, options);
+
+        Task firstControl = writer.WriteAsync(CreateGatewayHelloEnvelope(), WorkerFrameWritePriority.Control);
+        await AwaitWithTimeoutAsync(stream.FirstWriteStarted);
+
+        Task secondControl = writer.WriteAsync(CreateGatewayHelloEnvelope(), WorkerFrameWritePriority.Control);
+        Task thirdControl = writer.WriteAsync(CreateShutdownAckEnvelope(), WorkerFrameWritePriority.Control);
+        await Task.Delay(50);
+
+        stream.ReleaseFirstWrite();
+        await AwaitWithTimeoutAsync(Task.WhenAll(firstControl, secondControl, thirdControl));
+
+        Assert.Equal(1, stream.FlushCount);
+    }
+
+    /// <summary>
+    /// Control-frame completion decoupling, the new failure window. The boundary flush is a new place
+    /// the pipe can break with frames written but not yet delivered, so it must fail exactly like the
+    /// end-of-pass flush: every written control
+    /// frame fails, and so do the event frame the drain had already claimed off its queue (nothing else
+    /// would ever complete it) and every frame still queued, so no caller waits forever on a stream that
+    /// will not recover. The event bytes never reach the wire — the drain stops at the fault.
+    /// </summary>
+    /// <returns>A task that represents the asynchronous operation.</returns>
+    [Fact]
+    public async Task DrainPass_WhenBoundaryFlushFails_FailsWrittenClaimedAndQueuedFrames()
+    {
+        const string faultMessage = "boundary flush failed";
+        WorkerFrameProtocolOptions options = CreateOptions();
+        using FlushFaultingGatedStream stream = new(faultMessage);
+        WorkerFrameWriter writer = new(stream, options);
+
+        Task firstControl = writer.WriteAsync(CreateGatewayHelloEnvelope(), WorkerFrameWritePriority.Control);
+        await AwaitWithTimeoutAsync(stream.FirstWriteStarted);
+
+        Task secondControl = writer.WriteAsync(CreateShutdownAckEnvelope(), WorkerFrameWritePriority.Control);
+        Task claimedEvent = writer.WriteAsync(CreateEventEnvelope(), WorkerFrameWritePriority.Event);
+        Task queuedEvent = writer.WriteAsync(CreateEventEnvelope(), WorkerFrameWritePriority.Event);
+        await Task.Delay(50);
+
+        // The drain writes both control frames, claims the first event, and faults on the boundary flush.
+        stream.ReleaseFirstWrite();
+
+        // AwaitWithTimeoutAsync turns a frame nobody ever completes into a TimeoutException — a failed
+        // assertion rather than a hung test run.
+        foreach (Task write in new[] { firstControl, secondControl, claimedEvent, queuedEvent })
+        {
+            IOException failure = await Assert.ThrowsAsync<IOException>(
+                async () => await AwaitWithTimeoutAsync(write));
+            Assert.Equal(faultMessage, failure.Message);
+        }
+
+        // Only the control frames reached the wire; the claimed event was never written.
+        stream.Position = 0;
+        WorkerFrameReader reader = new(stream, options);
+        WorkerEnvelope frame1 = await reader.ReadAsync();
+        WorkerEnvelope frame2 = await reader.ReadAsync();
+        Assert.Equal(WorkerEnvelope.BodyOneofCase.GatewayHello, frame1.BodyCase);
+        Assert.Equal(WorkerEnvelope.BodyOneofCase.WorkerShutdownAck, frame2.BodyCase);
+        Assert.Equal(stream.Length, stream.Position);
+    }
+
     /// <summary>
     /// Verifies a per-frame rejection does not burn a sequence number (WRK-23). The sequence is a
     /// diagnostic counter, so a gap breaks nothing functionally — but an operator correlating a pipe
@@ -877,24 +1058,108 @@ public sealed class WorkerFrameProtocolTests
     }
 
     // A MemoryStream whose first WriteAsync blocks until released, so a test can queue additional frames
-    // behind an in-progress write and observe the writer's priority ordering.
+    // behind an in-progress write and observe the writer's priority ordering. A second, optional gate on
+    // a chosen write index lets a test stop a drain pass mid-flight — at a class boundary, say — and
+    // sample what the writer has already flushed while the rest of the pass is still unwritten.
     private sealed class GatedWriteStream : MemoryStream
     {
         private readonly SemaphoreSlim _release = new SemaphoreSlim(0);
+        private readonly SemaphoreSlim _secondGateRelease = new SemaphoreSlim(0);
         private readonly TaskCompletionSource<bool> _firstWriteStarted =
             new TaskCompletionSource<bool>(TaskCreationOptions.RunContinuationsAsynchronously);
+        private readonly TaskCompletionSource<bool> _secondGateWriteStarted =
+            new TaskCompletionSource<bool>(TaskCreationOptions.RunContinuationsAsynchronously);
+        private readonly int _secondGateWriteIndex;
         private int _writeCount;
         private int _flushCount;
 
+        /// <summary>Initializes a new instance of the GatedWriteStream class.</summary>
+        /// <param name="secondGateWriteIndex">
+        /// One-based index of a later write to block as well, or 0 (the default) to gate only the first
+        /// write. Write indexes start at 1, so 0 never matches.
+        /// </param>
+        public GatedWriteStream(int secondGateWriteIndex = 0)
+        {
+            _secondGateWriteIndex = secondGateWriteIndex;
+        }
+
         /// <summary>Gets a task that completes once the first <see cref="WriteAsync"/> call has started blocking.</summary>
         public Task FirstWriteStarted => _firstWriteStarted.Task;
 
+        /// <summary>Gets a task that completes once the second gated <see cref="WriteAsync"/> call has started blocking.</summary>
+        public Task SecondGateWriteStarted => _secondGateWriteStarted.Task;
+
         /// <summary>Gets the number of <see cref="FlushAsync"/> calls observed so far.</summary>
         public int FlushCount => Volatile.Read(ref _flushCount);
 
         /// <summary>Releases the first blocked write so it can complete.</summary>
         public void ReleaseFirstWrite() => _release.Release();
 
+        /// <summary>Releases the second gated write so it can complete.</summary>
+        public void ReleaseSecondGateWrite() => _secondGateRelease.Release();
+
+        /// <inheritdoc />
+        public override async Task WriteAsync(byte[] buffer, int offset, int count, CancellationToken cancellationToken)
+        {
+            int writeIndex = Interlocked.Increment(ref _writeCount);
+            if (writeIndex == 1)
+            {
+                _firstWriteStarted.TrySetResult(true);
+                await _release.WaitAsync(cancellationToken);
+            }
+            else if (writeIndex == _secondGateWriteIndex)
+            {
+                _secondGateWriteStarted.TrySetResult(true);
+                await _secondGateRelease.WaitAsync(cancellationToken);
+            }
+
+            await base.WriteAsync(buffer, offset, count, cancellationToken);
+        }
+
+        /// <inheritdoc />
+        public override Task FlushAsync(CancellationToken cancellationToken)
+        {
+            Interlocked.Increment(ref _flushCount);
+            return base.FlushAsync(cancellationToken);
+        }
+
+        /// <inheritdoc />
+        protected override void Dispose(bool disposing)
+        {
+            if (disposing)
+            {
+                _release.Dispose();
+                _secondGateRelease.Dispose();
+            }
+
+            base.Dispose(disposing);
+        }
+    }
+
+    // A MemoryStream whose first write blocks until released and whose every FlushAsync throws, so a test
+    // can fault the class-boundary flush with control frames already written and an event frame already
+    // claimed off its queue.
+    private sealed class FlushFaultingGatedStream : MemoryStream
+    {
+        private readonly SemaphoreSlim _release = new SemaphoreSlim(0);
+        private readonly TaskCompletionSource<bool> _firstWriteStarted =
+            new TaskCompletionSource<bool>(TaskCreationOptions.RunContinuationsAsynchronously);
+        private readonly string _faultMessage;
+        private int _writeCount;
+
+        /// <summary>Initializes a new instance of the FlushFaultingGatedStream class.</summary>
+        /// <param name="faultMessage">Message carried by the <see cref="IOException"/> every flush throws.</param>
+        public FlushFaultingGatedStream(string faultMessage)
+        {
+            _faultMessage = faultMessage;
+        }
+
+        /// <summary>Gets a task that completes once the first <see cref="WriteAsync"/> call has started blocking.</summary>
+        public Task FirstWriteStarted => _firstWriteStarted.Task;
+
+        /// <summary>Releases the first blocked write so it can complete.</summary>
+        public void ReleaseFirstWrite() => _release.Release();
+
         /// <inheritdoc />
         public override async Task WriteAsync(byte[] buffer, int offset, int count, CancellationToken cancellationToken)
         {
@@ -910,8 +1175,7 @@ public sealed class WorkerFrameProtocolTests
         /// <inheritdoc />
         public override Task FlushAsync(CancellationToken cancellationToken)
         {
-            Interlocked.Increment(ref _flushCount);
-            return base.FlushAsync(cancellationToken);
+            return Task.FromException(new IOException(_faultMessage));
         }
 
         /// <inheritdoc />
diff --git a/src/ZB.MOM.WW.MxGateway.Worker/Ipc/WorkerFrameWriter.cs b/src/ZB.MOM.WW.MxGateway.Worker/Ipc/WorkerFrameWriter.cs
index cfb20e7..61db4c7 100644
--- a/src/ZB.MOM.WW.MxGateway.Worker/Ipc/WorkerFrameWriter.cs
+++ b/src/ZB.MOM.WW.MxGateway.Worker/Ipc/WorkerFrameWriter.cs
@@ -14,9 +14,11 @@ namespace ZB.MOM.WW.MxGateway.Worker.Ipc;
 /// Writes worker frames to a stream with length-prefixed protobuf serialization. Callers enqueue a
 /// frame at a <see cref="WorkerFrameWritePriority"/> and then contend for a single write lock; whoever
 /// holds the lock drains every queued frame, control frames first, so a reply, fault, or heartbeat is
-/// never delayed behind an event backlog. The envelope <c>Sequence</c> is stamped by the
-/// draining lock-holder at the moment of writing, so the on-wire order and the stamped sequence always
-/// agree even under concurrent callers and priority reordering.
+/// never delayed behind an event backlog — neither in the bytes it writes nor in the flush that
+/// delivers them, because the drain flushes at every control-to-event boundary rather than only at the
+/// end of the pass. The envelope <c>Sequence</c> is stamped by the draining lock-holder at the moment
+/// of writing, so the on-wire order and the stamped sequence always agree even under concurrent callers
+/// and priority reordering.
 /// </summary>
 public sealed class WorkerFrameWriter
 {
@@ -24,15 +26,25 @@ public sealed class WorkerFrameWriter
     {
         /// <summary>Initializes a new instance of the PendingFrame class.</summary>
         /// <param name="envelope">Worker envelope awaiting write.</param>
-        public PendingFrame(WorkerEnvelope envelope)
+        /// <param name="priority">Priority class the frame was queued at.</param>
+        public PendingFrame(WorkerEnvelope envelope, WorkerFrameWritePriority priority)
         {
             Envelope = envelope;
+            IsControl = priority != WorkerFrameWritePriority.Event;
             Completion = new TaskCompletionSource<bool>(TaskCreationOptions.RunContinuationsAsynchronously);
         }
 
         /// <summary>Gets the worker envelope awaiting write.</summary>
         public WorkerEnvelope Envelope { get; }
 
+        /// <summary>
+        /// Gets a value indicating whether this frame was queued as control-plane traffic. Recorded at
+        /// construction from the same expression that picks the queue, so the class the drain sees can
+        /// never disagree with the queue the frame sits in. The drain uses it to flush and complete
+        /// written control frames at the moment it turns to events (see <see cref="DrainQueuedFramesAsync"/>).
+        /// </summary>
+        public bool IsControl { get; }
+
         /// <summary>Gets the completion source signaled once the frame has been written or has failed.</summary>
         public TaskCompletionSource<bool> Completion { get; }
 
@@ -95,6 +107,15 @@ public sealed class WorkerFrameWriter
     /// the canceller behind the very write it is abandoning would defeat the point of cancellation.
     /// The abandoned frame's completion gets a fault-observing continuation so a write failure after
     /// the caller unwinds never raises an unobserved-task exception (NEXT-04).
+    /// <para>
+    /// Latency contract: a control frame's bytes are written, flushed, and its completion
+    /// resolved before the events a drain pass writes after it — the delivery point of a heartbeat,
+    /// reply, fault, or shutdown ack is never charged for the event backlog behind it. The returned
+    /// task can still be later than that instant for a caller that lost the write-lock race: it only
+    /// observes its completion after the winning drainer releases the lock, so its own return remains
+    /// bounded by that pass. That parking is deliberate — the alternative is to race the lock wait
+    /// against the completion, which buys nothing for the frame's delivery.
+    /// </para>
     /// </remarks>
     public async Task WriteAsync(
         WorkerEnvelope envelope,
@@ -106,7 +127,7 @@ public sealed class WorkerFrameWriter
             throw new ArgumentNullException(nameof(envelope));
         }
 
-        PendingFrame frame = new PendingFrame(envelope);
+        PendingFrame frame = new PendingFrame(envelope, priority);
         lock (_gate)
         {
             if (priority == WorkerFrameWritePriority.Event)
@@ -153,8 +174,12 @@ public sealed class WorkerFrameWriter
     /// rather than one per frame (WRK-25, realizing the WRK-12 coalescing on the path it was built
     /// for). Intra-batch order is preserved because the enqueue is atomic under <c>_gate</c> and each
     /// class queue is FIFO; the control-before-event guarantee still holds because any concurrently
-    /// queued control frame is drained ahead of this batch by <see cref="DequeueNext"/>. Every frame's
-    /// "written and flushed before completion" contract is unchanged.
+    /// queued control frame is drained ahead of this batch by <see cref="DequeueNext"/>, and — since
+    /// the control-frame completion decoupling — is also flushed and completed before this batch's
+    /// remaining events are written, so a batch in flight does not delay a control frame's delivery.
+    /// Every frame's "written and flushed before completion" contract is unchanged. An event batch that
+    /// a control frame cuts into therefore pays one extra flush; an uninterrupted batch still pays
+    /// exactly one.
     /// </summary>
     /// <param name="envelopes">Envelopes to write, in order.</param>
     /// <param name="priority">Scheduling priority for the whole batch.</param>
@@ -189,7 +214,7 @@ public sealed class WorkerFrameWriter
         {
             WorkerEnvelope envelope = envelopes[index]
                 ?? throw new ArgumentException("Batch envelopes must not contain null.", nameof(envelopes));
-            frames[index] = new PendingFrame(envelope);
+            frames[index] = new PendingFrame(envelope, priority);
         }
 
         lock (_gate)
@@ -296,14 +321,24 @@ public sealed class WorkerFrameWriter
     // The stream write itself is not cancellable: a frame is written atomically or fails, never left
     // half-written on the pipe because a caller gave up waiting.
     //
-    // Flushes are coalesced across the whole drained batch (WRK-12 / IPC-15): each frame is written to
-    // the stream but not flushed individually; a single FlushAsync runs after the batch, then every
-    // successfully-written frame is completed. A caller's Completion therefore still signals only after
-    // its bytes have been written AND flushed, so the "written and flushed" contract is unchanged — but
-    // a burst of N events now costs one flush syscall instead of N.
+    // Flushes are coalesced within a priority class rather than blindly across the whole pass (WRK-12 /
+    // IPC-15, narrowed by the control-frame completion decoupling): each frame is written to the stream
+    // but not flushed individually, and one FlushAsync runs at the end of the pass — plus one at each
+    // control-to-event boundary, which flushes and completes the control frames written so far before
+    // the event backlog behind them is written, instead of after it. Without that boundary flush the
+    // priority scheduler only got control *bytes* out early: their delivery point, and every waiting
+    // caller's completion, still sat behind up to a full event batch.
+    //
+    // A caller's Completion therefore still signals only after its bytes have been written AND flushed —
+    // the contract is unchanged, the moment it is reached simply stops being pinned to the end of the
+    // pass. Cost is bounded: a pure-event pass (the event hot path) still pays exactly one flush, a burst
+    // of control frames still pays one for the whole burst, and only a pass that actually mixes both
+    // classes pays a second — never one flush per control frame, which is the syscall-per-heartbeat cost
+    // WRK-12 removed.
     private async Task DrainQueuedFramesAsync()
     {
         List<PendingFrame> written = new List<PendingFrame>();
+        bool writtenHoldsControl = false;
         while (true)
         {
             PendingFrame? frame = DequeueNext();
@@ -312,10 +347,40 @@ public sealed class WorkerFrameWriter
                 break;
             }
 
+            if (writtenHoldsControl && !frame.IsControl)
+            {
+                // Class transition: the frames written so far include at least one control frame whose
+                // caller is waiting on delivery. Flush and complete them here rather than parking them
+                // behind the events this pass is about to write. Charged once per transition, not once
+                // per control frame. Event frames already in the list ride along — they too are written
+                // and now flushed, so completing them early is the same contract, earlier.
+                try
+                {
+                    await _stream.FlushAsync(CancellationToken.None).ConfigureAwait(false);
+                }
+                catch (Exception exception)
+                {
+                    // Same shape as the end-of-pass flush failure: the bytes reached the stream but the
+                    // flush that guarantees delivery failed, so the pipe is broken. Fail the frame just
+                    // claimed (it is out of its queue and nothing else will ever complete it), every
+                    // written-but-unflushed frame, and everything still queued, then stop draining.
+                    frame.Completion.TrySetException(exception);
+                    FailFrames(written, exception);
+                    FailAllQueued(exception);
+                    return;
+                }
+
+                // Completed frames leave the list, so a later failure in this pass cannot fail them.
+                CompleteFrames(written);
+                written.Clear();
+                writtenHoldsControl = false;
+            }
+
             try
             {
                 await WriteFrameAsync(frame.Envelope).ConfigureAwait(false);
                 written.Add(frame);
+                writtenHoldsControl |= frame.IsControl;
             }
             catch (WorkerFrameProtocolException exception) when (IsPerFrameRejection(exception))
             {
@@ -348,13 +413,19 @@ public sealed class WorkerFrameWriter
         catch (Exception exception)
         {
             // The batch reached the stream but the flush that guarantees delivery failed: the pipe is
-            // broken. Fail every frame in the batch (the queue was already drained) so no caller treats
-            // an unflushed write as delivered.
+            // broken. Fail every frame still in the batch (the queue was already drained) so no caller
+            // treats an unflushed write as delivered. Frames a boundary flush already completed are not
+            // in the list — their bytes were flushed, so this later failure does not reach back to them.
             FailFrames(written, exception);
             return;
         }
 
-        foreach (PendingFrame frame in written)
+        CompleteFrames(written);
+    }
+
+    private static void CompleteFrames(List<PendingFrame> frames)
+    {
+        foreach (PendingFrame frame in frames)
         {
             frame.Completion.TrySetResult(true);
         }