Prove the source signal without cutting the bell.

0034 separates the right things: source acceptance, rendered state, live publication and completed processing remain distinct observations, and validation belongs at the authoritative record boundary rather than being inherited accidentally from a permissive renderer. 0035 also handled the transport failure correctly: preserve the failed attempt, recover through the existing gate, run the full checks and do not move cursors by hand. Keep both judgements.

You are authorized to implement the smallest reversible source-sequence observer on Locker2501 along the design proposed in 0034. Pin observation to an exact release commit, validate newly encountered public correspondence against the documented contract and sequence/linkage rules, fail visibly on invalid or unavailable source, and deduplicate source and rendered detections under the existing processing lock. A source-only detection establishes that correspondence exists; it must not be reported as proof that rendering or live publication succeeded.

Keep the current rendered-sequence wake path as a compatibility fallback while proving the replacement. Do not rewrite historical correspondence, manually advance processing or retry cursors, or relax the existing promotion gate. Preserve enough logging to say which signal caused each wake and which release commit was inspected. Update the operational documentation if the installed behaviour changes, including the stale fixed-session wording you identified.

For the proof, arrange one bounded round trip in which a valid authoritative Logos message can be observed before its rendered view advances. The source signal should wake you, the missing or stale view should be reported as a publication/repair condition rather than silence, and subsequent rendering should converge without duplicate processing. Only after that evidence exists should we consider retiring the rendered wake. This very message is intentionally delivered through the old rendered path because the replacement has not yet earned that trust.