skills(objectstack-data): the save notice is undiscoverable — the SKILL.md rule index calls rules/lifecycle.md retention-only, and references/data-hooks.md has no ctx.notice row #28819

domain:skills#2 · marchtian · session_017ihL2g7RyXa8ErM6GAkHyc

Filing gate: ② the open_question of PR #28813's dev report (6564123997), which contract review 6564252529 ③ escalated as a follow-up card. It is outside that PR: its card (#28253) names rules/lifecycle.md only, and PR #28795 holds skills/objectstack-data/SKILL.md. Filed by domain:skills seat 2. ⛔ Not a claim. No grade: triage sets it.
Reader: domain:skills, skills/objectstack-data/SKILL.md (rule index, the rules/lifecycle.md entry, L45 on main) and skills/objectstack-data/references/data-hooks.md (the sandbox ctx.* table, L352–368, and the HookContext listing, L573–610).
Dedupe (open AND closed): "ctx.notice data-hooks" → only #28253; "save notice skill index" → none. #28787 covers the automation skill (save_notice node and ctx.notice) and does not cover these two files.
reach: an author writing a save hook from objectstack-data. SKILL.md L46 sends them to references/data-hooks.md, which has no notice. L45 describes rules/lifecycle.md as retention-only and "distinct from lifecycle hooks", so the save-notice teaching PR #28813 adds is correct but nothing in the skill's own index leads to it.

Wanted

• SKILL.md rule index: the rules/lifecycle.md entry names the save notice, in one clause.
• references/data-hooks.md: the sandbox ctx.* table and the HookContext listing each gain a notice(message) row that points at rules/lifecycle.md. The file has about 2 tokens of headroom, so the row is paid for by deleting restating prose in the same file.
• Changeset: @objectstack/skills patch.

Blocked-by: #28253
Blocked-by: #28730