docs(milestone): complete v1.22 — Nova Deck Layout Fix

9 requirements complete (REQ-254..262):
- P1: theme-css — section padding + overflow + image rules + title
  chrome + spacing tightening (REQ-254,255,256)
- P2: render-scripts — delete render_deck.sh, pin CLI versions, 2x
  scale + transparent bg (REQ-257,258)
- P3: mermaid-relayout — telemetry TB + platform-pipeline 4-node TB,
  re-rendered 2x transparent (REQ-259,260)
- P4: deck-content — split slides 3+8 (18->20 main), trim 8
  overflowing slides, remove redundant header (REQ-261)
- P5: render-and-test — re-render HTML+PPTX, add 9 layout/aspect-
  ratio/theme-structural tests (REQ-262)
- P6: final review + audit + ship (this commit)

Final review fixes: source .md + talking-points re-synced to 20-slide
structure; ![h:480 class:tall] directives applied; README stale
references updated; CSS trailing newline added.

Root cause: nova-sp-theme.css had zero section padding (declared
/* @theme nova-sp */ as a comment, not the @theme directive; did not
@import Marp default theme). Combined with overflow:hidden, blunt
img max-height:320px, header+footer chrome on every slide, and two
P5 diagrams with extreme aspect ratios (13.52x and 0.63x), 8 of 19
slides overflowed. NOT a P5 regression — theme CSS byte-identical
P3->P5; P5 denser content made pre-existing flaws visible.

Tags on v1.21.x line (v1.21.0 P0 -> v1.21.6 P6 final = milestone
release). 32 slide tests pass (23 original + 9 new). 94 key-file
tests pass. Pipeline check exit 0.

---ci---
project: acdl
phase: 6
milestone: v1.22
status: complete
phase_role: final
requirements:
  covered: [REQ-254,REQ-255,REQ-256,REQ-257,REQ-258,REQ-259,REQ-260,REQ-261,REQ-262]
  partial: []
---/ci---

docs/presentations/README.md

@@ -13,7 +13,7 @@ every deck and a presenter-ready cue sheet for delivery.
 
 ```
 Step 1: full markdown       Step 2: Marp deck           Step 3: HTML + PPTX         Step 4: Talking points
-(source of truth)    ──►    (lean, 19 slides)    ──►    (rendered)           ──►    (presenter cues)
+(source of truth)    ──►    (lean, 21 slides)    ──►    (rendered)           ──►    (presenter cues)
 *.md                        *-marp.md                   *.html / *.pptx             *-talking-points.md
 + speaker notes             + embedded PNG diagrams                                 + 3-6 bullets per slide
 + mermaid code blocks       + Marp frontmatter                                     + key takeaway per slide
@@ -95,7 +95,7 @@ Distill the source of truth (Step 1) into presenter-ready cues, indexed by
 the Marp deck (Step 2) slide structure:
 
 - **One section per Marp slide** — `## Slide N — Title`, matching the Marp
-  deck's 18 main + 1 appendix slide structure exactly.
+  deck's 20 main + 1 appendix slide structure exactly.
 - **3-6 talking point bullets per slide** — punchy, actionable cues distilled
   from the source markdown's speaker notes.
 - **Key takeaway per slide** — the one memorable thing the audience should
@@ -108,8 +108,8 @@ the Marp deck (Step 2) slide structure:
 ```
 docs/presentations/
 ├── README.md                                  ← this file
-├── nova-autonomous-cloud-delivery.md                 ← Step 1: full source of truth (18 main slides + speaker notes)
-├── nova-autonomous-cloud-delivery-marp.md            ← Step 2: Marp deck (18 main + 1 appendix = 19 slides)
+├── nova-autonomous-cloud-delivery.md                 ← Step 1: full source of truth (20 main slides + speaker notes)
+├── nova-autonomous-cloud-delivery-marp.md            ← Step 2: Marp deck (20 main + 1 appendix = 21 slides)
 ├── nova-autonomous-cloud-delivery.html               ← Step 3: rendered HTML (committed, S&P-themed)
 ├── nova-autonomous-cloud-delivery.pptx               ← Step 3: rendered PPTX (committed, S&P-themed)
 ├── nova-autonomous-cloud-delivery-talking-points.md  ← Step 4: presenter cues (19 sections)
@@ -236,7 +236,7 @@ attached to the phase's release.
 
 | Deck | Source of truth (Step 1) | Marp deck (Step 2) | Rendered HTML + PPTX (Step 3) | Talking points (Step 4) | Slides | Audience |
 |---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
-| Nova — The Autonomous Cloud Delivery Platform | `nova-autonomous-cloud-delivery.md` | `nova-autonomous-cloud-delivery-marp.md` | `nova-autonomous-cloud-delivery.html` + `.pptx` (committed + release-attached) | `nova-autonomous-cloud-delivery-talking-points.md` | 18 main + 1 appendix (19) | CTO, Head of Cloud, Head of Infra, Head of DevOps |
+| Nova — The Autonomous Cloud Delivery Platform | `nova-autonomous-cloud-delivery.md` | `nova-autonomous-cloud-delivery-marp.md` | `nova-autonomous-cloud-delivery.html` + `.pptx` (committed + release-attached) | `nova-autonomous-cloud-delivery-talking-points.md` | 20 main + 1 appendix (21) | CTO, Head of Cloud, Head of Infra, Head of DevOps |
 
 > **v1.21:** the deck was renamed from "No-Humans Infrastructure Platform"
 > to "Autonomous Cloud Delivery Platform" (professional framing; conveys

docs/presentations/assets/nova-sp-theme.css

@@ -128,4 +128,4 @@ strong { color: var(--sp-red); }
  * we clamp to `hidden` so the exported slide is clean. */
 @media print {
   section { overflow: hidden; }
-}
+}

docs/presentations/nova-autonomous-cloud-delivery-marp.md

@@ -106,7 +106,7 @@ Every hour a developer spends writing, deploying, fixing, or remediating infrast
 
 **How intent becomes verified infrastructure — fail-fast policy scanning before the plan, runtime scanning after it.**
 
-![h:480](assets/png/platform-pipeline.png)
+![h:480 class:tall](assets/png/platform-pipeline.png)
 
 - **Contract → resolver → adapter → Checkov on static code (before plan) → terraform plan → Wiz on the plan → confidence signal → stage gate → apply → evidence + ledger**
 - **Fail-fast, quick feedback** — Checkov runs on the authored Terraform code before `terraform plan` so developers get immediate policy feedback
@@ -166,7 +166,7 @@ Separation-of-duties on prod: the approver cannot be the same person who built t
 
 **Every metric in this deck is traceable to a real emitted signal — the live-ops dashboard makes operations visible in PowerBI.**
 
-![h:480](assets/png/telemetry-live-ops.png)
+![h:480 class:tall](assets/png/telemetry-live-ops.png)
 
 - **Platform components → CloudEvents envelope → event log + decision ledger + run records → collector → cold store → PowerBI views → live ops dashboard**
 - **The live ops dashboard (PowerBI)** surfaces the four CTO-grade metrics (Lead Time, Vulnerability Count, MTTR, Cloud Spend) alongside trust metrics (Decision Ledger coverage, Attestation coverage) and efficiency metrics (touchless resolution, escalation frequency)

docs/presentations/nova-autonomous-cloud-delivery-talking-points.md

@@ -21,104 +21,120 @@
 - State the attestation model up front: QA for production, SRE for operational readiness
 - **Key takeaway:** autonomous operations with provable trust — security, remediation velocity, reliability, lead time made visible, not promised
 
-### Slide 3 — Strategic Objectives + Anti-Goals
+### Slide 3 — Strategic Objectives
+- Objective #1: zero-touch operations — autonomy as the default, not the demo; stage-gate attestation (QA, SRE) remains human by design
 - Objective #2 is the one to land carefully: trust = deterministic scoring, not an LLM; the platform functions without AI
 - Objective #3: four CTO-grade metrics (Lead Time, Vuln Count, MTTR, Spend) — all flow into PowerBI
 - Objective #4 is the integration thesis: Nova integrates with any upstream source; provides skills + MCP; all prod intents go through the same controls
-- Anti-goals #3 and #4 protect the scope: not an upstream dev platform, not a PDLC replacement
-- **Key takeaway:** purpose-built for infra ops, integrates with any source through one contract, measures success on four CTO metrics
+- **Key takeaway:** the scope is explicit — Nova governs infra + delivery, integrates with any source through one contract, measures success on four CTO metrics
 
-### Slide 4 — Scope: Downstream of PDLC
+### Slide 4 — Anti-Goals (What Nova Is NOT)
+- Not a general-purpose AI agent platform
+- Not a system that removes humans from accountability — only from normal operations
+- Not an upstream development platform (no product backlogs, IDE, code authorship)
+- Not a replacement for the Product Development Lifecycle (PDLC)
+- Anti-goals #3 and #4 protect the scope boundary — Nova will not become an IDE or a product-planning tool
+- **Key takeaway:** the boundaries are explicit — Nova is purpose-built for infra ops + delivery, not a general-purpose AI agent or an upstream dev platform
+
+### Slide 5 — Scope: Downstream of PDLC
 - Nova governs infra + delivery only; the PDLC (backlog, code authorship, IDE) is upstream — Nova never penetrates it
 - Integration is only through the validated contract boundary
 - Any upstream source (AI agent, agentic SDLC, dev platform) produces submissions subject to the same compliance standards
 - Nova validates the submission, not the author
 - **Key takeaway:** Nova is purpose-built for infrastructure operations; the scope boundary is clean and bounded
 
-### Slide 5 — RACI: Who Owns What
+### Slide 6 — RACI: Who Owns What
 - Four roles now: Citizen Developer, Platform, Quality Engineering, SRE
 - Quality attestation is owned by Quality Engineering (not the Platform); Production readiness is owned by SRE
 - The Platform runs the checks agentically but is never the Accountable party for the gate — that separation keeps the platform honest
 - Production readiness is co-owned: the platform runs attestations; the citizen developer authorizes the promotion at the stage gate
 - **Key takeaway:** you bring FRs + UAT; Nova provides NFRs + infra; QE guards the gate evidence; SRE signs off on production readiness
 
-### Slide 6 — The Platform Pipeline
+### Slide 7 — The Platform Pipeline
 - Walk the pipeline left-to-right: contract → resolver → adapter → Checkov (static) → plan → Wiz (on plan) → confidence → gate → apply
 - Two-stage scan: Checkov on static code BEFORE the plan (fail-fast dev feedback); Wiz on the plan (or Checkov as drop-in if no Wiz creds)
 - Never both Wiz + Checkov on the plan — avoid duplicate noise
 - Dev is autonomous; qa/prod/dr require attestation (QA for quality, SRE for production readiness)
 - **Key takeaway:** two layers of scanning, zero operator involvement in normal operations
 
-### Slide 7 — The Decision Ledger
+### Slide 8 — The Decision Ledger
 - "AI decisions" are really automated decisions — deterministic scripts calculate a score; the platform functions without AI
 - Do not dwell on the storage substrate — the value is accountability (immutable, queryable, traceable to outcome), not the database
 - Every stage-gate attestation is captured with approver identity and the evidence presented
 - When an LLM planner is added later, it emits richer alternatives without breaking the schema
 - **Key takeaway:** autonomous is defensible because every decision is immutable, queryable, accountable — and "automated" means deterministic scoring, not a black-box LLM
 
-### Slide 8 — The Attestation Matrix
-- The matrix is not a rubber stamp — structured, freshness-validated, separation-of-duties-enforced
+### Slide 9 — Attestation Matrix: QA
+- The matrix is not a rubber stamp — structured, freshness-validated
 - Each concern now has a plain-language description of what is being attested (the old "operator-supplied" label is gone)
-- SoD on prod: the approver can't be the same person who built it
+- Three QA concerns: functional correctness (24h), performance baseline (7d), security posture (24h)
+- Each concern has a freshness window — evidence older than the window does not satisfy the gate
+- **Key takeaway:** QA signs off on quality before any promotion — the gate is explicit, not implicit
+
+### Slide 10 — Attestation Matrix: Prod/DR
+- Seven prod/DR concerns: operational readiness, incident response, capacity & cost, DR drill, chaos, backup, DR region deploy
+- SRE signs off on operability (runbooks, dashboards, on-call), incident response, capacity, and the three resilience checks
+- Each concern has a freshness window — 30d/90d/180d depending on the control
+- SoD on prod: the approver can't be the same person who built it — the rule that keeps the gate honest
 - **Key takeaway:** autonomy in operations, human in accountability, by design — the matrix is what makes autonomous operations safe enough to trust in production
 
-### Slide 9 — Telemetry & Live Ops
+### Slide 11 — Telemetry & Live Ops
 - Deliberately minimal: Nova-native CloudEvents; no Kafka/Prometheus/ClickHouse
 - The live-ops dashboard is built in PowerBI on top of the exported views — leadership sees the same numbers the platform produces
 - Every number in the Proof slides is traceable to a signal — "where does this number come from?" → a query against the cold store
 - This is where the "infrastructure operations become visible" theme lands concretely
 - **Key takeaway:** the architecture is the trust substrate — operations become visible in PowerBI, with full traceability
 
-### Slide 10 — Decision Ledger + Attestation Coverage
+### Slide 12 — Decision Ledger + Attestation Coverage
 - Both 100% — no automated decision is ever lost; no prod/dr promotion lands without a human sign-off
 - The mandatory-by-design point: the ledger entry + the human attestation are a gate, not a best-effort feature
 - Easily queried: by run, by environment, by approver, by outcome — the audit trail is a query, not a forensic exercise
 - **Key takeaway:** trust is provable — not a marketing claim, a queryable record; no change to production without both the ledger entry and the human attestation
 
-### Slide 11 — Cost & ROI
+### Slide 13 — Cost & ROI
 - The ROI formula is shown inline — not hidden in a footnote
 - The four CTO-grade metrics are the ROI proof — Lead Time, Vuln Count, MTTR, Cloud Spend
 - The N=0 caveat is stated explicitly: the formula is grounded; the production numbers activate with a pilot
 - **Key takeaway:** the ROI is not a black box — the formula is shown, the four metrics are committed, the production-denominator caveat is up front
 
-### Slide 12 — What's Deferred — and Why
+### Slide 14 — What's Deferred — and Why
 - The preempt is critical: these deferrals are measurement infrastructure, not autonomy — the platform IS autonomous in operations
 - The blocking work is named in plain language (no decision IDs) — "live AWS re-provisioning", "drift-detection scheduler", "ML service"
 - Showing this to leadership demonstrates honesty, not weakness
 - **Key takeaway:** the autonomy is real; the measurement gaps are documented with the work that unblocks each one
 
-### Slide 13 — Roadmap to the North Star
+### Slide 15 — Roadmap to the North Star
 - Each deferred metric has an unblock path and a timeframe — near-term, mid-term, longer-term
 - No status column: most of it is not implemented yet, so status would be noise
 - Re-evaluation triggers: each blocking piece of work lifts on its own schedule
 - **Key takeaway:** every deferred metric has a plan and a timeframe — nothing is hand-waved
 
-### Slide 14 — 12-Month Product Roadmap
+### Slide 16 — 12-Month Product Roadmap
 - This is the *product* roadmap, forward-looking only
 - Q1 Pilot Activation → Q2 Provable Trust → Q3 Compounding ROI → Q4 Integration & Predictive
 - Each quarter activates one strategic objective from the North Star
 - **Key takeaway:** the 12-month product arc — each quarter activates a strategic objective and its board-level metric
 
-### Slide 15 — Quarter-by-Quarter Outcomes
+### Slide 17 — Quarter-by-Quarter Outcomes
 - Q1: three post-pilot metrics go live (Touchless ≥99%, Escalation <0.1%, Accuracy ≥99.5%) — denominator activates with the pilot
 - Q2: Decision Ledger Coverage was already grounded — tamper-evidence is the Q2 upgrade (local hash-chain → Object Lock + signed checkpoints)
 - Q3: Drift Auto-Reversal ≥95% unblocks when the drift scheduler ships; Spend Reduction ≥25% measured against the pilot baseline
 - Q4: Predictive:Reactive ≥3:1 requires the ML forecasting service; AI-Agent Intent Share is a first measurement (aspirational-metric)
 - **Key takeaway:** each quarter has a concrete deliverable, a target metric grounded in a strategic objective, and a path from deferred to shipped
 
-### Slide 16 — Production-Grade Guidance via Atelier (1/2)
+### Slide 18 — Production-Grade Guidance via Atelier (1/2)
 - Nova instructs the citizen developer's AI agent via skills (markdown, keyed to engineering domains) + an MCP server (4 tools, plugin-registry, stdio)
 - The integration point is the same regardless of source — AI agent, agentic SDLC, traditional IDE all get the same skills + MCP
 - This is how Nova makes the citizen developer production-grade without owning the PDLC
 - **Key takeaway:** the citizen developer's AI agent is not unguided — Nova provides engineering principles as skills + MCP
 
-### Slide 17 — Production-Grade Guidance via Atelier (2/2)
+### Slide 19 — Production-Grade Guidance via Atelier (2/2)
 - The value is the gap deterministic scanners leave: engineering discipline (Wiz/Checkmarx/Mend check policy/secrets, not discipline)
 - The MCP server catches "is this service observable?", "is this error path handled?", "is this API contract clear?"
 - Vendored at a pinned tag → audit reproducibility — a validation result is replayable months later
 - **Key takeaway:** submissions are checked for engineering discipline, not just policy compliance — and the check is reproducible for audit
 
-### Slide 18 — Recap + Ask
+### Slide 20 — Recap + Ask
 - Recap the 4-beat arc so the audience leaves with the structure
 - The ask is a business decision: approve a pilot estate + the tamper-evident ledger build-out
 - "Pipeline-ready" → "production-proven" is the value proposition

docs/presentations/nova-autonomous-cloud-delivery.md

@@ -98,10 +98,7 @@ operations.**
 
 ---
 
-## Slide 3 — Strategic Objectives + Anti-Goals
-
-**Four objectives Nova is building toward; four anti-goals that keep it
-focused.**
+## Slide 3 — Strategic Objectives
 
 **4 Strategic Objectives:**
 1. **Demonstrate production-grade zero-touch operations** — autonomy as
@@ -128,7 +125,21 @@ focused.**
    to deploy to production go through the same rigorous controls,
    quality gates, attestation, and evidence stream.
 
-**4 Anti-Goals (what Nova is NOT):**
+> **Benefit:** the scope is explicit — Nova governs infrastructure and
+> delivery, integrates with any upstream source through one validated
+> contract, and measures success on four metrics a CTO can repeat back.
+
+> **Speaker notes:** Objective #2 is the one to land carefully: trust is
+> established by deterministic scoring, not by an LLM. The platform
+> functions without AI.
+
+> **Transition:** "The objectives are concrete — here is what Nova is
+> NOT, to keep it focused."
+
+---
+
+## Slide 4 — Anti-Goals (What Nova Is NOT)
+
 1. Not a general-purpose AI agent platform.
 2. Not a system that removes humans from accountability — only from
    normal operations.
@@ -136,13 +147,11 @@ focused.**
    authorship).
 4. Not a replacement for the Product Development Lifecycle (PDLC).
 
-> **Benefit:** the scope is explicit — Nova governs infrastructure and
-> delivery, integrates with any upstream source through one validated
-> contract, and measures success on four metrics a CTO can repeat back.
+> **Benefit:** the boundaries are explicit — Nova is purpose-built for
+> infrastructure operations and delivery, not a general-purpose AI agent
+> or an upstream development platform.
 
-> **Speaker notes:** Objective #2 is the one to land carefully: trust is
-> established by deterministic scoring, not by an LLM. The platform
-> functions without AI. Anti-goals #3 and #4 protect the scope boundary —
+> **Speaker notes:** Anti-goals #3 and #4 protect the scope boundary —
 > Nova will not become an IDE or a product-planning tool.
 
 > **Transition:** "The scope boundary is explicit — here is exactly
@@ -150,7 +159,7 @@ focused.**
 
 ---
 
-## Slide 4 — Scope: Downstream of PDLC
+## Slide 5 — Scope: Downstream of PDLC
 
 **Nova governs infrastructure and delivery. The PDLC is upstream — Nova
 never penetrates it. Integration is through one validated contract.**
@@ -183,7 +192,7 @@ never penetrates it. Integration is through one validated contract.**
 
 ---
 
-## Slide 5 — RACI: Who Owns What
+## Slide 6 — RACI: Who Owns What
 
 **Four roles, one matrix — the citizen developer owns FRs + UAT, the
 platform owns NFRs + infra, quality engineering owns the gate evidence,
@@ -224,7 +233,7 @@ and SRE owns operational readiness.**
 
 ---
 
-## Slide 6 — The Platform Pipeline
+## Slide 7 — The Platform Pipeline
 
 **How intent becomes verified infrastructure — with fail-fast policy
 scanning before the plan and runtime scanning after it.**
@@ -272,7 +281,7 @@ graph LR
 
 ---
 
-## Slide 7 — The Decision Ledger
+## Slide 8 — The Decision Ledger
 
 **Every automated decision is captured, immutable, queryable — and
 accountable.**
@@ -310,16 +319,42 @@ accountable.**
 
 ---
 
-## Slide 8 — The Attestation Matrix
+## Slide 9 — Attestation Matrix: QA
 
-**The designed controls that keep humans at stage gates — structured,
-freshness-validated, and separation-of-duties-enforced.**
+**The designed controls that keep humans at stage gates — QA concerns,
+freshness-validated.**
 
 | Concern | Env | Freshness | Description |
 |---------|-----|-----------|-------------|
 | Functional correctness | qa | 24h | The application behaves as specified; evidence accepted from the consumer's UAT. |
 | Performance baseline | qa | 7d | The deployment meets its performance envelope vs. the agreed baseline. |
 | Security posture | qa | 24h | The deployment's security findings have been reviewed and accepted. |
+
+- Each concern has a freshness window — evidence older than the window
+  does not satisfy the gate.
+- Concerns that are offline-testable run for real; concerns that require
+  external evidence accept signed artifacts.
+
+> **Benefit:** QA signs off on quality before any promotion — the gate
+> is explicit, not implicit.
+
+> **Speaker notes:** The matrix is not a rubber stamp. Each concern has a
+> freshness window and a plain-language description of what is being
+> attested. The "operator-supplied" label from the prior deck was
+> dropped — every concern now has a plain-language description.
+
+> **Transition:** "QA is half the matrix — here are the production and
+> DR controls."
+
+---
+
+## Slide 10 — Attestation Matrix: Prod/DR
+
+**Production and DR controls — operational readiness, resilience, and
+disaster recovery.**
+
+| Concern | Env | Freshness | Description |
+|---------|-----|-----------|-------------|
 | Operational readiness | prod | 30d | SRE confirms the deployment is operable: runbooks, dashboards, on-call coverage. |
 | Incident response | prod | 90d | The on-call path has been exercised; the deployment has a working incident-response plan. |
 | Capacity & cost | prod | 30d | Capacity headroom and monthly cost are within the agreed envelope. |
@@ -332,17 +367,16 @@ freshness-validated, and separation-of-duties-enforced.**
   does not satisfy the gate.
 - **Separation-of-duties on prod:** the approver cannot be the same
   person who built the deployment.
-- Concerns that are offline-testable run for real; concerns that require
-  external evidence accept signed artifacts.
 
 > **Benefit:** the gate model is explicit — autonomy in operations,
 > human in accountability, by design. The matrix is what makes autonomous
 > operations safe enough to trust in production.
 
-> **Speaker notes:** The matrix is not a rubber stamp. Each concern has a
-> freshness window, a description, and a separation-of-duties rule. The
-> "operator-supplied" label from the prior deck was dropped — every
-> concern now has a plain-language description of what is being attested.
+> **Speaker notes:** The prod/DR rows are the operational-readiness and
+> resilience gates — SRE signs off on operability, incident response,
+> capacity, and the three resilience checks (DR drill, chaos, backup).
+> Separation-of-duties on prod is the rule that keeps the gate honest:
+> the approver cannot be the same person who built the deployment.
 
 > **Transition:** "You've seen how Nova works — the pipeline, the ledger,
 > the attestation gates. Here is how Nova instruments itself so that
@@ -350,7 +384,7 @@ freshness-validated, and separation-of-duties-enforced.**
 
 ---
 
-## Slide 9 — Telemetry & Live Ops
+## Slide 11 — Telemetry & Live Ops
 
 **Every metric in this deck is traceable to a real emitted signal — and
 the live-ops dashboard makes operations visible in PowerBI.**
@@ -399,7 +433,7 @@ graph TB
 
 ---
 
-## Slide 10 — Decision Ledger + Attestation Coverage
+## Slide 12 — Decision Ledger + Attestation Coverage
 
 **By design, no change reaches production without a ledger entry and a
 human attestation — both queryable for auditing, with full
@@ -435,7 +469,7 @@ traceability.**
 
 ---
 
-## Slide 11 — Cost & ROI
+## Slide 13 — Cost & ROI
 
 **The ROI formula and the cost estimates — grounded, with the production
 denominator honestly flagged.**
@@ -466,7 +500,7 @@ denominator honestly flagged.**
 
 ---
 
-## Slide 12 — What's Deferred — and Why
+## Slide 14 — What's Deferred — and Why
 
 **Honesty about what is not measured yet — and the blocking work for
 each.**
@@ -502,7 +536,7 @@ metrics — not the autonomy.
 
 ---
 
-## Slide 13 — Roadmap to the North Star
+## Slide 15 — Roadmap to the North Star
 
 **The path from the grounded metrics to the 12–18 month targets — each
 deferred metric has an unblock path and a candidate milestone.**
@@ -533,7 +567,7 @@ deferred metric has an unblock path and a candidate milestone.**
 
 ---
 
-## Slide 14 — 12-Month Product Roadmap
+## Slide 16 — 12-Month Product Roadmap
 
 **The product arc from pilot activation to integration — four quarters,
 four outcomes.**
@@ -560,7 +594,7 @@ integration) and the deferred-metric unblock paths.
 
 ---
 
-## Slide 15 — Quarter-by-Quarter Outcomes
+## Slide 17 — Quarter-by-Quarter Outcomes
 
 | Quarter | Product theme | Key deliverable | Target metric | Grounding |
 |---------|---------------|-----------------|---------------|-----------|
@@ -587,7 +621,7 @@ anymore, and the audit trail is stronger than it ever was.'"*
 
 ---
 
-## Slide 16 — Production-Grade Guidance via Atelier (1/2)
+## Slide 18 — Production-Grade Guidance via Atelier (1/2)
 
 **Nova instructs the citizen developer's AI agent on production-grade
 engineering — a set of skills and an MCP server.**
@@ -621,7 +655,7 @@ engineering — a set of skills and an MCP server.**
 
 ---
 
-## Slide 17 — Production-Grade Guidance via Atelier (2/2)
+## Slide 19 — Production-Grade Guidance via Atelier (2/2)
 
 **Agentic validation catches engineering-discipline gaps that deterministic
 scanners miss — and the validation is reproducible.**
@@ -656,7 +690,7 @@ scanners miss — and the validation is reproducible.**
 
 ---
 
-## Slide 18 — Recap + Ask
+## Slide 20 — Recap + Ask
 
 **The 4-beat recap + the business decision.**
 
@@ -710,4 +744,4 @@ S3 Object Lock + signed checkpoints. These two decisions move Nova from
 
 ---
 
-> **End of deck.** 18 main slides + 1 appendix slide = 19 total.
+> **End of deck.** 20 main slides + 1 appendix slide = 21 total.