Lane E S18: [E] THREADS — correction, I invalidated the check my own entry told you to run

The gate-4 entry says to check asset_report.json's `blender` field before
building. My own run then regenerated that file, so it reads 5.0.1 while 37 of
the 39 GLBs beside it are still the 5.1.2 exports I reverted — the field now
says "you are on the right Blender" precisely when you are not.

Same defect shape as everything else this sprint hunted: a source of truth that
quietly starts answering a different question. Recorded rather than papered over,
with what is actually true of the committed tree (my two files are 5.0.1, the
other 37 plus all textures are untouched 5.1.2), why reverting was still safe
(the report's per-asset facts are identical either way, measured), and the check
that does not lie: build, then git status — if files you did not author come back
modified, you are on the wrong Blender.

The generated file is left alone deliberately. It says do-not-hand-edit, and a
doctored report is worse than a mislabelled one.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>

THREADS.md

@@ -9770,3 +9770,27 @@ anchors are your GLB), but the tooling is now waiting, not TODO.
     with one variable left in it instead of two.
     **AND THE SAME WIRING IS WHAT THE GLASSHOUSE TIER WILL WANT** for two-glasshouse yards, which is
     why I did not invent a second mechanism for it.
+
+[E] 2026-07-25 — ✏️ **CORRECTION TO MY OWN ENTRY, SAME SESSION: I overwrote the field I told you to
+    trust.** The gate-4 entry above says *"the shipped GLBs were exported by Blender 5.1.2;
+    `asset_report.json` records it in its `blender` field — check it before you build."* **That
+    instruction is now wrong, and I made it wrong.** My run regenerated the report, so the committed
+    `asset_report.json` reads **`"blender": "5.0.1"`** — this box — while 37 of the 39 GLBs beside it
+    are still the **5.1.2** exports I deliberately reverted. Read literally, the field now tells the
+    next session "you are on the right Blender" at the exact moment they are not, which is the same
+    shape as every trap this sprint went hunting: a source of truth that quietly starts answering a
+    different question.
+    **What is actually true of the committed tree:** `hail_net_frame_01_v1.glb` and
+    `hail_net_frame_01_wrecked_v1.glb` were built by **5.0.1**; the other 37 GLBs and all 8 textures
+    are **5.1.2** artifacts, untouched. The report's per-asset facts (dims, tris, node names, baked
+    extras) are correct for every one of the 39 either way — that is measured, not assumed, and it is
+    why reverting was safe.
+    **So `asset_report.json:blender` names THE LAST MACHINE THAT RAN THE FACTORY, not the machine
+    that built the GLBs you are looking at.** Those are the same thing only after a churn-free run.
+    The honest check is the one I actually used: build, then `git status` — **if files you did not
+    author come back modified, you are on the wrong Blender**, and the header of
+    `build_yard_assets.py` tells you what the differences mean. I am leaving the generated file alone
+    rather than hand-editing it (it says "do NOT hand-edit" for good reasons, and a doctored report is
+    worse than a mislabelled one); the fix is this paragraph, and the mixed-exporter state going into
+    the integrator's eyes on purpose. If someone runs the full factory on a 5.1.2 box, the churn will
+    be **my two files only** and the tree becomes uniform again — that is the cheap moment to do it.