docs(driver-memory): the $eq exemption's note says the null-list cells were RULED, not held (#15480)

The `$eq`-only exemption above the no-value guard justified its
operator-shaped spelling by naming the cells it declined to move —
`$in: [null]` / `$nin: [null]` — as "#13357's cells,
`needs-user-decision`, held for the maintainer". That sentence stopped
being true on 2026-08-31, when the maintainer ruled them (option C) and
the shapes became REFUSED at the contract's validation entrance
(`assertListComparandShapes`), with the negative pin
`memory-null-list-member-unreachable.test.ts`.

This is not wording polish. `needs-user-decision` is a live protocol
state with a named reader — the maintainer's inbox. A source comment
asserting a cell sits in that state, when the door two packages over
refuses the shape by ruling, invites the next author to re-escalate a
settled question into the most expensive queue in this repo.

The same package already stated it correctly, twice: the `$gte: null`
note 34 lines below in this file ("the 2026-08-31 ruling had refused the
three siblings"), and the sibling header in
`memory-matcher-null-value-and-comparand.test.ts` ("They were
`needs-user-decision` when #13494/#13495/#13549 landed"). So the package
stated the decision state two ways, and the stale one is the one an
author reading this guard arrives at first.

The exemption's REASONING is deliberately unchanged: writing it over the
OPERATOR rather than over "the comparand is null" is still right,
because a rule spelled over the VALUE would still reach arms whose
no-value answer is ruled elsewhere. Only the cells' state moved —
refused at the door, rather than held. The note now says so, and says
explicitly that the ruling is not a licence to re-spell the exemption.

Comment-only. No arm, no guard condition, no behaviour: every added and
removed line in the diff is a `//` comment.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01ARYe3yQTQCUFm5qPYNgKaJ

Author: claude

packages/drivers/driver-memory/src/memory-matcher.ts

@@ -309,8 +309,24 @@ function checkCondition(value: any, condition: any): boolean {
         // ⚠️ `$eq` ONLY, deliberately. The exemption is written over the
         // OPERATOR and not over "the comparand is null", because the latter
         // spelling would have moved `$in: [null]` / `$nin: [null]` with it —
-        // and those are #13357's cells, `needs-user-decision`, held for the
-        // maintainer. They are measured byte-identical across this change.
+        // and those were #13357's cells, `needs-user-decision`, held for the
+        // maintainer when this landed. They are measured byte-identical
+        // across this change.
+        //
+        // ⛔ They are NOT held any more, and a reader arriving here must not
+        // escalate them a second time: the maintainer ruled them on 2026-08-31
+        // (option C, #13357) and the shapes are REFUSED at the contract's
+        // validation entrance (`assertListComparandShapes`) — the same door the
+        // `$gte: null` note below records for the ordering position — with the
+        // negative pin `memory-null-list-member-unreachable.test.ts`, and the
+        // sibling header in `memory-matcher-null-value-and-comparand.test.ts`
+        // already says so in the past tense.
+        //
+        // ⛔ That ruling is NOT a reason to re-spell this exemption over "the
+        // comparand is null". The reason above is unchanged: a rule written
+        // over the VALUE would still reach arms whose no-value answer is ruled
+        // elsewhere. Only the cells' STATE moved — refused at the door, rather
+        // than held for a ruling.
         if (value === undefined && op !== '$exists' && op !== '$null' && op !== '$eq'
             && !noValueSatisfiesNegation(op)) {
             return false;