fix(docs): AGENTS.md-Contract-Prosa als Sitzungsarbeit klargestellt, doc-pull-through-Instruction (schliesst #90)

Files changed:
- AGENTS.md
- CHANGES.md
- VERSION
- instructions/dev/doc-pull-through.md
- instructions/dev/stack-close/SKILL.md
- instructions/dev/stack-dev/SKILL.md
- instructions/dev/testing-conventions.md
- instructions/dev/version-parts.md
- tools/chemenu/commands/docs_verify.py

instructions/dev/stack-close/SKILL.md

@@ -75,12 +75,16 @@ and a fresh subagent starts without the session's context).
    #45 both closed exactly this way on the old, single-skill shape, the second an hour after the
    rule was first written down.
 
-3. **Check whether a `docs/` page or new human doc went stale.** A `docs/` page carries no
-   normative sentence, so nothing verifies it by construction (AGENTS.md § File naming) - the
-   same is true of `README.md`/`INSTALL.md`/`DEVELOPMENT.md` prose and a new instruction's own
-   wording, which `instructions verify` checks structurally but never for what it claims. If the
-   change this package shipped moved the reasoning one of these pages documents, update it now;
-   if none did, say so rather than leaving the question unasked.
+3. **Check whether a `docs/` page, a contract, or a new human doc went stale.** A `docs/` page
+   carries no normative sentence, so nothing verifies it by construction (AGENTS.md § File
+   naming) - the same is true of `tools/CONTRACT.md`'s two tables and any touched
+   `<stage>/CONTRACT.md`, whose prose `docs verify` checks only for presence and table-row
+   membership, never for what a cell or a section actually says
+   ([doc-pull-through.md](../doc-pull-through.md)); of `README.md`/`INSTALL.md`/`DEVELOPMENT.md`
+   prose; and of a new instruction's own wording, which `instructions verify` checks structurally
+   but never for what it claims. If the change this package shipped moved the reasoning or the
+   behaviour one of these documents describes, update it now; if none did, say so rather than
+   leaving the question unasked.
 
 4. **Name which model ran which phase - not only this one.** This is the handover in full, not
    a note about the tail alone: state the model for the design/version-part/boundary-judgment