raise the ceilings for a list of features, and say which kind of raise it is

core 2850 -> 3000, ext 2000 -> 3500, modules 6 -> 9.

ext was the binding one: 1975 of 2000, with syntax highlighting still to write,
so for that ceiling this is not anticipation but the difference between building
the next feature and not. The other two are bought ahead of a list of features
the human has signed for. DEPS_MAX 9 leaves room for chroma and its regexp2 —
which fill 6 exactly — plus two more.

Worth naming rather than glossing: a ceiling raised on evidence is a
measurement, and one raised on intent is a budget. The first two raises were the
first kind; this is the second, which is weaker. ADR-0041's test still stands —
if core approaches 3000 the question is again what belongs in ext, and the
answer is still feed.go and discover.go, waiting on a feature being able to own
a route.

Invariant 9 is measured by a number that has now moved three times. It says
something only because ext rose 75% where core rose 7%.

FILE_LOC_WARN and FUNC_LOC_WARN are untouched: they are about one file being
readable, and nothing about the plan changes that.

HARNESS.md

@@ -68,7 +68,14 @@ into an author's prose. It worked and it had tests; `text-wrap: pretty` does it
 content, so the feature was deleted (ADR-0045). If a feature only rearranges how something looks, expect the
 agent to push back toward CSS or a template.
 
-**The core ceiling has moved twice, both on purpose.** `CORE_LOC_MAX` went 2000 → 2800 (ADR-0041) because the
+**The ceilings have moved three times, all on purpose, and the third is a different kind.** The first two
+were measurements — a number costed before any code existed, then eight lines of contract that would not fit.
+The third (ADR-0074) is a budget: core 2850 → 3000, ext 2000 → 3500, modules 6 → 9, signed off ahead of a
+list of features rather than in response to one. `ext` was genuinely blocking at 1975 of 2000; the rest is
+headroom bought deliberately. Invariant 9 is measured by a number that has now moved three times, and says
+something only because ext rose 75% against core's 7%.
+
+**The core ceiling has moved twice before that, both on purpose.** `CORE_LOC_MAX` went 2000 → 2800 (ADR-0041) because the
 original figure was costed before any code existed and never budgeted what `cmd/` would hold — `check`, `new`,
 `-dev`, change detection. It went 2800 → 2850 (ADR-0065) for eight lines of theme contract, and ADR-0041's own
 test — read a second raise as evidence something belongs in `internal/ext/` — was applied rather than waived: