docs: correct how a wait-mode call actually dies on a dead source

Branch review caught the docs claiming something the code does not do.
CHANGELOG, README and the design's behaviour matrix all said a
force-opened source under circuit_open=wait waits out the full stall
window. It does not: the probe let through after each cooldown is a
real attempt, so it burns a max_attempts slot like any other, and a
401 source usually runs out of retry budget first -- reason is
retry_exhausted, not stalled. Which budget wins depends on
max_attempts against the cooldowns and the stall window.

The behaviour is right; only the prose was wrong. Charging the probe
to the retry budget is exactly the split issue #8 settled: the
question is who spends max_attempts, and a probe does send a real
request. A test now pins it so the claim cannot drift again.

Also drops the planned "woke up" log line. Each wait round already
logs on entry with its duration, and a still-blocked wake-up logs the
next round immediately, so a second line would only double the volume.

research-wiki/designs/2026-08-19-issue14-admission-wait-policy-design.md

@@ -182,7 +182,7 @@ issue 要求修订 `GatewayUnavailableError` 那句"业务侧 catch 本类做延
 | 场景 | `fail_fast`(缺省,= 现状) | `wait` |
 |---|---|---|
 | 单源 OPEN,冷却 60s | 立即 `CircuitOpenError(retry_after=剩余冷却)` | 睡到冷却结束(夹在 stall 预算内)→ 探针 → 成功即返回 |
-| 单源 `force_open`(401/403) | 立即失败 | 等 60 → 探针又 401 → 等 120 …… 直至 stall 判死(≤300s)。**代价须进文档** |
+| 单源 `force_open`(401/403) | 立即失败 | 等 60 → 探针又 401(**烧掉一格 `max_attempts`**)→ 等 120 → …… 以**先耗尽的那个预算**的 reason 失败: `max_attempts` 先尽则 `retry_exhausted`,冷却累计超过 stall 预算则 `stalled`。**代价须进文档** |
 | 多源部分开路 | 不变(有源可跑就不进这个分支) | 不变 |
 | 多源全部开路 | 立即失败 | 等最早恢复的那个源(`retry_after_s` 取 min) |
 | 全部 HALF_OPEN(探针在途) | `CircuitOpenError(retry_after=0)`,语义准确(随时可能好) | `poll_interval` 抖动复查,秒级拿到探针结果 |
@@ -210,7 +210,8 @@ issue 要求修订 `GatewayUnavailableError` 那句"业务侧 catch 本类做延
 | 等待上界的精确值 | `_stalled` 判据是 `>` 而非 `>=`(`retry.py:368`,Codex 审查补)。睡眠恰好夹到剩余预算时,醒来 `stalled_s()` 等于窗口而不大于,不判死。故 `_nap` 夹到 `剩余预算 + poll_interval_s`,一次到位;最坏墙钟精确表述为 `stall_window_s + 一个 poll 间隔`,不是"恰好 stall_window_s" |
 | 备忘的跨进程滞后 | 本进程记了 OPEN 冷却后,即便别的进程的探针已把共享门关回 CLOSED,本进程仍会跳到本地备忘自然过期(`_pick_runnable` 先查备忘再问门)。这是备忘"以本地记录换 Redis 往返"的固有代价,误差有界(≤ 一个 cooldown),**既有性质、本次不改**;备忘是进程内存,无持久化,故不存在滚动升级残留 |
 | 无限等待 | `_stalled` 是双条件合取,同 scope 其他调用仍在出餐时本调用不判死(ARCH §7.3 已承认的残余性质)。单源全开路时无人出餐,条件 B 必然成立,会判死;多源部分开路则走不到这个分支。文档沿用既有措辞:需要硬上限的调用方自行 `asyncio.wait_for` |
-| 未解决 | `force_open` 在 wait 档下把坏密钥的失败从毫秒拖到 stall 窗口。**有意不特判**——库无法区分"密钥坏了"与"中转抖了",选 `wait` 即声明"宁可等也不当场死" |
+| 未解决 | `force_open` 在 wait 档下把坏密钥的失败从毫秒拖长(上限 stall 窗口)。**有意不特判**——库无法区分"密钥坏了"与"中转抖了",选 `wait` 即声明"宁可等也不当场死" |
+| 两个预算并行(整分支审查发现,2026-08-20) | `wait` **不豁免重试预算**: 冷却结束后放行的探针是一次真实尝试,失败照样烧一格 `max_attempts`(issue #8 的划分依据是"谁消耗重试预算",探针发出了真实请求,理应记在重试预算上)。故 force_open 的源常以 `retry_exhausted` 而非 `stalled` 结束。原稿 §4 只写了 stall 一种结局,已更正;由 `test_wait_does_not_exempt_probes_from_the_retry_budget` 钉住 |
 
 ## 7. 文档与发布