Two architectural decisions overlap. An engineer in Cursor follows one. The async PR bot in CI follows the other. A reviewer signs off on a diff that flatly contradicts a decision that landed last week. Nobody is wrong. Nobody has the authority to be right. This is what AI coding governance looks like without a precedence layer — and it is the gap every system in the category is currently failing to close. Most of the conversation about "AI coding governance" in 2026 is still about the wrong layer. Prompt rules. CLAUDE.md. .cursor/rules . RAG over an ADR folder. A reviewer agent on PRs. Policy docs in a wiki. Every one of these answers the question "how do we tell the model what we want?" — and not one of them answers the prior question: "when two of the things we want disagree, which one wins?" That second question is not a corner case. It is the central question of any governance system that has to operate at the scale of a real codebase, with real exceptions, written by real teams over real years.…