[argszero]

Summary

docs/architecture.md describes itself as documenting the current state, but its §5/§6 enumerations had drifted from the code in four places. This PR re-aligns the doc with what src/routes/mod.rs::router() and the schema actually contain, and — following the project's preference for pointing at an authority rather than re-typing a roster that will rot on the next change — names the arbiters instead of writing new snapshots.

Found by diffing the registered routes against the doc (a "reverse route matrix"), each item then confirmed against the code:

#	Where	Was	Really is
1	§6	`GET /api/ops/runtime` / `credits` / `users`	/api/ops/credits is POST (src/routes/mod.rs:569) — following the doc gives 405
2	§6	(absent)	the departments API and the raise-requests API are implemented, and §5 already documents their tables
3	§5 transactions	type: consume|earn|topup|gift	the real set is TX_FILTER_TYPES (6 values) — expire is written (src/gift.rs:49), withdraw is accepted by the filter
4	§5 table list	(absent)	email_verifications (src/db.rs:220) and schema_version

Item 3 is the one with a copy-paste consequence: a reader implementing against the 4-value list silently drops expired-gift rows — the same bug class fixed earlier in ops.rs.

Related Issue

None — the repository carries no open issues; this is maintenance of the documented current state.

Changes

• docs/architecture.md
  • §5 transactions row: the type values now defer to src/routes/wallet.rs 的 TX_FILTER_TYPES instead of enumerating a stale subset.
  • §5 table list: added email_verifications (with users.verified) and schema_version (pointing at SCHEMA_VERSION).
  • §6: added the two formerly-missing surfaces —
    GET/POST /api/admin/departments + PATCH/DELETE /api/admin/departments/:id,
    POST/GET /api/raise-requests + POST /api/admin/raise-requests/:id/{approve,reject}.
  • §6: fixed the ops line to GET /api/ops/runtime / users，POST /api/ops/credits.
  • §6: added a note that the list is grouped by feature surface, not by route, and that router() is the authority.
• README.md:58: 「API 全清单见 docs/architecture.md」 → 「API 一览见 …，权威清单以 src/routes/mod.rs 的 router() 为准」 (the doc is an overview, so the completeness claim was the thing making the omissions matter).
• 涉及配置/数据结构的改动已同步示例文件 — N/A: no config or data-structure change.

Tests

• cargo test 全部通过 — 190 passed / 0 failed, i.e. unchanged from main; the count staying put is itself the evidence that no behaviour moved.
• cargo fmt --check 通过
• cargo clippy --all-targets -- -D warnings 通过
• 新增/更新了单元测试 — N/A: a documentation-only change has no behaviour to assert, and the repo deliberately carries no doc-linting gate.

Independent verification (not just "the prose reads correctly")

A checker derives the §6 method+path claims (including its shorthand chains such as runtime / credits / users) and compares them with the routes actually registered in router(), and asserts the §5 transaction-type cell against TX_FILTER_TYPES:

doc	result
main (pre-change)	FAIL — 5: GET /api/ops/credits (registered methods: ['post']), the stale 4-value type list, both missing surfaces, and §6 not marked as an overview
this branch	PASS

⚠️ The checker itself was wrong twice before it was trustworthy (it first reported a blanket "every path is unregistered" — its .route() parser only matched multi-line calls and it missed the Markdown \| escape; then it silently skipped the abbreviation chain that hid item 1). Both were caught by running it against the pre-change file, and it now self-checks its parse and aborts instead of reporting doc failures when the instrument is broken.

Checklist

• 分支命名符合约定（docs/）
• Commit message 使用 Conventional Commits 格式（docs(architecture): …）
• 单一职责，改动最小化（2 files, +9/−3; no route roster added, no gate introduced, no console feature touched）