A reservation can claim its place and then fail while saving running state. If cleanup lives only on the success path, no work begins and later work remains blocked too. I examined cleanup at failure boundaries, keeping storage failure and uncertainty about an external outcome as different facts.
First distinguish failure before dispatch
ProjectJobs claims its lane, checks host availability and then saves running state. If that save fails, it does not dispatch the operation and enters review handling. The outer finally invokes the acquired release. A reserved place must not remain occupied when execution never began.
The existing E02 test fails that write once, requires zero execution calls and an empty host lane, then creates another reservation in the same project. Successful later execution provides evidence of resource recovery beyond merely displaying an error message.
Failure after dispatch carries a different risk
Final and fallback-review writes can both fail after dispatch has already succeeded. The external operation must not be repeated. The process retains review-needed memory state while releasing its owned lanes. Persistence failure should neither freeze the entire project forever nor authorize replay of the uncertain item.
The existing test dispatches once, injects consecutive write failures and requires no additional call on the next tick. After storage recovers, another new item can proceed. Releasing a resource does not make the original operation safe to retry. Cleanup and replay permission remain separate conclusions.
The delivery queue also retains unsaved review state
DeliveryQueue keeps unsaved review entries in memory and gives them precedence when listing disk records. Claiming skips those entries, preventing the same process from treating older queued or running bytes as permission to deliver again.
That memory is not durable across application exit. Restart must inspect actual retained files and recovery behavior. Continuing device failure cannot be described as completed recovery. Fixing a leaked lane and establishing durable evidence under storage failure are different problems; the explanation should preserve both the result and its remaining limit.
Do not abandon an already claimed peer because a later claim fails
The delivery queue retains claimed entries before dispatching them. Failure while claiming a later entry must not discard an earlier independently owned project. Each retained lane must settle afterward. Waiting for all results and collecting errors keeps peer outcomes inspectable.
An existing test fails only the later entry's persistence and requires the earlier one to execute once and retain success. The error is still reported; it is not ignored. Independent progress remains visible beside failure rather than being overwritten by one batch-level error sentence that hides useful diagnostic facts.
Keep the verification layers identifiable
The versioned repair record distinguishes unit fault injection from persistence tests in owned Electron and MCP profiles. Later Python execution and preservation of existing material retain their historical scope. They are not evidence of new Cafe publication or video uploading.
This content task reads the functions and tests without injecting faults into the original application. The public lane and file-journal modules test their own ownership and storage boundaries. Combining those sources cannot guarantee every device or service recovery path. Direct execution and read-only examination retain separate evidence.
Explain what may proceed after the error
A completely blocked program encourages reopening and replaying from scratch. Retaining the failed item for review while returning resources for independent work provides a clearer alternative. A leaked lock need not become the permanent memory of an error.
Business software similarly broadens an incident when one failed ledger write blocks unrelated staff activity. Resources that may be released and results that need reconciliation require different decisions. Finally matters because it returns owned resources while preserving unresolved facts, not because it hides the failure.