docs: three statics, not four; name the test that covers the orderings

Two claims checked against the source and corrected.

"Four statics are that seam" was never true — the seam is ACTIVE_REQUEST,
ACTIVE_SENDER and COOKIES, three, which is also how many the list below it
has always had. 7978f79 wrote the sentence and the miscount together.

"The crate's one test" was true the day it was written and is not now: the
crate has three (a_live_request_vetoes_simulation, which the simulation
section already cites by name, column_captions_never_cut_mid_word, and
cancellation_survives_every_ordering). Naming the test that actually locks
the cancel orderings in says the same thing without a total that drifts
every time a test is added.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <[email protected]>

 CLAUDE.md | 5 +++--
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/CLAUDE.md b/CLAUDE.md
index e617a84..d22aad0 100644
--- a/CLAUDE.md
+++ b/CLAUDE.md
@@ -42,7 +42,7 @@ is why the fallbacks are worth keeping.
 
 polkitd calls `BeginAuthentication` on the tokio/zbus thread; the GUI runs
 `cce_ui::engine::run` on the **main** thread, one window at a time, so requests hand
-off over an mpsc channel and **queue**. Four statics are that seam:
+off over an mpsc channel and **queue**. Three statics are that seam:
 
 - `ACTIVE_REQUEST` — the request the window being built belongs to. Its presence *is*
   polkit mode (`polkit_mode = active_req.is_some()`), and taking it is how success is
@@ -87,7 +87,8 @@ yet, or one that is still starting and has no `ACTIVE_SENDER` to deliver to. The
 handler therefore records unconditionally and *then* tries to deliver; the main loop
 claims the cookie and checks for a record before opening a window, and `new()` checks
 again once a sender exists. A single active-cookie slot got all three orderings wrong
-and stranded dialogs. The crate's one test locks those orderings in.
+and stranded dialogs. `cancellation_survives_every_ordering` locks those orderings in —
+one test covering all three, run in sequence because `COOKIES` is process-global.
 
 ## Verifying (the safe envelope is narrow)