[Feature]: Dogfood /constitution on spec-kit (add memory/constitution.md)

Start with the issue’s acceptance criteria and review discussion #2504, especially the spec-forward, historical-once-shipped framing. Use the /constitution workflow to draft memory/constitution.md, covering when SDD applies and when it does not without adding quotas or downstream commitments. Done means the single document exists in main and satisfies each listed criterion.

Problem Statement

Spec-kit ships /constitution but the repo itself has no memory/constitution.md in main. There is no upstream artifact showing the workflow runs on the project that ships it — the dogfooding gap raised in discussion #2504. A maintainer (@mnriem) gave a green light to try it there, with the framing that specs in this repo should be spec-forward, historical-once-shipped (no living-doc maintenance burden against a fast-moving codebase).

Proposed Solution

Add memory/constitution.md, drafted via the /constitution workflow. It codifies:

• When SDD applies here: non-trivial scope, ambiguous design, cross-cutting impact, security/correctness stakes.
• When it does not: plumbing, refactors, catalog updates, doc fixes.
• Stance: spec-forward; historical once shipped (frozen snapshot, not maintained).

Single document. No quota, no cadence, no downstream commitment to spec any particular future PR.

Alternatives Considered

• Retroactive specs on shipped PRs (e.g. #2393): parked — does not fit "spec-forward."
• Per-feature triage on every PR: re-litigates the question on every change, more friction.
• Status quo: dogfooding gap remains.

Component

Documentation

AI Agent (if applicable)

Not applicable (repository governance, not agent-specific)

Use Cases

1. Contributor unsure whether their PR warrants a spec consults the constitution instead of asking per-PR.
2. Reviewer points to it to flag a fitting candidate ("cross-cutting and security-sensitive — want to spec this?").

Acceptance Criteria

• memory/constitution.md exists in main
• Drafted via the /constitution workflow
• Codifies criteria for when SDD applies to spec-kit work
• Codifies the "spec-forward, historical-once-shipped" stance per #2504
• No downstream commitments added (no quota, no required follow-up specs)

Additional Context

Discussion #2504, in particular @mnriem's comment giving the green light and the spec-forward framing. PR follows.