admin: surface corr_gate_veto on the correlation-debug endpoint (#115)

corr_gate_veto was written to corr_debug but the admin endpoint's whitelist (_call_summary + the summary tally) never surfaced it, so the last commit's whole point -- measuring window #4 instead of guessing -- would have produced nothing to read. Add it to both. Also softened the docstring's remaining overclaim: whether the active-only ctx[recent] limitation explains the 2/24 window-3 misses is unanswered, not confirmed -- read corr_gate_veto next window instead of asserting a guess again.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>

Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01Tbknwttzou4s46PAykmtix

drb-c2-core/app/routers/admin.py

@@ -135,6 +135,12 @@ async def debug_correlation(
             "corr_llm_reasoning":    call.get("corr_llm_reasoning"),
             "corr_llm_action":       call.get("corr_llm_action"),
             "corr_rules_action":     call.get("corr_rules_action"),
+            # server-26#115 — why an llm=orphan/rules=new disagreement escalated
+            # to tiebreak instead of being gated (see upload.py's
+            # _call_is_substanceless). Present only on that disagreement shape;
+            # written here specifically so a live measurement window can read
+            # the reason instead of reconstructing it by hand from the dump.
+            "corr_gate_veto":        call.get("corr_gate_veto"),
         }
 
     # ── Determine which systems have AI active ────────────────────────────────
@@ -293,6 +299,9 @@ async def debug_correlation(
         "corr_fit_signal":        _tally(c.get("corr_fit_signal") for c in linked),
         "corr_consensus":         _tally(c.get("corr_consensus") for c in linked),
         "corr_llm_action":        _tally(c.get("corr_llm_action") for c in linked),
+        # server-26#115 — this IS the number the escape-hatch fix exists to
+        # produce: why each llm=orphan/rules=new call escaped the gate.
+        "corr_gate_veto":         _tally(c.get("corr_gate_veto") for c in linked),
         # STT coverage: correlation quality is capped by this, so it belongs in
         # the same view rather than a separate investigation.
         "linked_calls_with_transcript": with_transcript,