docs(distribution): sync 100m launch parameters

[drewstone]

Summary

• sync launch governance notes to the normalized 100M TNT supply
• update migration docs and helper scripts to source normalized-100m.json
• align claim defaults to 10% unlocked / 90% vested and foundation/treasury vesting to FullDeploy

Verification

• python3 deploy/distributions/reconcile.py -> substrate + evm + foundation + treasury == 100,000,000 TNT
• forge test --root packages/migration-claim --match-path test/TangleMigration.t.sol -> 40 passed, 0 failed
• jq . deploy/config/base-mainnet.json >/dev/null
• bash -n packages/migration-claim/scripts/deploy-tangle-migration.sh
• git diff --check
• git merge-tree --write-tree origin/main HEAD -> clean tree

[tangletools]

✅ Auto-approved PR — 0625ad6c

Blanket team auto-approval is enabled for this reviewer service.
The full PR reviewer audit still runs separately and will publish findings if it detects issues.

_{tangletools · auto-approval · reason: blanket_auto_approve · 2026-06-14T23:31:58Z}

[tangletools]

🟡 Value Audit — sound-with-nits

Verdict	sound-with-nits
Concerns	2 (2 low)
Heuristic	0.0s
Duplication	0.0s
Interrogation	30.0s (2 bridge agents)
Total	30.0s

🔎 Heuristic Signals

🟡 Cruft: console debug added packages/migration-claim/script/DeployTangleMigration.s.sol

•        console.log("   Cliff: 6 months, Linear: 30 months (3 years total)");
  

🟡 Cruft: magic number added packages/migration-claim/test/TangleMigration.t.sol

•    assertEq(migration.unlockedBps(), 1000);
  

---

What this audit checks

It judges the change on its merits — not whether it was tasked out in an issue. Unticketed, fast-moving work is fine; the question is whether the change is good and whether a better or existing approach should be used instead.

Pass	What it asks
Heuristic	Vague title? Whitespace-only or cruft-bearing diff? (content signals only)
Duplication	Do added function/class names already exist elsewhere in the repo?
Value Audit	What does it do? What goal does it achieve? Is it good? Better architecture or already-exists?
Usefulness Audit	Does it integrate and fit? Will it hold up in real use and actually get used?

Findings are concerns, not blocks — the human reviewer decides what to do with them.

_{value-audit · 20260614T233424Z}