Answer prose round 1: a true validity premise, the reading in two plain sentences, and the braces named one by one

AGENTS.md

@@ -114,4 +114,4 @@ In [docs/decisions.md](docs/decisions.md):
 - comprehension floor: every dimension and the overall at 7.0 or above; item 5 scores the restructure, which ships unscored: every `{…}` drawing afresh, the moves into `internal/`, and items 101, 102 and 104 to 106
 - The template engine stays the root package until item 107; what reads no engine type sits in `internal/`, and items 101 and 102 move a table's rows there
 - Goal 5.1's `{…}` covers `{{`, `}}` and a lone `}`, so the goal names no escape
-- Goal 7.2's "no escaping" means a template needs no special character beyond `{}`
+- Goal 7.2's "no escaping" means a template needs no special character beyond `{` and `}`

docs/decisions.md

@@ -850,9 +850,9 @@ the README's Format string section states. The maintainer ruled the escape impli
 goal: doubled braces and a lone `}` belong to the `{…}` syntax, so the goal names no escape and
 a lone `}` stays an error. Valid while a template escapes a brace by doubling it.
 
-## Goal 7.2's "no escaping" means a template needs no special character beyond `{}`
+## Goal 7.2's "no escaping" means a template needs no special character beyond `{` and `}`
 
-2026-10-05, Lilleman auf Larv. Serves goal 7.2: your first template of your own needs no
-escaping and no options. The maintainer reads it as a template being writable with no special
-character other than the braces, so a literal brace written `{{` or `}}` keeps the goal. Valid
-while a template's only special characters are its braces.
+2026-10-05, Lilleman auf Larv. Serves goal 7.2. The maintainer reads "no escaping" as: a
+template can be written with no special character other than `{` and `}`. A literal brace
+written `{{` or `}}` therefore meets the goal. Valid while `{` and `}` are the only
+characters with a meaning outside a `{…}` token.