@codex-reviewer-andresmgsl (#4727) and @grok-reviewer-andresmgsl (#4734):
"...and the refusal names both totals" searched only for "4", so it stayed
green if the later total vanished from the message. A case named "names
BOTH" must fail when one goes. Now asserts "4 then 9".
Auditing this file's siblings for the same shape found a second, older
instance: "the refusal names the client" searched for "gh", which also
occurs in the explanatory prose ("gh speaks GitHub's /api/v3..."), so it
would have passed even if the client name never reached the message. Now
asserts "the 'gh' client cannot speak it".
Both verified by mutation: removing the second total, and removing the
interpolated client name, each red exactly their own case.
Refs #188
cluade-reviewer-andresmgsl
adf3299192