[Quality][High] Propagate registry pause state across dependent contracts

[Baskarayelu]

Objective

Define and enforce a consistent pause propagation policy for all registry-dependent flows.

Why this matters

Pausing a registry or control plane is ineffective if dependent contracts continue accepting value-moving operations.

This is a substantive production-quality improvement. It must change runtime behavior, security guarantees, correctness, reliability, or meaningful user functionality. It is not a documentation-only, formatting-only, or trivial dependency task.

Scope

Area: pause and cross-contract safety

Starting points: docs/credence-registry-pause-state.md, docs/pause-state-snapshots.md, registry and dependent crates

The contributor should verify the current implementation before changing it and keep the PR limited to this issue. Do not introduce unrelated refactors or weaken existing CI/security gates.

Acceptance criteria

• Every dependent mutating entrypoint checks the authoritative pause state.
• Pause reads fail closed when the registry response is invalid or unavailable.
• Read-only inspection remains available with an explicit paused status.
• Unpause and stale-cache behavior are bounded and cannot bypass authorization.

Required validation

• Test paused, unpaused, malformed, and unavailable registry responses.

• Cover every dependent contract entrypoint in a pause matrix.

• Test cross-contract call failure leaves local state unchanged.

• The PR explains the failure mode, the chosen design, backward-compatibility impact, and rollback or migration considerations.

• The PR includes CI evidence and does not contain secrets, generated noise, unrelated cleanup, or disabled checks.

Contributor deliverables

• Open a focused feature branch and do not begin implementation until assigned.
• Reference this issue with Closes #<issue-number> or Fixes #<issue-number>.
• Check off every acceptance criterion in the PR with links to the relevant code and tests.
• Include a security/correctness note explaining why adversarial inputs cannot bypass the new guarantee.

Maintainer quality bar

The PR must be independently reviewable, preserve existing behavior outside this scope, exercise failure paths, and pass the repository's complete required CI/CD checks. Reward eligibility is not guaranteed by this issue or by merging.

[Peolite001]

i would love to work on this issue