fix(node): report the transfer cap the node actually enforces

`transfer_state` read `slots.per_member` — the node-wide default — while
`_has_room` decides with `member_cap()`, which prefers the group's own signed
limit, and the handshake ack announces that same `member_cap()`. Three readings
of one number, and one of them was the odd one out.

In a group where the operator signed a higher limit, every lease update told the
client "cap: 2" while the node would grant five: the transfers widget draws
`used >= cap` as saturated, so a member with two transfers running saw the rest
of their slots disappear. Lowered the other way it is worse in the other
direction — the interface offers slots the node will queue.

Nothing was ever granted or refused wrongly; the enforcement was right on both
paths. It is the number beside it that contradicted them.

Two tests, one override above the default and one below, because a bug that
reads the node-wide value passes the first whenever the default happens to be
the larger number.

Node suite 1215 passed.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01AsoWC3GmhNdwVFomW3QjH3

1 files changed, 30 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/packages/meshbay-node/tests/test_transfer_slots_wire.py b/packages/meshbay-node/tests/test_transfer_slots_wire.py
index db8c17a..c9fc85a 100644
--- a/packages/meshbay-node/tests/test_transfer_slots_wire.py
+++ b/packages/meshbay-node/tests/test_transfer_slots_wire.py
@@ -93,6 +93,36 @@ async def test_a_queued_transfer_is_told_how_many_are_ahead(ctx):
     assert peer.sent[-1]["ahead"] == 1
 
 
+async def test_the_cap_reported_is_the_cap_enforced(ctx):
+    """A group with its own signed limit is told that limit, not the default.
+
+    Two code paths answer "how many may this member run at once": `_has_room`,
+    which decides, and this message, which the transfers widget draws. They read
+    the same value or the interface contradicts the node — offering a slot that
+    will be queued, or showing a member as saturated while the node would still
+    grant two more.
+    """
+    ctx["transfer_limits"] = {DOWNLOAD: 5}
+    peer = _join(ctx, "s1", "alice")
+    peer._do_transfer_open({"tr": "t1"})
+    assert peer.last()["cap"] == 5
+    assert peer._slots().member_cap(DOWNLOAD, ("g1", "alice")) == 5
+
+
+async def test_a_lowered_group_cap_is_reported_too(ctx):
+    """The same in the other direction: an override *below* the default.
+
+    Worth its own test because a bug that reads the node-wide value passes the
+    one above whenever the default happens to be the larger number.
+    """
+    ctx["transfer_limits"] = {DOWNLOAD: 1}
+    peer = _join(ctx, "s1", "alice")
+    peer._do_transfer_open({"tr": "t1"})
+    peer._do_transfer_open({"tr": "t2"})
+    assert peer.sent[0]["cap"] == 1
+    assert peer.sent[1]["state"] == "queued"
+
+
 async def test_the_reply_carries_no_name_and_no_path(ctx):
     """A lease holds neither, and `transfer_state` stays in clear — so this is
     the message where a filename would quietly become metadata on the wire."""