Assess the next PRK.Client Lua UI migration slice

Inspect current develop's remaining native UI and recommend the next coherent Lua migration slice, with concrete reuse opportunities, authority boundaries, risks and validation scope. Investigation only; do not implement a migration without agreement. Worktree /home/mathias/Projects/worktrees/engines-lua-next-target; branch refactor/lua-next-target; base local develop 78bd6621e. Preserve the original checkout and unrelated work. Acceptance: trace shortlisted native presenters/controllers and existing Lua components; recommend a bounded target and explain alternatives and any unverified behavior. Assessment: recommend Mission Terminal as the next bounded slice. MissionTerminalPresenter owns offer cells, seven sliders, advanced visibility and label alignment; MissionTerminalController already separates request/accept rules, range/session lifetime and waypoints. Reuse core.window content-sized policy, core.icon_grid, generated typed action references, scoped preferences and LuaUiComponent. Keep MissionSliders wire conversion, committed slider state, rules and packet dispatch native; remove controller dependence on presenter.Sliders. Protect actions with current terminal/offer context and physical activation. Preserve Ctrl-click/context menus, cancelled drags on close/reopen, existing preference encoding, dynamic localized label alignment and combat-time refresh. Existing ui.on_value_changed is not proof of commit-equivalent semantics; check the need for a generic committed-value observer. ContentWindowSizing has only MissionTerminalController as a consumer and can be removed with migration. Alternatives: Friends requires reusable custom table cells for note chips and retains native note validation; NPC dialogue needs rich transcript composition, docked companion-panel lifecycle and native item hand-over; HUD is a separate coherent follow-up, Market needs native async state extraction first. Reviewed relevant production presenters/controllers, Core component documentation/modules and existing Mission Terminal test behavior. Read-only source assessment, no implementation or test execution; no live/platform claims. Worktree remains clean.