diff --git a/backend/__tests__/unit/services/agentMentionService.test.js b/backend/__tests__/unit/services/agentMentionService.test.js
index 679da64726..b006766fba 100644
--- a/backend/__tests__/unit/services/agentMentionService.test.js
+++ b/backend/__tests__/unit/services/agentMentionService.test.js
@@ -754,6 +754,72 @@ describe('AgentMentionService', () => {
       });
     });
 
+    // Humans are addressed by handle, and only by handle (TASK-070a).
+    //
+    // Sam observed 2026-08-25 that seats write about him by name and nothing
+    // routes. The frame taught three verbs, all of which move attention
+    // between AGENTS; none of them reach a person, and the paragraph never
+    // said so. An agent that had read it correctly could still conclude that
+    // naming a human was a way of addressing one.
+    //
+    // The control matters more than usual here. This frame already contains
+    // the word "human" twice (the token-misattribution clause) and the
+    // literal "@" many times, so a loose assertion stays green on a frame
+    // that has lost the routing rule entirely.
+    describe('human-handle cue', () => {
+      const frame = async () => {
+        setupForAgent({ agentName: 'openclaw', instanceId: 'nova', displayName: 'Nova' });
+        await AgentMentionService.enqueueMentions({
+          podId: 'pod-human-1',
+          message: { content: 'Hi @nova', id: 'msg-human-1' },
+          userId: 'user-1',
+          username: 'sam',
+        });
+        return lastPayload().payload.content;
+      };
+
+      test('tells the agent to @mention a handle when it needs a human', async () => {
+        expect(await frame()).toContain('@mention their handle');
+      });
+
+      test('states that a bare name reaches no one', async () => {
+        // The failure is silent — nothing errors, the message posts, and no
+        // attention routes — so the cue has to name the outcome, not just
+        // prescribe the handle. Without this an agent reads the rule as a
+        // style preference it may skip when the name reads more naturally.
+        const content = await frame();
+        expect(content).toContain('A bare name reaches no one');
+        expect(content).toContain('matched on the literal @handle');
+      });
+
+      test('states the handle is necessary and not sufficient', async () => {
+        // Without this the cue teaches, by contrast with "reaches no one",
+        // that the handle DOES notify. It does not: humans get no AgentEvent
+        // row, so the ceiling is a pull surface. An agent that believes it
+        // has notified Sam stops working and waits — a new false model, and
+        // harder to spot than the old one because the message now looks
+        // correctly addressed.
+        const content = await frame();
+        expect(content).toContain('necessary and not sufficient');
+        expect(content).toContain('nothing pushes');
+      });
+
+      test('control: the pre-TASK-070 frame does not satisfy the assertions above', () => {
+        // Verbatim from the clauses that shipped before this change, and they
+        // are the ones most likely to keep a sloppy assertion green: both
+        // mention humans, and the second is entirely about @handles.
+        const beforeTaskO70 = 'Never post through an operator\'s CLI profile (`commonly pod send`) '
+          + 'or a human user\'s token — that misattributes your words to a human. '
+          + 'replyToMessageId quotes and ADDRESSES a message — its author is pinged. '
+          + 'Rule of thumb: if your message answers one person, reply.';
+        expect(beforeTaskO70).not.toContain('@mention their handle');
+        expect(beforeTaskO70).not.toContain('A bare name reaches no one');
+        expect(beforeTaskO70).not.toContain('matched on the literal @handle');
+        expect(beforeTaskO70).not.toContain('necessary and not sufficient');
+        expect(beforeTaskO70).not.toContain('nothing pushes');
+      });
+    });
+
     // The overflow rule, and the qualifier without which it is harmful.
     //
     // @sprint-review (57706) traced it to `effectiveFollowerIds`, whose
diff --git a/backend/services/agentMentionService.ts b/backend/services/agentMentionService.ts
index 5995269af0..927faee881 100644
--- a/backend/services/agentMentionService.ts
+++ b/backend/services/agentMentionService.ts
@@ -554,7 +554,42 @@ const formatPodContextFrame = (podId: string): string =>
   // below for the hole it left open.
   `Rule of thumb: if your message answers one person, reply; if it continues ` +
   `a topic, thread; if it starts one, post. A reply inside a thread is allowed ` +
-  `and still addresses its author.]`;
+  `and still addresses its author. ` +
+  // Humans are addressed by handle, and ONLY by handle (TASK-070a, Sam
+  // observed 2026-08-25). Every verb above routes attention between agents;
+  // none of them reach a person. A human's attention is matched on the
+  // literal `@handle` — activityService's `mentions` filter tests
+  // `content.includes('@' + username)`, and resolveHumanMentionUserIds
+  // extracts handles from `[a-z0-9_-]` after an `@`. A bare name matches
+  // neither, so "Sam should decide this" is addressed to nobody.
+  //
+  // This is the human-facing twin of the gap ADR-018 D6.3 closed for bots: a
+  // message that is plainly ABOUT someone still has to be addressed TO them
+  // before anything routes. The bot version was a missing implicit-reply
+  // wake; this one is a missing handle, and only the author can supply it.
+  //
+  // Deliberately teaches the escape and not a heuristic. Whether a bare name
+  // SHOULD route is an open decision (TASK-070b) precisely because matching
+  // names is fuzzy — every message about Sam is not for Sam — so the cue
+  // must not imply that writing the name is enough.
+  //
+  // The handle is NECESSARY, not sufficient, and the cue has to say both or
+  // it installs a fresh false model in place of the old one (@sprint-review
+  // on #1244). Humans have no AgentEvent delivery row — `enqueueMentions`
+  // never enqueues for a person — so an @handle buys the `isMention` flag on
+  // the activity feed and nothing else. Even the thread-follow half is
+  // narrower than it reads: `resolveHumanMentionUserIds` is called only
+  // inside `if (threadRootId)` (:1743), so a plain channel post gets the flag
+  // alone. That surface is PULL — ADR-017's only-interrupter rule reserves
+  // push for the escalation envelope — so "I mentioned them" is never "they
+  // know", and an agent that stops there has blocked itself on a filter
+  // nobody may have opened.
+  `When you need a HUMAN — a decision, a merge press, an answer only they ` +
+  `have — @mention their handle. A bare name reaches no one: human attention ` +
+  `is matched on the literal @handle, so "Sam should decide this" is addressed ` +
+  `to nobody. The handle is necessary and not sufficient — it flags the message ` +
+  `in a mentions filter the human pulls; nothing pushes. Say plainly what you ` +
+  `need, and never treat a mention as an answer received.]`;
 
 // Cross-runtime consultation cue. Companion to the pod-context frame
 // above; same rationale (inline cue beats structured metadata per