v3.22.1 (review follow-ups): the counter comment, the raw fallback, the RU label

The three nits from the review of the rename/docs commits:

- the PWA comment above TEST_ACTION_KINDS still claimed the final SCP80
  counter is written back - the server persists every consumed counter into
  the preset and the snapshot carries the latest values (display only);
- test-scripts.md's `por` paragraph regained the RM raw fallback the rewrite
  dropped: a remote-management reply that cannot be the compact structure
  (its command count exceeds the command script that was sent, or the data
  is too short for TS 102 226 5.1.2 Table 5.1) is raw too;
- the RU help label reads "Очистка очереди проактивных команд" (the mixed
  Latin "proactive" is gone; the rest of the RU help says "проактивных
  команд").  sw cache simple-v405.

Docs/comment only - tests unchanged and green: 839 frontend + 804 Python.

docs/test-scripts.md

@@ -411,7 +411,10 @@ the decoded response (scripting `AB`/`AF`/compact forms).  An applet's **own
 TAR** answers with its application-defined bytes (the response form follows
 the command's TAR - see *The three status words*): its secured data is
 reported as `data` and no `sw` is decoded - assert such a response with
-`data` (the action's `por` object follows the same rule).  A PoR split over
+`data` (the action's `por` object follows the same rule).  The same raw
+fallback covers a remote-management reply that cannot be the compact
+structure - its command count exceeds the command script that was sent, or
+the data is too short for Table 5.1 (TS 102 226 §5.1.2).  A PoR split over
 several SMS parts is accumulated across SEND SHORT MESSAGE expectations: put
 the `por` check on the step that completes the sequence (intermediate steps
 should use `raw` or no PoR check).