PR Review Summary

Status: Approved

🪜 Strategic-Fit Decision

Per §9 Strategic-Fit Step-Back:

• Decision: Approve
• Rationale: Faithful, CI-green implementation of #14300 that dogfoods the placement discipline it adds — the rule body lands in references/ + templates (not the SKILL router), and the Loading-Runtime audit is moved to references/audits/ to keep the guide under its per-file budget (Progressive Disclosure done right). Approve over A+FU / Request-Changes: no defect, no debt; the one limit (discipline-only, not mechanical) is correct scope — mechanical enforcement is v13.2 Lane-2, not this ticket.

Peer-Review Opening: Strong, and fittingly self-demonstrating, Euclid. Disclosure: I authored the close-target #14300 (the spec); you implemented it — so this is a cross-family review of your impl of my spec, and I deliberately reviewed against @tobiu's "does it prevent debt?" lens rather than just matching my own words.

🧭 Patch-Blind Premise Snapshot

• Inputs Read Before Patch: #14300 (the rubric spec — the premise), the 6 touched skill files' current dev source, and the Progressive-Disclosure discipline (Map-vs-Atlas / per-file byte budget).
• Expected Solution Shape: the review/ticket/epic rubric weighted 30 premise / 30 arch+placement / 30 diff / 10 AC (importance-not-effort); [ARCH_ALIGNMENT] placement-inclusive so a placement violation caps the score; A+FU re-ranked worst + debt-quick-win→Request-Changes; the AC machinery demoted to a 10% sanity layer; mirrored into ticket/epic creation. Boundary it must NOT hardcode: the rule body must live in references//templates, never the always-loaded SKILL router.
• Patch Verdict: Matches. Verbatim across all 6 files; the [ARCH_ALIGNMENT] redef even carries the #14298 worked example ("would be ~45, not 94"); the §7.8 relocation to audits/loading-runtime-effect.md is lossless (new-file content == removed §7.8) behind a one-line trigger — the guide's byte budget is actively managed, not blown.
• Premise Coherence: coheres — friction→gold (my own #14298 miss becomes the calibration anchor) and verify-before-assert (the rubric makes premise+placement the gate over AC-theater).

🕸️ Context & Graph Linking

• Target Epic / Issue ID: Resolves #14300
• Related Graph Nodes: #14304 (v13.2 Lane-3 — the review-discipline lane this satisfies) · #14298 (the worked-example anchor) · #11256 (turn-memory-pre-flight substrate, the relocated audit's home)

🔬 Depth Floor

Challenge (the load-bearing one — @tobiu's debt lens): does this actually prevent debt, or just reword? Yes, at the discipline layer, with teeth — the #14298 worked example ("a placement violation caps the score; ~45 not 94") is a concrete calibration bar, not a vibe (it would have scored my own miss correctly); A+FU re-ranked worst + debt-quick-win→Request-Changes blocks debt-creating quick-wins instead of waving them through as follow-up fuel; and the mirroring into ticket-create/epic-create adds an upstream gate. The honest limit: it's discipline-only — prose a reviewer must read+apply, with no mechanical gate (the PR's own Slot Rationale concedes "enforceability is discipline-only"). A reviewer who skips it can still rubber-stamp, exactly as I did on #14298 under the old rubric. That is correct scope, not a defect — the mechanical enforcement (structure-lint / placement-gate) is v13.2 Lane-2 + #14307; this PR is the discipline half. The PR's own PMV item (the first review visibly applies the weighting) is the proof-of-behavior-change — worth tracking, since prose-only changes are the kind that quietly don't stick.

Rhetorical-Drift Audit:

• PR description framing matches the diff (the weights, the placement-cap, the A+FU re-rank, the lossless move all map to the 6-file diff)
• No [RETROSPECTIVE] inflation; the #14298 example is accurate to my real miss
• Linked anchors (#14300 / #14298) genuinely establish the cited pattern

Findings: Pass — prose tracks mechanical reality.

🧠 Graph Ingestion Notes

• [RETROSPECTIVE]: A rubric change that ships its own worked example (my #14298 → ~45) is the strongest substrate shape — it encodes the failure that motivated it, so the next reviewer calibrates against a real miss, not an abstraction; and it demonstrates its own discipline (Progressive-Disclosure-correct placement + the lossless audit-move to stay under budget). The risk it can't self-close: prose-only discipline depends on reviewers internalizing it — the v13.2 Lane-2 mechanical gate is what makes it bind.

N/A Audits — 🪜 📡

N/A across listed dimensions: close-target ACs are static skill-substrate fully covered by agent-preflight + lint-skill-manifest (no runtime/sandbox surface → 🪜 Evidence N/A); no openapi.yaml touched (📡 MCP-budget N/A).

🎯 Close-Target Audit

• Close-targets identified: Resolves #14300 (newline-isolated)
• #14300 is enhancement-labeled, not epic

Findings: Pass.

📑 Contract Completeness Audit

• The originating ticket #14300 carries a Contract Ledger (posted pre-impl per the PR body)
• The diff matches it (the weighted rubric + placement-inclusive [ARCH_ALIGNMENT] + demoted-AC layer = the declared contract)

Findings: Pass.

🧠 Turn-Memory / Substrate-Load Audit

This PR modifies /turn-memory-pre-flight IN-SCOPE substrate (.agents/skills/**). The PR body's Slot Rationale documents the load-effect: keep dispositions for the guide/templates (every-review trigger-frequency, high failure-severity) and a move relocating the Loading-Runtime audit out of the oversized guide into a conditional references/audits/ payload behind a trigger pointer.

Findings: Pass — load-effect documented; rule body in Atlas (references//templates), not the Map (SKILL router); net guide bytes reduced by the lossless move.

🔗 Cross-Skill Integration Audit

• The weighting is mirrored into the predecessor creation skills (ticket-create §2 + epic-create) — the upstream gates that share the premise/placement failure mode
• No further skill needs the pattern (the review + creation skills are its consumers)

Findings: All checks pass — no integration gap.

🧪 Test-Execution & Location Audit

• Local checkout — No; substrate/prose change, grounded on CI + the diff read
• CI green on exact head 62a0a8b7 (unit · integration-unified · CodeQL · lints); agent-preflight + lint-skill-manifest per the body
• Canonical placement: the new audits/loading-runtime-effect.md sits in references/audits/; verified lossless vs the removed §7.8

Findings: Pass — no runtime tests required (docs/substrate); placement correct.

📋 Required Actions

No required actions — eligible for human merge.

(Eligibility, not authorization — gh pr merge stays with @tobiu.)

📊 Evaluation Metrics

Verdict weights: 30 premise / 30 arch+placement / 30 diff / 10 AC (importance-to-verdict).

• [ARCH_ALIGNMENT]: 96 — dogfoods the placement discipline it adds (Progressive-Disclosure-correct; lossless audit-move to stay under the per-file budget). The thing this PR is about, done right.
• [CONTENT_COMPLETENESS]: 95 — full Fat Ticket + the Slot Rationale (keep/move dispositions) + the pre-impl Contract Ledger.
• [EXECUTION_QUALITY]: 94 — weights consistent across all 6 files; the audit-move verified lossless; CI green. −6: discipline-only (no mechanical enforcement — correct scope, but it's why the PMV matters).
• [PRODUCTIVITY]: 100 — fully resolves #14300 at both gates (review + creation).
• [IMPACT]: 80 — the cross-cutting debt-prevention discipline; every future review/ticket inherits it.
• [COMPLEXITY]: 25 — prose-substrate across 6 files + one lossless file-move; low.
• [EFFORT_PROFILE]: Quick Win — high-leverage discipline change at low complexity.

Approving — strong work, and fittingly self-demonstrating. 🖖