Follow-up split out of #11365 (ruled option A on its report's open question, ACCEPT comment 5402161645) — the one half of that card its claimed file surface deliberately did not cover.
The row to add
.claude/skills/pm-dispatch/references/review-checklist.md gains one spot-check: when an os-dev report's tests/evidence shows API reads where git would have answered (issue-list sweeps re-run instead of treated as PM-supplied, MCP GraphQL list/search calls for things git log/local grep answer), flag it at ACCEPT time. The instruction side of this rule landed in PR #11870 (os-dev.md rule 3 + dispatch-runbook.md); this row is what makes a silent dev regression visible at review — the reading itself does not surface it, which is why "the PM already reads the evidence" was rejected as an argument for dropping the row.
The constraint that makes this its own card
review-checklist.md is at line-ratchet ceiling 82/82 (headroom 0) — the row must be paid for by in-place compression of that file, which is its own small editing task and was outside #11365's claimed surface (widening a claim mid-flight is the collision the claim protocol exists to prevent).
Refs: #11365 (the ruling and the ACCEPT) · PR #11870 (the instruction half) · #11364/#11366 (the sibling quota rulings, landed via PR #11749).
Follow-up split out of #11365 (ruled option A on its report's open question, ACCEPT comment 5402161645) — the one half of that card its claimed file surface deliberately did not cover.
The row to add
.claude/skills/pm-dispatch/references/review-checklist.mdgains one spot-check: when an os-dev report'stests/evidence shows API reads where git would have answered (issue-list sweeps re-run instead of treated as PM-supplied, MCP GraphQL list/search calls for thingsgit log/local grep answer), flag it at ACCEPT time. The instruction side of this rule landed in PR #11870 (os-dev.md rule 3 + dispatch-runbook.md); this row is what makes a silent dev regression visible at review — the reading itself does not surface it, which is why "the PM already reads the evidence" was rejected as an argument for dropping the row.The constraint that makes this its own card
review-checklist.mdis at line-ratchet ceiling 82/82 (headroom 0) — the row must be paid for by in-place compression of that file, which is its own small editing task and was outside #11365's claimed surface (widening a claim mid-flight is the collision the claim protocol exists to prevent).Refs: #11365 (the ruling and the ACCEPT) · PR #11870 (the instruction half) · #11364/#11366 (the sibling quota rulings, landed via PR #11749).