feat: add severity floor to review prompts

[sv-tmueller]

Closes #407

Part of batch #423

What

Adds a severity floor: five objectively checkable policy conditions make a finding must-fix, whatever the reviewer's overall read. Prompt text only, no code change.

1. A test deleted, skipped or weakened, without the PR body saying why.
2. --no-verify, or any other bypassed git hook.
3. A new dependency with no justification in the PR body.
4. A CI job with no timeout-minutes, or a workflow with no concurrency group carrying cancel-in-progress: true.
5. A change touching the full stack, shipped without e2e.

Surfaces

• PROMPTS in tm-review-changes.js (review, consolidate) and tm-review-codebase.js (area_review, architecture_review, consolidate), plus the matching prompts JSON, in lockstep. The Hermes renderer reads that JSON, so no separate Hermes copy exists.
• .claude/agents/reviewer.md and .claude/adapters/prompts/reviewer.md: new ## Severity floor section.
• Only the PROMPTS region of the workflow files is touched (the meta block belongs to Make each tm- workflow's meta a literal first statement #424).

For the human reviewer: docs/architecture/role-contracts.md

The reviewer section gains a "Severity floor" paragraph and the numbered list, after the Pass 2 paragraph. It is the host-neutral source both reviewer bindings derive from, so leaving it out would make it stale. This hunk was added beyond the issue's file list (lead decision, batch #423 Decision 2).

Decisions

• Workers: the floor is a severity rule ("if a finding you report matches one of these"), not a detection mandate. Detection stays with the dimension briefs and the consolidate/critic stage.
• Consolidate prompts say a floor finding cannot be downgraded, but may still be dismissed when false on the facts. The verify prompt is unchanged.
• tm-review-codebase templates add one sentence: a whole-repo review has no diff or PR body, so apply only the conditions the current tree can show.
• The prompt text does not cite process-core.md; condition 1 comes from the reviewer contract.

Tests

New severity-floor.test.mjs pins all five conditions in each of the 5 JS templates, the same 5 JSON keys, both reviewer.md files and the role-contracts.md reviewer section, plus the no-downgrade phrase in both consolidate templates. Red on main (17 failures), green now. npm test: 485 pass, 0 fail.

Version bumped 2.9.0 to 2.10.0 (minor). If #424 merges first, rebase and keep a version above main's.

No new dependencies.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

[sv-tmueller]

Tester report (round 1)

VERDICT: PASS
COMMIT: 866409a
FINDINGS: none
UNTESTED CLAIMS:

• The "may still be dismissed if false on the facts" escape in both consolidate templates (JS and JSON) is not pinned. severity-floor.test.mjs only checks the sentinel "cannot be downgraded". Scratch copy with the escape removed from codebase consolidate (JS and JSON together): npm test stays 485 pass, 0 fail.
• The tm-review-codebase whole-repo scoping sentence in its three templates is not pinned by any test.
• The "floor sets severity, not truth" wording in the three markdown files is not pinned. Only the five conditions are.
• The PROMPTS.verify check in the new test only asserts condition 1 is absent. Byte-identity to main is not tested. I confirmed it by hand: verify and scout are unchanged in JS and JSON.
  Checks run:
• npm test on the branch: 485 pass, 0 fail. node scripts/check-version-bump.mjs origin/main HEAD exits 0 (2.9.0 -> 2.10.0).
• All 5 JS templates are changed. Each JSON key equals its JS template. Slot lists, opening 60 characters, em dashes and "fable" are unchanged or clean. adapters/prompts/reviewer.md has 0 "CLAUDE.md".
• The diff for both workflow files touches only the PROMPTS lines (291 and 295; 267, 269 and 271).
• Drift mutations in a scratch copy under /tmp each failed the new test and named the surface and condition. The six mutations were:
  • a reworded condition 2 in the codebase area_review JS template
  • condition 5 dropped from the changes JSON consolidate key
  • condition 3 dropped from agents/reviewer.md
  • condition 4 dropped from role-contracts.md
  • condition 1 reworded in adapters/prompts/reviewer.md
  • the changes JSON drift also tripped prompts-sync
• Scratch merge with fix/424-literal-workflow-meta (1afc284): the only conflict is the plugin.json version line (2.10.0 vs 2.9.1). The two workflow JS files auto-merged. With 2.10.0 kept, npm test shows 495 pass, 0 fail. The merge was aborted afterwards and the worktree is clean.
  LESSONS: A sentinel-phrase assertion pins only the phrase. If a rule has a carve-out clause, pin it with its own assertion, or a consistent edit to JS and JSON can remove it unnoticed.

[sv-tmueller]

Reviewer report (round 1)

VERDICT: APPROVE
STAGE: quality
FINDINGS:

1. .claude/workflows/tests/severity-floor.test.mjs:83-87, should-fix. The test pins only "cannot be downgraded". Nothing pins the dismissal escape that goes with it. The escape carries real weight in tm-review-codebase, which has no verify stage: without it, a false floor finding cannot be removed. Fix: add a second sentinel, may still dismiss it if it is false on the facts, and assert it in both consolidate templates, JS and JSON.
   Evidence: sub-plan Decision 2 ("Without the dismissal escape, a false floor finding could not be removed"). The tester's scratch copy with the escape removed still passed npm test (485 pass).
2. .claude/workflows/tests/severity-floor.test.mjs:91-93, nit. The test is named "verify prompt is unchanged", but it only checks that condition 1 is missing from the JS verify prompt. Fix: rename it to something like "verify prompt carries no floor condition" and loop over all five conditions.
   Evidence: line 93, assert.ok(!norm(js.verify).includes(FLOOR_CONDITIONS[0])). Verify is in fact unchanged: it is context-only in the diff, in both JS and JSON.
3. .claude/workflows/tm-review-codebase.js:267,269,271 (and the matching JSON keys), nit. No test pins the whole-repo scoping sentence. Fix (optional): assert apply only the conditions the current tree can show inside the codebase loop.
   Evidence: sub-plan Decision 3. The tester's untested claim 2.
4. .claude/agents/reviewer.md:42-43, .claude/adapters/prompts/reviewer.md:29-30, docs/architecture/role-contracts.md:180-181, nit. "is still dismissed, with the reason" assumes the single reviewer has somewhere to record a dismissal. Its report contract has no such field (VERDICT/STAGE/FINDINGS/CHECKS/LESSONS, "nothing before or after it"), so the wording invites prose outside the contract. Fix: say the finding "is not reported", or similar, in all three files together.
   Evidence: the "Report contract" section in both reviewer.md files.
   CHECKS: n/a