chore: improve docs skills

.claude/skills/check-doc-consistency/SKILL.md

@@ -108,6 +108,22 @@ Group by severity:
 
 End with a verdict for the doc family or topic.
 
+### 5. Verification guardrails
+
+Before finalizing findings:
+
+- Quote the exact conflicting text from both sides when possible (doc vs
+  doc, or doc vs source).
+- Cite concrete `file:line` locations for both sides of the mismatch.
+- If you cannot ground one side with a concrete citation, keep the
+  finding but mark it **needs research** and do not classify it as
+  **HIGH**.
+- Re-check every **HIGH** finding against the current checkout just before
+  output to avoid stale or already-fixed claims.
+
+A zero-finding run is valid. If no contradictions are found, output an
+explicit clean verdict instead of inventing weak findings.
+
 ## Notes
 
 - This skill is read-only; hand findings to [[fix-docs]] to apply them.

.claude/skills/check-doc-drift/SKILL.md

@@ -116,6 +116,28 @@ For each finding give one line with a `file:line` reference for both
 the doc side and the source side. End with a two- to three-sentence
 health verdict per doc area.
 
+### 4. Verification guardrails
+
+Before finalizing findings:
+
+- Quote the exact doc text and the exact source-side text that disagree.
+- Include `file:line` for both sides of every finding.
+- If you cannot quote or locate one side precisely, downgrade the finding
+  to **MEDIUM** or **LOW** and mark it **needs research**.
+- Re-open and re-check every **HIGH** finding against the current
+  checkout before output.
+
+A zero-finding run is valid. If docs and source match for the audited
+scope, report a clean result.
+
+### 5. Suppressions (do not report)
+
+- Pure style or tone issues with no factual mismatch (hand those to
+  [[check-doc-expressions]]).
+- Naming preferences that are not contradictory and do not mislead the
+  reader.
+- Weak "might be stale" guesses without a concrete conflicting source.
+
 ## Drift patterns
 
 These recurring shapes are worth grepping for first:

.claude/skills/check-doc-expressions/SKILL.md

@@ -145,6 +145,30 @@ Group by severity:
 
 End with a short verdict for the page or doc set.
 
+### 6. Verification guardrails
+
+Before finalizing findings:
+
+- Quote the exact sentence, paragraph fragment, or command/context pair
+  that triggered the finding.
+- Cite concrete `file:line` locations.
+- If a readability claim is subjective and cannot be grounded in a
+  specific text defect, either rewrite it as a concrete defect or drop
+  it.
+- Re-check every **HIGH** finding to ensure the cited text still exists
+  in the current checkout.
+
+A zero-finding run is valid. If prose is clear for the selected audience
+and no comprehension-impacting defects are found, report a clean result.
+
+### 7. Suppressions (do not report)
+
+- Pure preference nits that do not change comprehension or actionability.
+- Repetition-only comments when the repeated text is intentional for
+  safety-critical visibility.
+- General statements like "too long" without a concrete place where
+  meaning is lost.
+
 ## Notes
 
 - This skill is read-only; do not rewrite the page until the wording

.claude/skills/check-doc-structure/SKILL.md

@@ -120,6 +120,30 @@ Group by severity:
 
 End with a per-doc-family verdict.
 
+### 7. Verification guardrails
+
+Before finalizing findings:
+
+- Quote the exact structural defect trigger (missing heading, stale nav
+  entry, broken anchor, unresolved link).
+- Cite concrete `file:line` locations for source and target sides when
+  applicable.
+- If a target cannot be resolved from the checkout, mark the finding as
+  **blocked** or **needs judgment** rather than guessing.
+- Re-check every **HIGH** finding against current files before output.
+
+A zero-finding run is valid. If navigation and structure are sound,
+report a clean result.
+
+### 8. Suppressions (do not report)
+
+- Cosmetic heading-style preferences when hierarchy and navigation are
+  still correct.
+- Pure prose complaints with no structural impact (route to
+  [[check-doc-expressions]]).
+- "Could be organized differently" suggestions without a concrete
+  discoverability or integrity failure.
+
 ## Notes
 
 - This skill is read-only; hand findings to [[fix-docs]] to apply them.