Fixes #53

Summary

• Bump the shared review result contract to schema 1.3 (additive only): add
  a verification_sufficiency_evidence array recording, per claimed
  validation command or test touching a materially risky change, the
  claimed_test_or_command, whether it exercises_material_risk (yes,
  no, or not_applicable), and reasoning.
• review-suite/scripts/validate.py: enforce structure and a clean-verdict
  consistency rule — an entry recording exercises_material_risk: "no"
  cannot pair with a clean verdict, since that would silently hide the exact
  gap this evidence exists to surface. Extend the stale-schema-version
  rejection so a v1.2 result now fails with a useful migration error.
• skills/review-correctness/SKILL.md: add the two required passes from
  Add correctness traversal and verification-sufficiency passes #53's body as dimensions of this single lens — a consumer/impact-traversal
  pass that populates Add consumer/impact-traversal evidence to the shared review contract #52's consumer_impact_evidence, and a
  verification-sufficiency pass that populates the new evidence array — and
  explicitly rule out routing to any specialist module.
• Add a new canonical fixture, verification-sufficiency-guard, modeled on
  the frozen baseline's verification-sufficiency miss (a release guard whose
  only claimed test exercises an already-safe branch instead of the actual
  owner-absent triggering condition).
• Add two real-runtime forward-evaluation scenarios under
  skills/review-correctness/evals/ modeled on both frozen v1 baseline
  misses, plus fixture-conformance and no-specialist-module tests.
• Migrate every canonical fixture, eval helper, and each bundled skill's
  standalone eval fixtures to schema 1.3; refresh the four bundled
  review-suite copies via just sync-contracts.

Why

• Use the v1 baseline to finalize and preregister the review v2 graph #59's decision record found both baseline misses in
  s1-correctness-orchestrator confident (zero ambiguity, 5-for-5 across
  independent attempts): a missed sibling call site of a changed
  permissive/strict helper, and a verification-sufficiency gap where the
  added test exercised an already-safe branch. Add consumer/impact-traversal evidence to the shared review contract #52 supplied the
  consumer_impact_evidence schema shape; this ticket supplies the lens
  behavior that populates and reasons from it, plus the new
  verification-sufficiency evidence array and pass. Specialist routing is
  dropped entirely per Use the v1 baseline to finalize and preregister the review v2 graph #59's decision record — no baseline evidence supports
  it.

Acceptance criteria (from #53's body)

• A multi-file contract fixture is not clean when the changed producer is
  correct but an unchanged consumer remains incompatible. — covered by
  Add consumer/impact-traversal evidence to the shared review contract #52's existing consumer-impact-traversal fixture/tests plus new
  real-runtime eval standalone-sibling-call-site-traversal.
• A verification-gap fixture is not clean when passing tests mock, stub,
  or bypass the material behavior the change addresses. — new
  verification-sufficiency-guard fixture plus real-runtime eval
  standalone-verification-sufficiency-gap.
• No specialist module (security, concurrency-as-a-context, migration,
  operational, or UI) exists anywhere in review-correctness after this
  change. — verified by test_no_specialist_module_exists and manual
  repository search.
• Every clean result contains completed consumer_impact_evidence and
  verification_sufficiency_evidence where applicable. — SKILL.md now
  requires both; demonstrated by real-runtime replay below.
• Clean controls and rejected connector findings remain clean. — existing
  fixtures migrated and still pass; a fresh agent given only
  repository-convention-clean's packet stayed clean with no spurious
  findings under both new passes.
• Deterministic tests and repeated real-runtime replay demonstrate the
  behavior on both target cases. — see Verification below.
• The preregistered v2 scoring gate is understood as informational
  context for a later, separate re-scoring ticket, not a gate on this
  merge (per the ticket body's own framing). No scoring harness was built.
• just format, just lint, and just test pass.

Non-goals honored

• No new public review lens added.
• No independent reviewer contexts added (that is Evaluate independent correctness discovery and per-finding validation #54).
• No risk-routed specialist modules of any kind.
• review-correctness was not turned into an exhaustive checklist.
• No product code under review was changed.

Verification

• just format, just lint, and just test all pass (241 tests in
  review-suite/scripts/tests, unchanged in count from the prior commit; 8
  tests in skills/review-correctness/scripts/tests, up from 3).
• just sync-contracts leaves all four bundled review-suite copies
  byte-identical to the canonical source.
• python3 review-suite/scripts/evals/audit_corpus.py passes for all 7
  corpora (no case-identifier leakage into reviewer-visible contract text).
• Real-runtime replay: a fresh, isolated agent given only the bundled
  skill/contract text and each eval's raw evidence (no access to the
  expected-result answer key) correctly reproduced the required verdict on
  both new standalone evals, twice each, and left the existing
  repository-convention-clean fixture clean under both new passes with no
  spurious findings.
• No file under review-suite/evals/baseline/v1/ or review-suite/evals/v2/
  was touched; Make clean verdicts require passing validation and current-head lens evidence #51's lens_executions and Add consumer/impact-traversal evidence to the shared review contract #52's consumer_impact_evidence
  behavior are unchanged and covered by their existing tests, which still
  pass.
• Initial review-code-change pass (fresh, read-only, raw-evidence-only
  context) returned a clean aggregate across all three lenses
  (solution-simplicity, correctness, code-simplicity) bound to this exact
  head/base.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code