@c4a/context-cli 0.7.36 → 0.7.37

package/indexers/release-manifest.json

@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 {
   "protocol": "context.indexer.cli-release-manifest/v1",
   "package": "@c4a/context-cli",
-  "version": "0.7.36",
+  "version": "0.7.37",
   "issuer": "context4ai/context",
   "bundles": [
     {

package/package.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "@c4a/context-cli",
-  "version": "0.7.36",
+  "version": "0.7.37",
   "type": "module",
   "description": "Local runtime and Agent integration for traceable knowledge production",
   "license": "MIT",
@@ -24,17 +24,17 @@
   },
   "dependencies": {
     "@c4a/agent-graph": "0.3.0",
-    "@c4a/context": "0.7.36",
-    "@c4a/extract": "0.7.36",
-    "@c4a/extract-contract": "0.7.36",
-    "@c4a/extract-go": "0.7.36",
-    "@c4a/extract-mdx": "0.7.36",
-    "@c4a/extract-proto": "0.7.36",
-    "@c4a/extract-rush": "0.7.36",
-    "@c4a/extract-sql": "0.7.36",
-    "@c4a/extract-style": "0.7.36",
-    "@c4a/extract-thrift": "0.7.36",
-    "@c4a/extract-ts": "0.7.36",
+    "@c4a/context": "0.7.37",
+    "@c4a/extract": "0.7.37",
+    "@c4a/extract-contract": "0.7.37",
+    "@c4a/extract-go": "0.7.37",
+    "@c4a/extract-mdx": "0.7.37",
+    "@c4a/extract-proto": "0.7.37",
+    "@c4a/extract-rush": "0.7.37",
+    "@c4a/extract-sql": "0.7.37",
+    "@c4a/extract-style": "0.7.37",
+    "@c4a/extract-thrift": "0.7.37",
+    "@c4a/extract-ts": "0.7.37",
     "@mermaid-js/layout-elk": "0.2.0",
     "commander": "^11.0.0",
     "fast-xml-parser": "^5.10.1",

package/plugins/VERSION

@@ -1 +1 @@
-0.7.36
+0.7.37

package/plugins/claude/.claude-plugin/plugin.json

@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 {
   "name": "c4a",
   "description": "Start or continue a project-local knowledge workspace through one graph-routed entry.",
-  "version": "0.7.36",
+  "version": "0.7.37",
   "author": {
     "name": "c4a"
   },

package/plugins/claude/commands/context.md

@@ -251,7 +251,6 @@ already made for the same scope.
 | `context.gate.top_level_directory` | Confirm the concrete structure. | Same. | Knowledge map guidance |
 | `context.gate.knowledge_review` | Ask for a decision on the current HTML report. | Delegate when the Route permits. | `knowledge-review` |
 | `context.gate.deletion_scope` | A user-approved deletion of exact sources or approved pages needs no second question after the CLI preview; ask only before deleting additional objects outside that scope. | Same. | Source remove / article retirement preview |
-| `context.gate.force_review_approval` | If the user explicitly says `强制批准` after the report is inaccessible, execute the current force-approval Route without another question. | Same. | `knowledge-review` recovery |
 | `context.gate.package_output` | Ask. | Choose within the requested delivery scope. | `package-output` |
 | `context.gate.package_template` | Ask. | Choose within the requested delivery scope. | `package-template-review` |
 | `context.gate.git_delivery` | Ask before commit, push or MR. | Same. | Host Git delivery |
@@ -465,9 +464,8 @@ receipt or recovery step.
 inspection and resolution separate: inspection resources apply while inspecting;
 resolution resources apply once the decision is authorized. Neither replaces
 ordinary required reading. For ordinary Knowledge Review, use its selected
-dialogue; only the exact reply `强制批准` authorizes the report-inaccessible
-force-approval route. Do not offer that shortcut initially or treat generic
-approval as equivalent.
+dialogue to interpret confirmation, revision notes, or explicit approval after
+revision. Ordinary confirmation needs no review code or special phrase.
 
 For `execution.target: agent-host`, use the exact top-level host action with
 its required access, not a restricted child sandbox. For `configuration`, edit
@@ -571,7 +569,7 @@ above for every progress summary.
 Keep the exact HTML review report links the user actually used in this
 conversation. Include those links in a compact final `Review reports` section
 when applicable; do not reconstruct them from runtime files or describe managed,
-force-approved or inaccessible reports as user-reviewed.
+unread or inaccessible reports as user-reviewed.
 
 Publication is outside the Context production Route. When explicitly requested,
 use an installed distribution tool and its documented complete-output upload

package/plugins/codex/.codex-plugin/plugin.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "c4a",
-  "version": "0.7.36",
+  "version": "0.7.37",
   "description": "Start or continue a project-local knowledge workspace through one graph-routed entry.",
   "author": { "name": "c4a" },
   "homepage": "https://github.com/context4ai/c4a",
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@
   "skills": "./skills/",
   "interface": {
     "displayName": "C4A Context",
-    "shortDescription": "Initialize and advance a local, source-linked project knowledge workspace.\nv0.7.36",
+    "shortDescription": "Initialize and advance a local, source-linked project knowledge workspace.\nv0.7.37",
     "longDescription": "Create a Context workspace and use agent-guided next steps to register sources, run extraction, review candidates, build package outputs, and verify health without silently mutating source repositories.",
     "developerName": "c4a",
     "category": "Productivity",

package/plugins/codex/skills/context/SKILL.md

@@ -249,7 +249,6 @@ already made for the same scope.
 | `context.gate.top_level_directory` | Confirm the concrete structure. | Same. | Knowledge map guidance |
 | `context.gate.knowledge_review` | Ask for a decision on the current HTML report. | Delegate when the Route permits. | `knowledge-review` |
 | `context.gate.deletion_scope` | A user-approved deletion of exact sources or approved pages needs no second question after the CLI preview; ask only before deleting additional objects outside that scope. | Same. | Source remove / article retirement preview |
-| `context.gate.force_review_approval` | If the user explicitly says `强制批准` after the report is inaccessible, execute the current force-approval Route without another question. | Same. | `knowledge-review` recovery |
 | `context.gate.package_output` | Ask. | Choose within the requested delivery scope. | `package-output` |
 | `context.gate.package_template` | Ask. | Choose within the requested delivery scope. | `package-template-review` |
 | `context.gate.git_delivery` | Ask before commit, push or MR. | Same. | Host Git delivery |
@@ -463,9 +462,8 @@ receipt or recovery step.
 inspection and resolution separate: inspection resources apply while inspecting;
 resolution resources apply once the decision is authorized. Neither replaces
 ordinary required reading. For ordinary Knowledge Review, use its selected
-dialogue; only the exact reply `强制批准` authorizes the report-inaccessible
-force-approval route. Do not offer that shortcut initially or treat generic
-approval as equivalent.
+dialogue to interpret confirmation, revision notes, or explicit approval after
+revision. Ordinary confirmation needs no review code or special phrase.
 
 For `execution.target: agent-host`, use the exact top-level host action with
 its required access, not a restricted child sandbox. For `configuration`, edit
@@ -569,7 +567,7 @@ above for every progress summary.
 Keep the exact HTML review report links the user actually used in this
 conversation. Include those links in a compact final `Review reports` section
 when applicable; do not reconstruct them from runtime files or describe managed,
-force-approved or inaccessible reports as user-reviewed.
+unread or inaccessible reports as user-reviewed.
 
 Publication is outside the Context production Route. When explicitly requested,
 use an installed distribution tool and its documented complete-output upload

package/plugins/cursor/.cursor-plugin/plugin.json

@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 {
   "name": "c4a",
   "displayName": "C4A Context",
-  "version": "0.7.36",
+  "version": "0.7.37",
   "description": "Start or continue a project-local knowledge workspace through one graph-routed entry.",
   "author": {
     "name": "Context4AI",

package/plugins/cursor/commands/c4a-context.md

@@ -246,7 +246,6 @@ already made for the same scope.
 | `context.gate.top_level_directory` | Confirm the concrete structure. | Same. | Knowledge map guidance |
 | `context.gate.knowledge_review` | Ask for a decision on the current HTML report. | Delegate when the Route permits. | `knowledge-review` |
 | `context.gate.deletion_scope` | A user-approved deletion of exact sources or approved pages needs no second question after the CLI preview; ask only before deleting additional objects outside that scope. | Same. | Source remove / article retirement preview |
-| `context.gate.force_review_approval` | If the user explicitly says `强制批准` after the report is inaccessible, execute the current force-approval Route without another question. | Same. | `knowledge-review` recovery |
 | `context.gate.package_output` | Ask. | Choose within the requested delivery scope. | `package-output` |
 | `context.gate.package_template` | Ask. | Choose within the requested delivery scope. | `package-template-review` |
 | `context.gate.git_delivery` | Ask before commit, push or MR. | Same. | Host Git delivery |
@@ -460,9 +459,8 @@ receipt or recovery step.
 inspection and resolution separate: inspection resources apply while inspecting;
 resolution resources apply once the decision is authorized. Neither replaces
 ordinary required reading. For ordinary Knowledge Review, use its selected
-dialogue; only the exact reply `强制批准` authorizes the report-inaccessible
-force-approval route. Do not offer that shortcut initially or treat generic
-approval as equivalent.
+dialogue to interpret confirmation, revision notes, or explicit approval after
+revision. Ordinary confirmation needs no review code or special phrase.
 
 For `execution.target: agent-host`, use the exact top-level host action with
 its required access, not a restricted child sandbox. For `configuration`, edit
@@ -566,7 +564,7 @@ above for every progress summary.
 Keep the exact HTML review report links the user actually used in this
 conversation. Include those links in a compact final `Review reports` section
 when applicable; do not reconstruct them from runtime files or describe managed,
-force-approved or inaccessible reports as user-reviewed.
+unread or inaccessible reports as user-reviewed.
 
 Publication is outside the Context production Route. When explicitly requested,
 use an installed distribution tool and its documented complete-output upload

package/plugins/skills/context/SKILL.md

@@ -249,7 +249,6 @@ already made for the same scope.
 | `context.gate.top_level_directory` | Confirm the concrete structure. | Same. | Knowledge map guidance |
 | `context.gate.knowledge_review` | Ask for a decision on the current HTML report. | Delegate when the Route permits. | `knowledge-review` |
 | `context.gate.deletion_scope` | A user-approved deletion of exact sources or approved pages needs no second question after the CLI preview; ask only before deleting additional objects outside that scope. | Same. | Source remove / article retirement preview |
-| `context.gate.force_review_approval` | If the user explicitly says `强制批准` after the report is inaccessible, execute the current force-approval Route without another question. | Same. | `knowledge-review` recovery |
 | `context.gate.package_output` | Ask. | Choose within the requested delivery scope. | `package-output` |
 | `context.gate.package_template` | Ask. | Choose within the requested delivery scope. | `package-template-review` |
 | `context.gate.git_delivery` | Ask before commit, push or MR. | Same. | Host Git delivery |
@@ -463,9 +462,8 @@ receipt or recovery step.
 inspection and resolution separate: inspection resources apply while inspecting;
 resolution resources apply once the decision is authorized. Neither replaces
 ordinary required reading. For ordinary Knowledge Review, use its selected
-dialogue; only the exact reply `强制批准` authorizes the report-inaccessible
-force-approval route. Do not offer that shortcut initially or treat generic
-approval as equivalent.
+dialogue to interpret confirmation, revision notes, or explicit approval after
+revision. Ordinary confirmation needs no review code or special phrase.
 
 For `execution.target: agent-host`, use the exact top-level host action with
 its required access, not a restricted child sandbox. For `configuration`, edit
@@ -569,7 +567,7 @@ above for every progress summary.
 Keep the exact HTML review report links the user actually used in this
 conversation. Include those links in a compact final `Review reports` section
 when applicable; do not reconstruct them from runtime files or describe managed,
-force-approved or inaccessible reports as user-reviewed.
+unread or inaccessible reports as user-reviewed.
 
 Publication is outside the Context production Route. When explicitly requested,
 use an installed distribution tool and its documented complete-output upload

package/providers/context/actions/apply-confirmed-review.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
+schema: agent-graph.action.v1
+id: apply-confirmed-review
+runner: host
+effect: write
+handler: context.review.confirm-current

package/providers/context/graphs/workspace.yaml

@@ -184,7 +184,7 @@ nodes:
     kind: gate
     reasonCode: route.review.decision-required
     inspectionAction: actions/inspect-review.yaml
-    resolutionAction: actions/apply-forced-review.yaml
+    resolutionAction: actions/apply-confirmed-review.yaml
     delegated:
       inspection: skip
       resolutionAction: actions/apply-managed-review.yaml

package/providers/context/manifest.json

@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
   "schema": "agent-graph.bundle.v1",
   "provider": {
     "id": "c4a/context",
-    "version": "0.7.36"
+    "version": "0.7.37"
   },
   "providerManifest": "provider.yaml",
   "graphs": [
@@ -14,7 +14,7 @@
     {
       "id": "workspace",
       "path": "graphs/workspace.yaml",
-      "digest": "sha256:869b4dfcb052d45cc706e06aee9058ba72af9acc86c20ad3edb9b0217bf03459"
+      "digest": "sha256:ba5d93d4883c28e9dfd21829528684d8d6ad9b1523d5e1895b67dc5106b43f7c"
     }
   ],
   "actions": [
@@ -29,9 +29,9 @@
       "digest": "sha256:69ebc6ba54e3c59f3e17d97246fe7beae5ae15eb7b331e4e48ad59342a3fbada"
     },
     {
-      "id": "apply-forced-review",
-      "path": "actions/apply-forced-review.yaml",
-      "digest": "sha256:ed530819831b68824bd373dec399c73a30d7eeebd2ef72ae0eab3e7a60cad80f"
+      "id": "apply-confirmed-review",
+      "path": "actions/apply-confirmed-review.yaml",
+      "digest": "sha256:9e90af61f9c3aa5ceaacc84d9b886ad8abf14c7690a15044da3690e030254b29"
     },
     {
       "id": "apply-managed-review",
@@ -258,7 +258,7 @@
     {
       "id": "dialogue.knowledge-review",
       "path": "resources/dialogue/knowledge-review.md",
-      "digest": "sha256:d61cd56bc74ea0653ac6d02588115575ca7d7c21b4ac071d3868c4a2524242b6"
+      "digest": "sha256:685d6d408419d21a6cfb2affa008b260813193836a828486868a8700123cf11e"
     },
     {
       "id": "dialogue.package-output",
@@ -308,12 +308,12 @@
     {
       "id": "procedure.knowledge-review",
       "path": "resources/procedures/knowledge-review.md",
-      "digest": "sha256:fa37908e7766f62227e02f6d38f3f3cc9ec023fd1ab01374bcb56e11338cf6fa"
+      "digest": "sha256:c3707cfe0c53e3732366ee4b19873f7f609823b44746c9a694e6a3d44bfafd55"
     },
     {
       "id": "procedure.knowledge-updates",
       "path": "resources/procedures/knowledge-updates.md",
-      "digest": "sha256:44cea5c34793c775a0729f589f4436546528ddcde524e36fe16b5bad0f8e32e1"
+      "digest": "sha256:5f43cd5f6f1dd9260e11382867c71724d40699e99ef7c0d8a2c966000d449269"
     },
     {
       "id": "procedure.note",
@@ -458,8 +458,8 @@
       "digest": "sha256:69ebc6ba54e3c59f3e17d97246fe7beae5ae15eb7b331e4e48ad59342a3fbada"
     },
     {
-      "path": "actions/apply-forced-review.yaml",
-      "digest": "sha256:ed530819831b68824bd373dec399c73a30d7eeebd2ef72ae0eab3e7a60cad80f"
+      "path": "actions/apply-confirmed-review.yaml",
+      "digest": "sha256:9e90af61f9c3aa5ceaacc84d9b886ad8abf14c7690a15044da3690e030254b29"
     },
     {
       "path": "actions/apply-managed-review.yaml",
@@ -571,11 +571,11 @@
     },
     {
       "path": "graphs/workspace.yaml",
-      "digest": "sha256:869b4dfcb052d45cc706e06aee9058ba72af9acc86c20ad3edb9b0217bf03459"
+      "digest": "sha256:ba5d93d4883c28e9dfd21829528684d8d6ad9b1523d5e1895b67dc5106b43f7c"
     },
     {
       "path": "provider.yaml",
-      "digest": "sha256:0f561dd75d89ccbd26e3d9d0102607cf942a30ec180890be5f8551cdbb14e550"
+      "digest": "sha256:8a74deb769bb16186805bdf9e56b7eb7eca8e921a637337643f1ecc447a69d28"
     },
     {
       "path": "resources/contracts/indexer-provider-guide.yaml",
@@ -607,7 +607,7 @@
     },
     {
       "path": "resources/dialogue/knowledge-review.md",
-      "digest": "sha256:d61cd56bc74ea0653ac6d02588115575ca7d7c21b4ac071d3868c4a2524242b6"
+      "digest": "sha256:685d6d408419d21a6cfb2affa008b260813193836a828486868a8700123cf11e"
     },
     {
       "path": "resources/dialogue/package-output.md",
@@ -631,7 +631,7 @@
     },
     {
       "path": "resources/manuals/guides/knowledge-updates.md",
-      "digest": "sha256:c85e58acf930b9ffae128f0bb83d5494024dd81ae1c338df4a2fa6fa0a95695f"
+      "digest": "sha256:5ac2976982208339a2cb4142c3d2c0877ea35c6add63ce21d2253b5015c96fa7"
     },
     {
       "path": "resources/manuals/guides/lark-resources.md",
@@ -715,11 +715,11 @@
     },
     {
       "path": "resources/procedures/knowledge-review.md",
-      "digest": "sha256:fa37908e7766f62227e02f6d38f3f3cc9ec023fd1ab01374bcb56e11338cf6fa"
+      "digest": "sha256:c3707cfe0c53e3732366ee4b19873f7f609823b44746c9a694e6a3d44bfafd55"
     },
     {
       "path": "resources/procedures/knowledge-updates.md",
-      "digest": "sha256:44cea5c34793c775a0729f589f4436546528ddcde524e36fe16b5bad0f8e32e1"
+      "digest": "sha256:5f43cd5f6f1dd9260e11382867c71724d40699e99ef7c0d8a2c966000d449269"
     },
     {
       "path": "resources/procedures/note.md",
@@ -882,5 +882,5 @@
     "indexer": [],
     "workspace": []
   },
-  "digest": "sha256:29b92311749d0e5041e30fe8e2fec76bd8e29eea0fcbb3c1b7b6d5b6923d046f"
+  "digest": "sha256:bda37ec8c50797ca3c5eb3ceab11095cd51bb1f591a80eb4dcb3957a1447a9cf"
 }

package/providers/context/provider.yaml

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 schema: agent-graph.provider.v1
 id: c4a/context
-version: 0.7.36
+version: 0.7.37
 name: Context workflow
 description: Internal work contract for Context knowledge workspaces.
 graphs:

package/providers/context/resources/dialogue/knowledge-review.md

@@ -6,55 +6,58 @@ mediaType: text/markdown
 
 # Knowledge-review dialogue
 
-Explain that Review is the boundary between draft candidates and approved
-Markdown. In ordinary mode:
-
-1. open the complete current Review report;
-2. let the user approve, reject, or request revisions to candidates;
-3. ask them to copy the review code back into the conversation; and
-4. apply only that exact review code through the returned command.
-
-The user does not need to create a payload file; the Agent may write the pasted
-review code to ignored scratch storage for the CLI command. Preserve it exactly;
-do not decode, regenerate, summarize, or edit it. The code carries decisions and
-revision instructions together. If it exceeds 1,000 characters, use a direct
-reply (mention the Bot when relevant) instead of a length-limited form. Older
-segmented codes still require every segment in the same input file. If the CLI
-reports damaged or stale feedback, follow its diagnostic and request a fresh
-report/code; never repair a code by hand.
-Never derive a payload
-from HTML, candidate ids, snapshots, or a default decision.
-
-When the user completes a decision from the report, retain the exact report URL
-or local report path and reviewed scope in the current conversation for the
-final completion summary. Do not persist a separate workspace ledger or count a
-report as user-reviewed when it was inaccessible, fully managed, or bypassed by
-force approval.
-
-Do not mention force approval when first presenting Review. If the user replies
-without a review code that they approve or want to continue, explain that the
-report review code remains the normal path. Only at that point, when the report is
-unavailable to them, tell them they may explicitly reply with the exact phrase
-`强制批准` to approve the complete current scope without per-candidate choices.
-Execute the Route's `after-human-confirmation` force-approval command only after
-that exact phrase appears in the current conversation. Phrases such as `我批准`,
-`继续`, or `全部通过` do not invoke this escape path.
-
-Do not open Review for one page or module while another confirmed item in the
-same round is still being generated. If a repeat codeindex run has no delta,
-state that existing approvals were preserved and no Review gate remains.
-
-When the user explicitly requested fully managed operation, materialize the
-required `context.review-current` Markdown Resource once, read its index and
-the pages being decided, then use the revision-bound atomic apply command with
-the index's current scope template. Approve only pages actually reviewed; leave
-undecided and repair pages pending. Do not open HTML or persist a parallel review
-ledger. A partial review code in ordinary mode likewise leaves pending pages
-unchanged; all segments of that code are still required.
-
-After applying feedback, follow each returned repair command with the user's
-exact instruction. Repairs remain pending; neither copying nor applying the
-code approves them. Pending instructions are retained by the CLI and exposed in
-the current review resource after a session restart. Re-read and review the
-resulting candidate before approval. Do not silently replace a revision request
-with rejection or bulk approval.
+Present one current report for the complete agreed candidate scope. Ask the user
+to read it and confirm or return revision notes. Use the host's user-question
+tool when a response is needed. In a host supporting an opt-in feedback
+confirmation presentation, use that presentation with an optional feedback input
+and one explicit Confirm submit action. Otherwise use the existing question
+surface. Do not require review codes, exact magic phrases, read receipts, or
+per-article decisions from the user.
+
+Interpret the full reply in its conversation context:
+
+- Feedback alone: preserve the instructions, repair the affected candidates,
+  inspect the resulting content, generate an updated report, and ask again.
+- Explicit confirmation, approval, or permission to continue: apply approval to
+  the presented scope using the current revision-bound confirmation command.
+  There is no additional confirmation step.
+- Feedback plus explicit approval to continue after fixing it: repair first,
+  verify the resulting content against the instructions, then approve only the
+  affected resulting revisions and previously presented unchanged candidates.
+  Share the updated report for information and follow the next Route without
+  asking again. If the correction cannot be completed, report the remaining
+  issue instead of approving it.
+- A request to continue editing and show the result afterward authorizes editing,
+  not approval. Generate the revised report and wait for the user's decision.
+
+An explicit Confirm submission with empty optional feedback is approval. Nonempty
+feedback alone is a revision request even when sent with that same submit button;
+only an explicit instruction to approve after revision adds that authority.
+An ignored card, timeout, read progress or silence is not approval. Do not decide
+by matching isolated keywords. Quoted examples inside feedback are not approval.
+
+Resolve notes by canonical article ID or title against the presented candidates.
+If a title is ambiguous, ask only for that missing identity. Retain the report
+reference, scope and user intent in the conversation; do not make the user copy
+an internal JSON payload. The Agent prepares scoped JSON from the current review
+resource when needed. It may record pending instructions as repairs containing
+candidate_id and instruction, separate from approve/reject decisions. Applying
+repair instructions never approves a page. Follow returned repair commands and
+inspect actual new content, not just successful command receipts.
+
+A content change invalidates the old mechanical snapshot. For approved-after-fix
+intent, materialize the new scope after verifying the fix and explicitly map the
+result back to the authorized articles; leave unrelated new drafts pending. Do
+not widen prior consent to a new article or an unrelated change. Use explicit
+per-candidate decisions when the current batch also contains unapproved work.
+Keep source, identity, baseline, revision and atomic-apply checks intact.
+
+Retain the exact report URL or local path and the user's reviewed scope for the
+final summary. A generated or accessible report is not proof that it was read.
+Do not report fully managed or inaccessible material as read by the user.
+
+With explicit session-managed authority, consume the required current Markdown
+review resource and use its scope template and Route's atomic apply command.
+Read pages before deciding, leave repair and undecided pages pending, and reuse
+still-available review of unchanged pages. Do not open HTML or create a parallel
+review ledger. After any apply or repair, follow the freshly evaluated Route.

package/providers/context/resources/manuals/guides/knowledge-updates.md

@@ -324,16 +324,20 @@ assembled page and previous text without accepting the edit. Submit the same
 input without that flag to continue. A preview is not approval and does not make
 a stale revision valid.
 
-Review can approve checked pages while leaving repair pages pending. The HTML
-report shows the current site navigation, candidate changes and expected file
-paths. Unchanged approved pages retain their titles with omitted bodies. Enter
-revision instructions directly in the report; the copied code and following
-instruction lines must be returned together without edits. The CLI binds them to
-the reviewed content and baseline and returns repair commands while leaving
-those pages pending. Changed candidates require a fresh review. The HTML
-review code includes pending positions; managed Review provides the same current
-scope as a JSON template. Send decisions only for pages actually reviewed. Omit
-means a durable exclusion, not repair. Partial approval alone does not build.
+Review can approve checked pages while leaving repair pages pending. The report
+shows current navigation, candidate changes and expected file paths. Its READ
+progress is local to the browser. Enter revision notes in the article input,
+then copy the plain notes back to the conversation or simply confirm there.
+No review code is needed. Feedback alone leads to repair and an updated report;
+explicit approval continues the workflow. If the user asks to fix the notes and
+then proceed, verify the fix and approve only that authorized scope without
+another question. A request to edit and show the result still waits for review.
+
+The Agent uses the current resource's scoped JSON template, with explicit
+candidate decisions or repairs containing candidate_id and instruction. The CLI
+checks scope, content and displayed baseline before applying changes. Pending
+instructions survive a session restart. Omit means durable exclusion, not repair.
+Partial approval alone does not build.
 
 When the user requests an earlier delivery, use the Route's `context run
 --deliver` request. Independently approved pages can pass close/build while

package/providers/context/resources/procedures/knowledge-review.md

@@ -8,7 +8,6 @@ mediaType: text/markdown
 
 Agent policy: `context.gate.knowledge_review`. An instance-specific Bot may
 override the managed default and require the ordinary HTML review decision.
-The report-inaccessible exception is `context.gate.force_review_approval`.
 
 Review is the authority boundary between candidates and approved knowledge.
 Open one report for the complete current candidate set and apply only a payload
@@ -25,20 +24,22 @@ an approved path is a migration within the user's requested scope; do not ask
 again when that scope is already clear. The resulting Candidate still enters
 Review.
 
-Without explicit session-managed authority:
-
-- open the report returned by the route;
-- let the user approve, reject, or request revisions to candidates;
-- apply the exact copied review code through the returned review apply command; and
-- retain the exact report reference and reviewed scope in this conversation for
-  the final completion summary.
-
-The ordinary Route also carries a revision-bound force-approval resolution
-Action as an escape path. Do not advertise it when first presenting Review.
-Use it only after the user cannot use the report and explicitly replies with
-the exact phrase `强制批准` in the current conversation. That reply is the
-decision; do not ask a second confirmation. It approves the complete
-current scope atomically; no candidate-specific decisions are inferred.
+Without explicit session-managed authority, open the report returned by the
+Route and request confirmation or revision notes through the host user-question
+tool. Follow the selected knowledge-review dialogue to distinguish feedback,
+approval and approval-after-repair. Keep the exact report reference, presented
+scope and user intent in this conversation. The HTML contains reading progress
+and plain revision notes, not approval authority. Normal explicit confirmation
+uses the Route's revision-bound resolution Action and the report's scope snapshot.
+No review code or special approval phrase is required.
+
+For old automation, `review approve-all --force` remains a deprecated explicit
+approval alias and applies the current candidate scope without requiring a new
+report. Prefer `--confirmed` for new calls. The CLI also accepts existing legacy
+review files and translates their decisions and repair notes, retaining scope,
+content and baseline checks. Compatibility notices go to stderr, preserving JSON
+stdout. Never request or generate a review code; the page exposes only reading
+progress and revision notes. Existing pending repairs must still be resolved.
 
 With explicit session-managed authority, materialize the required
 `context.review-current` Markdown Resource once. Read its index and every
@@ -80,16 +81,19 @@ all candidate pages as New. Existing unchanged pages show titles only; changed
 blocks and previous text remain available for comparison. Navigation without a
 Git baseline is labelled as current context, not an invented historical diff.
 
-Approve accepts a candidate. Reject durably omits it; it does not request a
-rewrite or retire an approved article. Entering revision instructions requests
-repair and locks the other choices for that page until cancelled. Bulk approval
-requires confirmation and affects only undecided pages. When the report contains
-new top-level categories, the dialog lists them and requires explicit
-acknowledgment plus an eight-second wait before confirmation is enabled.
-New descendant pages under an existing category do not trigger this extra step. The copied code binds
-the candidate scope, exact content, displayed baseline and revision instructions;
-the CLI validates these together before writing any decision. Follow returned
-repair commands, then obtain review of the repaired candidates.
+Opening a candidate marks it READ once for that browser and content version.
+Read counts and revision notes are local convenience state, never approval or
+required CLI receipts. The total includes only current candidates. Typing notes
+immediately marks a page for revision; clearing notes preserves its READ state.
+The revision counter opens a card list of titles and notes, with links back to
+the articles. Copy exports plain notes with article IDs and titles. After copying,
+a five-second dialog previews the text; only that preview is truncated at 400px.
+
+The Agent converts conversation intent into current scoped CLI decisions or
+revision instructions. A rejection durably omits a candidate; it does not request
+a rewrite or retire an approved article. Repair first, inspect the actual result,
+and obtain a new decision unless the user already explicitly authorized approval
+after the correction. The latter applies only to the same agreed article scope.
 
 Use the affected page's `Repair` command in the review material, replacing only
 the correction instruction. Current candidates are repaired within this batch;