@mrciphersmith/keryx 0.3.113 → 0.3.115

package/dist/core.js

@@ -28739,10 +28739,12 @@ function researchErrors(value, findings) {
     ids.add(id);
     if (!nonempty(o.source) || !nonempty(o.question))
       errors.push(`${id}: source and question are required`);
-    if (!["finding", "refuted", "out-of-scope"].includes(String(o.status)))
+    if (!["finding", "refuted", "out-of-scope", "narrowed"].includes(String(o.status)))
       errors.push(`${id}: unresolved research (${String(o.status)})`);
     if (!nonempty(o.evidence) || !nonempty(o.reason))
       errors.push(`${id}: closure needs evidence and reason`);
+    if (o.status === "narrowed" && !nonempty(o.remains))
+      errors.push(`${id}: narrowed needs a "what remains" text`);
     if (o.status === "finding") {
       const matches = findings.filter((f) => f && typeof f === "object" && (f.id === o.finding || f.global_id === o.finding));
       if (!nonempty(o.finding) || matches.length !== 1)

package/package.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "@mrciphersmith/keryx",
-  "version": "0.3.113",
+  "version": "0.3.115",
   "description": "Version-controlled project context for AI coding agents: code graph, architecture wiki, project memory, relevant tests, quality signals, and task flows.",
   "private": false,
   "publishConfig": {

package/src/gdskills/bundled/skills/review/review-orchestrator/SKILL.md

@@ -207,8 +207,7 @@ keryx review complete <review-id-or-path>
                       [--finding <id> --disposition <state> --evidence <ref>]...
 ```
 
-**An unrecognised option is refused, not ignored** — a misspelled flag exits
-non-zero rather than printing `status: closed` and writing nothing at all.
+**An unrecognised option is refused, not ignored** — a misspelled flag exits non-zero rather than printing `status: closed` and writing nothing at all.
 
 `--verifications` takes what `review-verifier` returned. `--scope` takes the
 whole `--json` output of `keryx review scope`, so the package records what the
@@ -234,9 +233,7 @@ Two channels, and both work:
   it: it is copied into the package it screened and removed from the slot, so a
   later round cannot be screened against a set nobody recomputed.
 
-Do **not** write the record inside the package directory before the ingest. A
-round that names no `--review-id` has not allocated that directory yet, and
-creating it makes the ingest take the next free name instead.
+Do **not** write the record inside the package directory before the ingest. A round that names no `--review-id` has not allocated that directory yet, and creating it makes the ingest take the next free name instead.
 
 `--refuted` takes the findings this round **raised and then dismissed**, in the
 same finding shape, each carrying `disposition: {state, evidence}` with one of
@@ -252,9 +249,12 @@ Everything except `unknown` must cite where the outcome is written down — the
 commit, the test, the decision. A recorded state and its citation cannot be
 overwritten by a later close; record a correction as a new round.
 
-**Closing a fix round without dispositions leaves every finding reading
-`unknown`.** That is not "the reviewers were right"; it is "nobody wrote down
-what happened", and it is the single reason the precision figure cannot be read.
+`review complete` on a PR-bound package refuses a merged PR or a moved head unless `report.md`'s first line names the reviewed SHA and says so; a package with no PR binding is unaffected.
+`review complete` refuses a report with no `Evidence level:` line (`static only — did not run: <what>` or `ran — <what>`); a package ingested before the field existed only warns.
+`review ingest` refuses an internal finding whose `quote` is not at its `path` at the reviewed SHA, and adds a `citation not found` line, never a deletion, to a rebuttal citing a rule or document that is not in the tree.
+A finding may close as `narrowed` (research obligation `"status":"narrowed","remains":"<what remains>"`); it counts as closed only with that text, and the report keeps it under "Refuted and narrowed".
+
+**Closing a fix round without dispositions leaves every finding reading `unknown`.** That is not "the reviewers were right"; it is "nobody wrote down what happened", and it is the single reason the precision figure cannot be read.
 
 Managed modes:
 

package/src/gdskills/bundled/skills/review/review-orchestrator/reviewer-input.schema.json

@@ -259,6 +259,19 @@
             },
             "additionalProperties": false
           }
+        },
+        "unavailable": {
+          "type": "array",
+          "description": "Sections that could not be read, with the reason. An empty section that is not listed here was read and held nothing.",
+          "items": {
+            "type": "object",
+            "required": ["section", "reason"],
+            "properties": {
+              "section": { "enum": ["affected", "wiki", "memory"] },
+              "reason": { "type": "string" }
+            },
+            "additionalProperties": false
+          }
         }
       },
       "additionalProperties": false

package/src/gdskills/bundled/skills/review/review-orchestrator/templates/review-report.md

@@ -34,8 +34,10 @@ what a reader must act on; everything else is folded.
 
 ```markdown
 <!-- slot:pre-verdict -->
+<only when the PR merged or its head moved: "Reviewed `<sha>` — the PR has since merged / moved on to `<new sha>`." as the very first line>
 **Changes requested — 1 Blocker, 2 Major, 4 Minor, 1 question.** <what holds, and where the risk is — one sentence.>
 Reviewed `<head>` against `<base>` · round N · <files> files, +<add>/−<del> · CI <green | red: check names>.
+Evidence level: <static only — did not run: tests, build | ran — the commands that ran>
 <!-- slot:after-verdict -->
 
 ### Prior findings            (fix rounds only)
@@ -43,6 +45,7 @@ Reviewed `<head>` against `<base>` · round N · <files> files, +<add>/−<del>
 ### Major
 ### Minor
 ### Questions
+### Refuted and narrowed      (only when a finding was dismissed or narrowed)
 
 <details><summary><b>Pre-existing (not blocking)</b></summary> … </details>
 <details><summary><b>Scope</b></summary> … </details>          (only when a pr-process note exists)
@@ -68,6 +71,25 @@ author answer, rendered under Questions, not as a finding.
 The second line is the context line: head, base, round, size, CI. If head moved
 during the round, add `· unchecked: <commits>`.
 
+The third line is the **evidence level** and is required: `Evidence level: static
+only — did not run: <what>` when nothing was executed, or `Evidence level: ran —
+<what ran>`. `keryx review complete` refuses a report without it.
+
+When the PR was merged or its head moved after the review, the report's first line
+says so and names the reviewed SHA, or `keryx review complete` refuses.
+
+### Refuted and narrowed
+
+One line per finding that did not stand as reported, kept with its evidence so a
+reader sees what was claimed and why it was set aside:
+
+```markdown
+- **F-007. Dismissed** — <the author's rebuttal, quoted>. <citation not found: …> where the cited rule is not in the tree.
+- **F-009. Narrowed** — <what the finding claimed>. **Remains:** <what is still open>. Evidence: <what was run>.
+```
+
+A narrowed finding counts as closed only with its "Remains" text.
+
 ## One finding
 
 Blocker and Major as a paragraph, visible: