vibe-coding-master 0.7.19 → 0.7.21

package/README.md

@@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ VCM helps you keep one task organized across dedicated roles:
 - Architect
 - Coder
 - Tester
-- optional Gate Reviewer
+- optional Reviewer
 
 It runs locally, connects to a local Git repository, creates a task branch and
 worktree, starts embedded Claude Code terminals, and manages handoffs,
@@ -133,7 +133,7 @@ If you want VCM app state to survive container rebuilds, set:
 7. Review the harness/bootstrap commit diff.
 8. Start the role sessions, or use the saved launch template / one-click start.
 9. Talk mostly to Project Manager.
-10. Let PM route work to Architect, Coder, Tester, and Gate Reviewer when
+10. Let PM route work to Architect, Coder, Tester, and Reviewer when
     enabled.
 11. Review the final result and close the task when finished.
 
@@ -290,7 +290,7 @@ The global launch template stores per-role defaults for the five workflow roles:
 - auto orchestration
 
 One-click start launches the four core roles. If any Gate Review Gate is enabled,
-it also launches Gate Reviewer.
+it also launches Reviewer.
 
 Translator and Harness Engineer are tool roles. They are controlled from their
 own panels, not from the main role tab bar or the one-click launch template.
@@ -331,14 +331,14 @@ Available gates:
 - Validation adequacy
 - Code diff
 
-When a gate is enabled, VCM uses Gate Reviewer as an independent review role.
-Gate Reviewer reviews artifacts and diffs, writes a gate report, and returns
+When a gate is enabled, VCM uses Reviewer as an independent review role.
+Reviewer reviews artifacts and diffs, writes a gate report, and returns
 only:
 
 - `approve`
 - `request_changes`
 
-Gate Reviewer does not run tests and does not choose owners or fixes. PM routes
+Reviewer does not run tests and does not choose owners or fixes. PM routes
 findings back to the responsible role.
 
 ## Translation
@@ -405,7 +405,7 @@ Gateway can:
 - translate mobile messages when Gateway translation is enabled
 
 Gateway does not expose the embedded terminal and does not send directly to
-Architect, Coder, Tester, or Gate Reviewer.
+Architect, Coder, Tester, or Reviewer.
 
 Common commands:
 
@@ -462,7 +462,7 @@ files.
 
 `Auto memory` is the switch for the entire automated memory workflow. During
 Review Task Harness after Final Acceptance, Project Manager, Architect, Coder,
-Tester, and an enabled Gate Reviewer submit proposals in sequence through
+Tester, and an enabled Reviewer submit proposals in sequence through
 `vcm-propose-memory`. Harness Engineer verifies and consolidates them before VCM
 applies the result. Roles cannot edit active memory directly.
 
@@ -484,7 +484,7 @@ Final Acceptance
 ```
 
 Memory proposal prompts sent to Project Manager, Architect, Coder, Tester, and
-an enabled Gate Reviewer use their normal task sessions and participate in
+an enabled Reviewer use their normal task sessions and participate in
 Round/Turn tracking. Harness Engineer review and retrospective work remain tool
 role activity and do not participate in Round completion.
 

package/dist/backend/cli/install-vcm-harness.js

@@ -8,7 +8,7 @@ import { renderArchitectHarnessRules } from "../templates/harness/architect-agen
 import { renderCoderHarnessRules } from "../templates/harness/coder-agent.js";
 import { renderCoderWorkerHarnessRules } from "../templates/harness/coder-worker-agent.js";
 import { renderArchitectScaffoldWorkerHarnessRules } from "../templates/harness/architect-scaffold-worker-agent.js";
-import { renderGateReviewerAgentRules, renderRequestGateReviewTool, renderTranslatorAgentRules, renderVcmGateReviewSkillRules } from "../templates/harness/gate-review.js";
+import { renderReviewerAgentRules, renderRequestGateReviewTool, renderTranslatorAgentRules, renderVcmGateReviewSkillRules } from "../templates/harness/gate-review.js";
 import { renderHarnessEngineerHarnessRules } from "../templates/harness/harness-engineer-agent.js";
 import { renderRootClaudeHarnessRules } from "../templates/harness/claude-root.js";
 import { renderGitignoreHarnessRules } from "../templates/harness/gitignore.js";
@@ -34,6 +34,8 @@ const CLI_DIR = path.dirname(fileURLToPath(import.meta.url));
 const APP_ROOT = path.resolve(CLI_DIR, "../../..");
 const VCM_PACKAGE_VERSION = readVcmPackageVersion(APP_ROOT);
 const MANIFEST_PATH = ".ai/vcm-harness-manifest.json";
+const LEGACY_REVIEWER_AGENT_PATH = ".claude/agents/gate-reviewer.md";
+const REVIEWER_AGENT_PATH = ".claude/agents/reviewer.md";
 const HTML_BLOCK_PATTERN = /<!-- VCM:BEGIN(?:\s+version=\d+)? -->[\s\S]*?<!-- VCM:END -->/m;
 const HASH_BLOCK_PATTERN = /# VCM:BEGIN(?:\s+version=\d+)?\n[\s\S]*?# VCM:END/m;
 const LEGACY_CODEX_HARNESS_PATHS = [
@@ -71,7 +73,7 @@ const AGENT_FRONTMATTER = {
     tester: {
         description: "VCM testing role for validation, test adequacy, approved-scope validation, and risk findings."
     },
-    "gate-reviewer": {
+    reviewer: {
         description: "VCM independent gate review role for architecture plans, validation adequacy, and code diffs.",
         tools: "Read, Grep, Glob, Bash, Write"
     },
@@ -171,13 +173,13 @@ const MANAGED_FILES = [
         content: renderPullRequestTemplateHarnessRules()
     },
     {
-        path: ".claude/agents/gate-reviewer.md",
-        title: "Gate Reviewer Agent",
-        agentName: "gate-reviewer",
+        path: ".claude/agents/reviewer.md",
+        title: "Reviewer Agent",
+        agentName: "reviewer",
         commentStyle: "html",
-        category: "gate-reviewer-agent",
+        category: "reviewer-agent",
         memoryBlock: true,
-        content: renderGateReviewerAgentRules()
+        content: renderReviewerAgentRules()
     },
     {
         path: ".claude/agents/translator.md",
@@ -380,6 +382,7 @@ async function main() {
     const dryRun = args.dryRun;
     const operations = [];
     await assertDirectory(projectRoot, "Project root");
+    await migrateReviewerAgent({ projectRoot, dryRun, operations });
     const manifest = await buildManifest(projectRoot);
     for (const definition of MANAGED_FILES) {
         await installManagedFile({ projectRoot, definition, dryRun, operations });
@@ -405,6 +408,32 @@ async function main() {
     });
     printReport({ projectRoot, dryRun, operations });
 }
+async function migrateReviewerAgent({ projectRoot, dryRun, operations }) {
+    const legacyPath = resolveInside(projectRoot, LEGACY_REVIEWER_AGENT_PATH);
+    const legacyContent = await readOptionalText(legacyPath);
+    if (legacyContent === undefined) {
+        return;
+    }
+    const reviewerPath = resolveInside(projectRoot, REVIEWER_AGENT_PATH);
+    const reviewerContent = await readOptionalText(reviewerPath);
+    if (dryRun) {
+        operations.push(plan(LEGACY_REVIEWER_AGENT_PATH, reviewerContent === undefined
+            ? `rename to ${REVIEWER_AGENT_PATH}`
+            : `delete after ${REVIEWER_AGENT_PATH} was installed`));
+        return;
+    }
+    if (reviewerContent === undefined) {
+        const migratedContent = legacyContent
+            .replace(/^name:[ \t]*gate-reviewer[ \t]*$/m, "name: reviewer")
+            .replace(/^# Gate Reviewer Agent[ \t]*$/m, "# Reviewer Agent");
+        await fs.mkdir(path.dirname(reviewerPath), { recursive: true });
+        await fs.writeFile(reviewerPath, migratedContent, "utf8");
+    }
+    await fs.rm(legacyPath, { force: true });
+    operations.push(done(LEGACY_REVIEWER_AGENT_PATH, reviewerContent === undefined
+        ? `renamed to ${REVIEWER_AGENT_PATH}`
+        : `deleted after ${REVIEWER_AGENT_PATH} was installed`));
+}
 function parseArgs(argv) {
     const args = {
         dryRun: false,

package/dist/backend/services/auto-memory-service.js

@@ -14,7 +14,7 @@ const MEMORY_FILE_DEFINITIONS = [
     { path: ".claude/agents/architect.md", title: "Architect Memory", role: "architect" },
     { path: ".claude/agents/coder.md", title: "Coder Memory", role: "coder" },
     { path: ".claude/agents/tester.md", title: "Tester Memory", role: "tester" },
-    { path: ".claude/agents/gate-reviewer.md", title: "Gate Reviewer Memory", role: "gate-reviewer" },
+    { path: ".claude/agents/reviewer.md", title: "Reviewer Memory", role: "reviewer" },
     { path: ".claude/agents/harness-engineer.md", title: "Harness Engineer Memory", role: "harness-engineer" }
 ];
 export function createAutoMemoryService(deps) {
@@ -151,7 +151,7 @@ export function createAutoMemoryService(deps) {
         const gateSettings = await deps.appSettings.getGateReviewSettings(input.baseRepoRoot, input.taskSlug);
         const roles = ["project-manager", "architect", "coder", "tester"];
         if (gateSettings.enabled) {
-            roles.push("gate-reviewer");
+            roles.push("reviewer");
         }
         const timestamp = now();
         const runId = createRunId(timestamp, "auto");

package/dist/backend/services/claude-hook-service.js

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-import { isGateReviewerRoleName, isHarnessEngineerToolRoleName, isTranslatorToolRoleName, isVcmRoleName } from "../../shared/constants.js";
+import { isHarnessEngineerToolRoleName, isReviewerRoleName, isTranslatorToolRoleName, isVcmRoleName } from "../../shared/constants.js";
 import { VcmError } from "../errors.js";
 import { readTranscriptTurnEvidence } from "./claude-transcript-reply.js";
 import { submitTerminalInput } from "../runtime/terminal-submit.js";
@@ -298,7 +298,7 @@ export function createClaudeHookService(deps) {
             }
         }
         return recordTurnEnd(input, context, eventName, {
-            dispatchRouteFiles: !isGateReviewerRoleName(input.role),
+            dispatchRouteFiles: !isReviewerRoleName(input.role),
             notifyGateway: true,
             settleGuard: true
         });
@@ -347,7 +347,7 @@ export function createClaudeHookService(deps) {
         if (hasCompletionEvidence) {
             await clearStopFailureRecoveryState(context, input.role);
             return recordTurnEnd(input, context, eventName, {
-                dispatchRouteFiles: !isGateReviewerRoleName(input.role),
+                dispatchRouteFiles: !isReviewerRoleName(input.role),
                 notifyGateway: false,
                 settleGuard: true
             });

package/dist/backend/services/gate-review-service.js

@@ -6,11 +6,11 @@ import { VcmError } from "../errors.js";
 import { resolveRepoPath } from "../adapters/filesystem.js";
 import { submitTerminalInput } from "../runtime/terminal-submit.js";
 import { getTaskRuntimeRepoRoot } from "./task-service.js";
-const GATE_REVIEW_AGENT_PATH = ".claude/agents/gate-reviewer.md";
+const REVIEWER_AGENT_PATH = ".claude/agents/reviewer.md";
 const GATE_REVIEW_DIR = ".ai/vcm/gate-reviews";
 const REQUESTS_DIR = ".ai/vcm/gate-reviews/requests";
 const GATE_REVIEW_VERSION = 1;
-const GATE_REVIEWER_ROLE = "gate-reviewer";
+const REVIEWER_ROLE = "reviewer";
 const DEFAULT_REPORT_POLL_INTERVAL_MS = 1000;
 const DEFAULT_REPORT_TIMEOUT_MS = 30 * 60 * 1000;
 const activeRuns = new Set();
@@ -431,7 +431,7 @@ export function createGateReviewService(deps) {
             });
             await updateRequestStatus(deps.fs, context, requestId, "running", { startedAt: timestamp });
             const reviewDir = resolveRepoPath(context.taskRepoRoot, GATE_REVIEW_DIR);
-            const agentPath = resolveRepoPath(context.repoRoot, GATE_REVIEW_AGENT_PATH);
+            const agentPath = resolveRepoPath(context.repoRoot, REVIEWER_AGENT_PATH);
             const prompt = buildGatePrompt(context, gate, requestId, codeDiffInput, codeDiffSources);
             await deps.fs.ensureDir(reviewDir);
             await deps.fs.ensureDir(resolveRepoPath(context.taskRepoRoot, REQUESTS_DIR));
@@ -439,20 +439,20 @@ export function createGateReviewService(deps) {
             if (!(await deps.fs.pathExists(agentPath))) {
                 throw new VcmError({
                     code: "GATE_REVIEW_AGENT_MISSING",
-                    message: `${GATE_REVIEW_AGENT_PATH} does not exist.`,
+                    message: `${REVIEWER_AGENT_PATH} does not exist.`,
                     statusCode: 409,
                     hint: "Apply the VCM harness before requesting Gate Review Gates."
                 });
             }
-            const session = await ensureGateReviewerSession(context);
+            const session = await ensureReviewerSession(context);
             await submitTerminalInput(deps.runtime, session.id, prompt);
-            await deps.sessionService.markRoleActivityRunning(context.repoRoot, context.taskSlug, GATE_REVIEWER_ROLE, session.id);
+            await deps.sessionService.markRoleActivityRunning(context.repoRoot, context.taskSlug, REVIEWER_ROLE, session.id);
             await deps.roundService.recordRoleTurnEvent({
                 repoRoot: context.repoRoot,
                 stateRepoRoot: context.taskRepoRoot,
                 stateRoot: context.stateRoot,
                 taskSlug: context.taskSlug,
-                role: GATE_REVIEWER_ROLE,
+                role: REVIEWER_ROLE,
                 eventName: "UserPromptSubmit"
             });
             const parsed = await waitForGateReport(deps.fs, context.taskRepoRoot, gate, requestId, now(), {
@@ -501,24 +501,24 @@ export function createGateReviewService(deps) {
             activeRuns.delete(runKey);
         }
     }
-    async function ensureGateReviewerSession(context) {
-        const existing = await deps.sessionService.getRoleSession(context.repoRoot, context.taskSlug, GATE_REVIEWER_ROLE);
+    async function ensureReviewerSession(context) {
+        const existing = await deps.sessionService.getRoleSession(context.repoRoot, context.taskSlug, REVIEWER_ROLE);
         if (existing?.status === "running" && deps.runtime.getSession(existing.id)) {
             return existing;
         }
         if (existing?.claudeSessionId) {
             try {
-                return await deps.sessionService.resumeRoleSession(context.repoRoot, context.taskSlug, GATE_REVIEWER_ROLE, {
+                return await deps.sessionService.resumeRoleSession(context.repoRoot, context.taskSlug, REVIEWER_ROLE, {
                     cols: 100,
                     rows: 28,
                     model: "default"
                 });
             }
             catch {
-                // Fall through to a fresh Gate Reviewer terminal if the saved session cannot be resumed.
+                // Fall through to a fresh Reviewer terminal if the saved session cannot be resumed.
             }
         }
-        return deps.sessionService.startRoleSession(context.repoRoot, context.taskSlug, GATE_REVIEWER_ROLE, {
+        return deps.sessionService.startRoleSession(context.repoRoot, context.taskSlug, REVIEWER_ROLE, {
             cols: 100,
             rows: 28,
             model: "default"
@@ -891,7 +891,7 @@ async function computeInputHash(deps, taskRepoRoot, gate, codeDiffInput, codeDif
         "CLAUDE.md",
         ".claude/agents/architect.md",
         ".claude/agents/coder.md",
-        ".claude/agents/gate-reviewer.md",
+        ".claude/agents/reviewer.md",
         ".claude/agents/tester.md",
         ".claude/skills/vcm-gate-review/SKILL.md",
         ".ai/tools/request-gate-review",
@@ -1048,13 +1048,13 @@ function buildGatePrompt(context, gate, requestId, codeDiffInput, codeDiffSource
         ? "\nDiff: inspect git status/diff in Worktree."
         : "";
     const architectureContract = gate === "architecture-plan"
-        ? "\n\nComplete every Architecture Analysis field required by the Gate Reviewer role with concrete current-worktree evidence before deciding."
+        ? "\n\nComplete every Architecture Analysis field required by the Reviewer role with concrete current-worktree evidence before deciding."
         : "";
     const validationContract = gate === "validation-adequacy"
-        ? "\n\nComplete every Validation Analysis field required by the Gate Reviewer role with concrete current-worktree production and test evidence before deciding."
+        ? "\n\nComplete every Validation Analysis field required by the Reviewer role with concrete current-worktree production and test evidence before deciding."
         : "";
     const codeDiffContract = gate === "code-diff"
-        ? "\n\nComplete every Code Diff Analysis field required by the Gate Reviewer role with concrete evidence from the named commit range before deciding."
+        ? "\n\nComplete every Code Diff Analysis field required by the Reviewer role with concrete evidence from the named commit range before deciding."
         : "";
     const codeDiffSection = gate === "code-diff" && codeDiffInput
         ? `
@@ -1109,7 +1109,7 @@ async function waitForGateReport(fs, taskRepoRoot, gate, requestId, timestamp, o
     const detail = errorMessage(lastError);
     throw new VcmError({
         code: "GATE_REVIEW_REPORT_TIMEOUT",
-        message: `Gate Reviewer did not produce a valid ${gate} report within ${Math.round(options.timeoutMs / 1000)}s.`,
+        message: `Reviewer did not produce a valid ${gate} report within ${Math.round(options.timeoutMs / 1000)}s.`,
         statusCode: 504,
         hint: detail
     });

package/dist/backend/services/harness-service.js

@@ -5,7 +5,7 @@ import { renderArchitectHarnessRules } from "../templates/harness/architect-agen
 import { renderCoderHarnessRules } from "../templates/harness/coder-agent.js";
 import { renderCoderWorkerHarnessRules } from "../templates/harness/coder-worker-agent.js";
 import { renderArchitectScaffoldWorkerHarnessRules } from "../templates/harness/architect-scaffold-worker-agent.js";
-import { renderGateReviewerAgentRules, renderRequestGateReviewTool, renderTranslatorAgentRules, renderVcmGateReviewSkillRules } from "../templates/harness/gate-review.js";
+import { renderReviewerAgentRules, renderRequestGateReviewTool, renderTranslatorAgentRules, renderVcmGateReviewSkillRules } from "../templates/harness/gate-review.js";
 import { renderHarnessEngineerHarnessRules } from "../templates/harness/harness-engineer-agent.js";
 import { renderRootClaudeHarnessRules } from "../templates/harness/claude-root.js";
 import { renderGitignoreHarnessRules } from "../templates/harness/gitignore.js";
@@ -183,12 +183,12 @@ const HARNESS_FILES = [
         renderRules: renderRestartArchitectSkillRules
     },
     {
-        kind: "agent-gate-reviewer",
-        path: ".claude/agents/gate-reviewer.md",
-        title: "Gate Reviewer Agent",
+        kind: "agent-reviewer",
+        path: ".claude/agents/reviewer.md",
+        title: "Reviewer Agent",
         memoryBlock: true,
-        frontmatter: renderAgentFrontmatter("gate-reviewer", "VCM independent gate review role for architecture plans, validation adequacy, and code diffs.", { tools: "Read, Grep, Glob, Bash, Write" }),
-        renderRules: renderGateReviewerAgentRules
+        frontmatter: renderAgentFrontmatter("reviewer", "VCM independent gate review role for architecture plans, validation adequacy, and code diffs.", { tools: "Read, Grep, Glob, Bash, Write" }),
+        renderRules: renderReviewerAgentRules
     },
     {
         kind: "agent-translator",
@@ -1279,7 +1279,7 @@ async function analyzeLegacyCodexHarnessPaths(fs, repoRoot) {
         changes.push({
             path: relativePath,
             action: "delete",
-            reason: "Legacy Codex harness path is obsolete; VCM now uses Claude Code Gate Reviewer and Translator roles."
+            reason: "Legacy Codex harness path is obsolete; VCM now uses Claude Code Reviewer and Translator roles."
         });
     }
     return changes;

package/dist/backend/services/task-launch-service.js

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-import { CORE_VCM_ROLE_DEFINITIONS, GATE_REVIEWER_ROLE_DEFINITION, VCM_ROLE_NAMES } from "../../shared/constants.js";
+import { CORE_VCM_ROLE_DEFINITIONS, REVIEWER_ROLE_DEFINITION, VCM_ROLE_NAMES } from "../../shared/constants.js";
 import { VcmError } from "../errors.js";
 import { getTaskRuntimeRepoRoot } from "./task-service.js";
 const ONE_CLICK_SESSION_COLS = 100;
@@ -25,10 +25,10 @@ export function createTaskLaunchService(deps) {
             mode
         });
     }
-    function composeRoleDefinitions(gateReviewerEnabled) {
+    function composeRoleDefinitions(reviewerEnabled) {
         return [
             ...CORE_VCM_ROLE_DEFINITIONS,
-            ...(gateReviewerEnabled ? [GATE_REVIEWER_ROLE_DEFINITION] : [])
+            ...(reviewerEnabled ? [REVIEWER_ROLE_DEFINITION] : [])
         ];
     }
     // Skip a running role, resume one that has a prior Claude session, otherwise

package/dist/backend/templates/harness/architect-agent.js

@@ -22,10 +22,11 @@ ${renderRoleMemoryRules("architect")}
 ### Architecture Interview
 
 - Before the first Architecture Planning step of Code-Change Flow, use \`vcm-architecture-interview\` and complete \`.ai/vcm/handoffs/architecture-brief.md\` and \`.ai/vcm/handoffs/architecture-evidence.md\`.
-- Read project evidence before asking questions. Ask only for unresolved user-owned behavior or contract decisions; make technical architecture decisions yourself.
+- Read project evidence before asking questions. Ask only for unresolved user-owned behavior or contract decisions; make routine technical architecture decisions yourself.
+- During the interview, draft the correctness-critical mechanisms and check their feasibility against current code and the authoritative spec or domain docs. Surface any spec or code conflict, and any correctness-, determinism-, or safety-critical mechanism choice you cannot settle from evidence, to the user for decision rather than settling it silently; record each decision's provenance in the brief (see \`vcm-architecture-interview\`).
 - Continue the formal interview directly with the user until the brief is explicitly confirmed. Do not report each answer to project-manager.
-- Do not write or revise \`architecture-plan.md\`, create scaffold, or implement code during Architect Interview.
-- After confirmation and evidence completion, report both artifacts to project-manager and stop. Project-manager must route Architect planning separately.
+- Do not write or revise \`architecture-plan.md\`, create scaffold, or implement code before the brief is confirmed; until then, gather evidence and draft the feasibility mechanisms only. Begin planning only after confirmation, in the same turn.
+- After the user confirms the brief and evidence is complete, continue directly into Architecture Planning in the same turn; do not stop for a separate planning route. Report to project-manager once the confirmed brief, complete evidence, and complete plan are all ready, so PM can run the architecture-plan Gate.
 
 ### Planning Inputs
 
@@ -75,7 +76,7 @@ ${renderRoleMemoryRules("architect")}
 - \`Current Code Reality\`: cite \`architecture-evidence.md\` and summarize only the verified facts that constrain the architecture decision. Do not duplicate the full evidence inventory. For any module whose build configuration the plan changes, the evidence artifact must quote its complete direct dependency list from the package manifest, never a summary or selection.
 - Any enumeration the plan presents as complete over the codebase — call-site inventories, module or file lists, symbol sets — must either record the deterministic, repository-local command that generates it (run at the scaffold commit, the set transcribed from its output) or be explicitly marked as judgment-derived with the evidence basis for its completeness. A complete-claimed enumeration with neither is not evidence.
 - \`Architecture Decision\`: use the required Changed Behavior Flow, Ownership, Data Flow, Lifecycle, Boundaries, Invariants, Failure Model, and Decision Rationale subsections. Describe why the design fits verified current code.
-- \`Module/File Plan\`: list each affected module, changed or created file, file responsibility, why it is in scope, expected change, dependency direction, user-visible behavior change, durable comment needs, and every non-private callable surface intended for use outside its file.
+- \`Module/File Plan\`: list each affected module, changed or created file, file responsibility, why it is in scope, expected change, dependency direction, user-visible behavior change, durable comment needs, and every non-private callable surface intended for use outside its file. For every ledger item that consumes or sources cross-module data, name the module and symbol that owns or produces the data, trace the source-to-consumer path, and identify every field, parameter, accessor, trait method, command field, dependency, or other cross-file surface required by that path.
 - \`Public Surface Impact\`: state changed APIs, routes, commands, events, exports, storage formats, configuration, UI behavior, visibility changes, side effects, error boundaries, expected callers, or explicitly state none.
 - \`Scaffold Manifest\`: an item ledger — one entry per implementation item. An item is one of: a created body or surface (\`create\`), one required change site — one contiguous edit region inside an existing body or surface (\`change\`), or one deletion of a body, site, or file (\`delete\`). An item not in the ledger is not in the plan; coder must not implement it.
 - Each ledger entry carries, in this column order: a unique stable ID such as \`SCF-001\`, action, exact file path, symbol or site, coder work, allowed implementation freedom, and a behavior/contract proof point. Per-file evidence, why-in-scope, and durable-comment needs live in the Module/File Plan, not in the ledger. Open-ended coverage language ("as work proceeds", "replicate", "etc.", "and others") is forbidden anywhere in the ledger.
@@ -90,7 +91,7 @@ ${renderRoleMemoryRules("architect")}
 - \`Known Risks\`: state concrete remaining technical risks, uncertainty, or validation risks that coder or tester must pay attention to.
 - \`Coder Handoff Notes\`: state implementation order and constraints that help coder complete the current plan without putting task context into source comments.
 - Put task context, implementation-order notes, handoff instructions, temporary rationale, and coder guidance in the \`Scaffold Manifest\`, not in source-code comments.
-- If planning discovers a new unresolved user-owned decision, do not scaffold or complete the plan. Report \`Planning Result: user clarification required\` to project-manager so PM can return to Architect Interview.
+- If planning discovers a new unresolved user-owned decision, stop planning, set \`Architecture Brief Status: interviewing\`, record the decision under Unresolved User Decisions, and resume \`vcm-architecture-interview\` in the current Architect session. Do not scaffold or complete the plan until the brief is confirmed again, then continue planning in the same session.
 
 #### Code Scaffolding
 
@@ -100,6 +101,7 @@ ${renderRoleMemoryRules("architect")}
 - Create or update only the minimum module/file scaffolding needed to make boundaries, callable surfaces, and placeholders unambiguous. Minimum limits depth (no business implementation), never breadth: every \`create\`, \`change\`, and \`delete\` item must be scaffolded.
 - When a required configuration, package manifest, or build-definition change cannot safely contain a \`VCM:CODE\` marker, complete and commit it directly as Architect-owned scaffold work. Record it in the Module/File Plan and Scaffold Build Evidence. Do not add it to the Scaffold Manifest.
 - When the plan introduces a new cross-module call path or seam — a module invoking surfaces it does not invoke today — scaffold one wired exemplar that materializes the full path shape: the imports, interface implementations, and conditional-compilation gating the intended body needs, with placeholder bodies only. Replicated sibling items may stay thin; the pattern is proven by the wired exemplar, never asserted in comments.
+- For every cross-module data path, materialize each path-shaping surface in current code or scaffold before planning is complete. If a required hop needs another file or surface, include it in the Module/File Plan and scaffold it; do not leave Coder to invent the data source or cross-file path.
 - Source-code comments must describe durable behavior, contracts, invariants, error boundaries, or non-obvious logic that should remain useful after the task is complete.
 - Do not put task-specific context, task labels, implementation-order notes, handoff instructions, temporary plan rationale, or coder guidance in source-code comments.
 - Task labels such as \`RP<n>\`, \`SCF-<n>\`, \`KI-<n>\`, \`Phase <n>\`, or temporary task/round/PR labels must not appear in durable source comments.

package/dist/backend/templates/harness/gate-review.js

@@ -1,10 +1,10 @@
 import { renderRoleMemoryRules } from "./role-memory.js";
-export function renderGateReviewerAgentRules() {
+export function renderReviewerAgentRules() {
     return `## Role
 
-You are VCM \`gate-reviewer\`.
+You are VCM \`reviewer\`.
 
-${renderRoleMemoryRules("gate-reviewer")}
+${renderRoleMemoryRules("reviewer")}
 
 Review only the gate in the VCM prompt. Use the task and worktree paths named there. Project memory may orient you, but only current worktree evidence can decide the gate.
 
@@ -59,6 +59,14 @@ automates it). Run this on every review round, including revision rounds:
   green check, and that every symbol the path requires is reachable from the
   consuming module's declared dependencies. A call path that exists only in
   prose over stub-only scaffold is \`request_changes\`.
+- For every ledger item that consumes or sources cross-module data, independently
+  trace the path from the module and symbol that owns or produces the data to the
+  assigned consumer file and site. Verify every required field, parameter,
+  accessor, trait method, command field, dependency, and other cross-file surface
+  is present in current code or the committed scaffold. A path that exists only
+  in prose, requires an unplanned file change, or leaves Coder to add or change a
+  cross-file surface is \`request_changes\`. Verify the path shape without
+  requiring completed business implementation.
 - Record each of these pre-checks and its result in the report.
 
 For \`architecture-plan\`, reconstruct the proposed architecture and look for
@@ -78,6 +86,20 @@ inspect its current callers and consumers.
 
 Verify that the plan preserves every confirmed user decision in the architecture
 brief without omission, reinterpretation, or an incompatible assumption.
+Do not treat the brief itself as a trusted correctness baseline. Independently
+verify that each decision the brief records as user-owned is faithful to the
+user's real input, not an architect inference relabeled as a user requirement.
+For any mechanism sourced from architect inference rather than an explicit user
+requirement — including one the plan inherits from the brief — verify its
+correctness against the authoritative spec or domain docs and current code the
+same way you verify the plan, rather than accepting it because the brief states
+it. Allow Architect-owned mechanism choices when current code and authoritative
+specs or domain docs show that they are correct, safe, and consistent with
+confirmed user decisions. A mechanism that is unsafe, unsupported, or conflicts
+with those sources is \`request_changes\`. Require a user decision only when
+resolving the conflict depends on user-owned intent or an external contract; do
+not require user approval merely because the mechanism is correctness-,
+determinism-, or safety-critical.
 Analyze accepted scope versus proposed design, current code reality versus
 plan claims, ownership, data flow, lifecycle, module boundaries, dependency
 direction, public surface and callers, architecture invariants, state or durable artifact ownership,
@@ -437,7 +459,7 @@ When VCM sends \`[VCM GATE REVIEW CALLBACK]\`, read the named report path.
 - \`failed\`: stop and ask the user to retry, skip, or override in VCM.
 - \`skipped\` or \`overridden\`: record the exception reason in PM context and continue only as appropriate.
 
-Do not ask Gate Reviewer to choose owners, fixes, Replan, or user-intervention needs. PM routes those decisions through normal VCM responsibilities.`;
+Do not ask Reviewer to choose owners, fixes, Replan, or user-intervention needs. PM routes those decisions through normal VCM responsibilities.`;
 }
 export function renderRequestGateReviewTool() {
     return `#!/usr/bin/env python3
@@ -669,7 +691,7 @@ def input_hash(root: Path, gate: str, sources: list[str] | None = None, gate_rec
         "CLAUDE.md",
         ".claude/agents/architect.md",
         ".claude/agents/coder.md",
-        ".claude/agents/gate-reviewer.md",
+        ".claude/agents/reviewer.md",
         ".claude/agents/tester.md",
         ".claude/skills/vcm-gate-review/SKILL.md",
         ".ai/tools/request-gate-review",

package/dist/backend/templates/harness/project-manager-agent.js

@@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ PM Managed Mode applies only when the user explicitly asks to complete the curre
 - PM must drive the accepted task to completion through the normal VCM flow.
 - PM must not reduce, defer, reinterpret, skip, or move requested work outside the current task.
 - PM must not use workload, task size, context size, implementation difficulty, dependency choice, refactor need, testing effort, or number of iterations as a reason to ask the user.
-- Technical execution questions are handled inside the VCM flow. PM routes them to Architect, Coder, Tester, or Gate Reviewer according to role responsibility.
+- Technical execution questions are handled inside the VCM flow. PM routes them to Architect, Coder, Tester, or Reviewer according to role responsibility.
 - PM may defer non-blocking user-facing questions until the final user report, but only when continuing does not require user intent, external authorization, or a user-approved exception.
 - Deferred questions remain part of the current task report. They must not become follow-up scope unless the user explicitly creates a new task.
 - PM must pause and ask the user only when the task cannot proceed without user intent or real-world authorization: unclear or conflicting requested outcome, required account/secret/test environment/data access, real cost, production permission, sensitive data access, destructive or irreversible real-world action, durable-doc conflict requiring user choice, or a required user-approved exception.
@@ -82,13 +82,13 @@ Use this flow when the accepted task requires production-code or runtime-behavio
 
 The main flow is:
 
-\`Architect Interview -> Architect planning -> architecture-plan Gate -> Coder implementation -> code-diff Gate -> Tester validation -> validation-adequacy Gate -> Architect docs sync -> Final Acceptance -> completed\`
+\`Architect Interview and planning -> architecture-plan Gate -> Coder implementation -> code-diff Gate -> Tester validation -> validation-adequacy Gate -> Architect docs sync -> Final Acceptance -> completed\`
 
 PM may leave this path only through the allowed branches below.
 
 #### Allowed Branches
 
-- **Architecture Interview Continuation:** Keep Architect Interview active while \`.ai/vcm/handoffs/architecture-brief.md\` is \`interviewing\` or \`.ai/vcm/handoffs/architecture-evidence.md\` is incomplete. After the user confirms the brief and Architect reports both complete artifacts, route Architect planning. If planning returns \`Planning Result: user clarification required\`, return to Architect Interview.
+- **Architect Interview and Planning:** The Architect confirms the brief with the user and then continues into planning within the same turn. Keep the Architect turn active while \`.ai/vcm/handoffs/architecture-brief.md\` is \`interviewing\`, \`.ai/vcm/handoffs/architecture-evidence.md\` is incomplete, or the plan is not yet complete; run the architecture-plan Gate only after Architect reports a confirmed brief, complete evidence, and a complete plan. If planning surfaces a new user-owned decision, the Architect re-interviews the user in the same turn (brief status back to \`interviewing\`) instead of routing back through PM; route Architect again only when a turn ends with the plan still incomplete (see Architecture Plan Revision).
 - **Architecture Plan Revision:** If Architect planning is incomplete, route Architect again to continue the recorded planning work plan; multi-round planning against \`.ai/vcm/handoffs/planning-progress.md\` is the normal path for large plans, and PM must not press for completion within one round or accept summary-row compression in place of remaining steps. If the architecture-plan Gate returns \`request_changes\`, route the complete report to Architect, then rerun the full architecture-plan Gate after the plan and scaffold are revised.
 - **Coder Continuation:** If Coder returns \`Decision: incomplete\`, lacks the required completion artifact, or has not completed implementation and L0/L1 validation, route Coder again — this is the only route for an in-progress sweep. Problems recorded inside an incomplete report are sweep state, not routable failures; PM routes problems onward only from a post-sweep \`failed\` report carrying the consolidated per-item disposition.
 - **Coder Failure Debug:** If Coder returns \`Decision: failed\` with compile, typecheck, or L0/L1 failure evidence after implementation, suspend the main flow and enter Architect Debug Branch.
@@ -321,7 +321,7 @@ PM may lightly rewrite the user's words to:
 - In an Architect Debug Branch or Architecture Diagnosis Branch, track the parent flow, resume point, Architect result, test report, and required Gate Review results. Do not require a branch-level final acceptance report.
 - In an Architect Debug Flow or Architecture Diagnosis Flow that produces code changes, track the Architect result, test report, required Gate Review results, docs-sync report, and final acceptance report.
 - In Docs-Only Flow, complete only when Architect returns \`Decision: synced\` or \`Decision: unchanged\` with complete evidence. In Validation-Only Flow, complete only from a complete \`test-report.md\` after the validation-adequacy Gate finishes successfully.
-- Do not route Architect planning until \`architecture-brief.md\` is confirmed. Advance to the next gate only when the required role artifact/result is complete and PM routing rules allow that gate.
+- The Architect does not begin planning until \`architecture-brief.md\` is confirmed (this happens inside the same Architect Interview-and-planning turn, not a separate PM route). Advance to the next gate only when the required role artifact/result is complete and PM routing rules allow that gate.
 - If a required artifact is missing, stale, blocked, or asks for a decision, route the issue to the responsible role or user.
 - In Code-Change Flow, Architect Debug Flow, and an Architecture Diagnosis Flow that produces code changes, request Architect post-validation docs sync after Tester completes. Architect Debug Branch and Architecture Diagnosis Branch return to their recorded resume points after Tester passes.
 
@@ -334,7 +334,7 @@ PM may lightly rewrite the user's words to:
 - Do not run \`code-diff\` for incomplete, failed, planning-only, Docs-Only Flow, Validation-Only Flow, PR-Preparation Flow, or Communication-Only Flow.
 - Gate Review trigger points apply only when the active delivery flow reaches that milestone. Do not run Gate Review for Communication-Only Flow.
 - On a callback, accept only \`approve\` or \`request_changes\`. Apply \`request_changes\` through the allowed branch defined by the active flow; in Code-Change Flow use Architecture Plan Revision, Code-Diff Correction, or Validation Revision according to the gate.
-- Do not ask Gate Reviewer to choose owners, fixes, Replan, or user-intervention needs.
+- Do not ask Reviewer to choose owners, fixes, Replan, or user-intervention needs.
 - Record gate decision, report path, and any skip or override reason.
 
 ### Partial Role Results

package/dist/backend/templates/harness/vcm-architecture-interview-skill.js

@@ -19,11 +19,17 @@ During an active Architect Interview, handle the user's answers and final confir
 - If code, docs, and the user's requested behavior conflict, state the concrete conflict and ask which user-visible behavior is intended.
 - Maintain \`.ai/vcm/handoffs/architecture-evidence.md\` while reading. Record repository evidence, not session recollection or conversation history.
 
+## Feasibility Draft
+
+- Before presenting the brief for confirmation, draft the correctness-critical mechanisms the outcome needs — the key data and role paths and the invariants only, not a full plan or scaffold — and check them for feasibility against current code and the authoritative spec or domain docs (for example, the project whitepaper).
+- Where the spec assigns a role or an invariant, confirm the drafted mechanism honors it as written, not by paraphrase; a plausible paraphrase that quietly reassigns the role is a conflict, not a match.
+- When a draft conflicts with the spec or code, or two mechanisms would differ in correctness, determinism, or safety, record it under Unresolved User Decisions and surface it per the User Decision Filter. Do not defer the choice into planning.
+
 ## User Decision Filter
 
 Ask only when two reasonable answers would materially change user-observable behavior, data meaning or business rules, lifecycle or failure behavior, compatibility or migration, permissions or security, irreversible effects, or an external contract.
 
-Technical architecture decisions remain Architect-owned. Do not turn implementation uncertainty into a user question.
+Routine technical architecture decisions remain Architect-owned; do not turn ordinary implementation uncertainty into a user question. The narrow exception: surface an implementation choice — even when user-observable behavior does not change — when two reasonable options would materially differ in correctness, determinism, safety, or fidelity to an authoritative spec, when you cannot settle it from evidence, or when your drafted mechanism conflicts with the spec or current code. Present the options and your recommendation and let the user decide; do not silently pick one and record it as settled.
 
 ## Interview Protocol
 
@@ -66,7 +72,7 @@ Architecture Brief Status: interviewing|confirmed
 ...
 \`\`\`
 
-Record concise confirmed requirements and constraints, not implementation design. Use \`None\` under Unresolved User Decisions only when no user-owned decision remains.
+Record concise confirmed requirements and constraints. Tag each entry under Confirmed User Decisions with its provenance and depth — [user-stated | architect-proposed, user-approved | architect-inferred] and [intent-level | mechanism-level] — and record the user's real input faithfully as a short summary; never present an architect inference as a user requirement. Record correctness-critical mechanism choices surfaced during the interview with their options, your recommendation, the user's decision, and the rejected alternative, so later stages can tell a chosen mechanism from an inferred one. Keep this to decisions and their provenance — not a full implementation design, and not a transcript. Use \`None\` under Unresolved User Decisions only when no user-owned decision remains.
 
 Maintain the evidence artifact with this structure:
 
@@ -101,8 +107,7 @@ Only after explicit confirmation and complete code evidence:
 1. Set \`Architecture Brief Status: confirmed\`.
 2. Record the confirmation under User Confirmation.
 3. Set \`Architecture Evidence Status: complete\`.
-4. Report both artifact paths to project-manager with \`vcm-route-message\`.
-5. End the turn immediately.
+4. Continue directly into Architecture Planning in the same turn, following the Architect planning rules.
 
-Do not continue into architecture planning. Project-manager owns the route from Architect Interview to Architect planning.`;
+The interview is complete once the brief is confirmed; do not end the turn for a separate planning route. Planning proceeds in the same Architect turn and produces \`.ai/vcm/handoffs/architecture-plan.md\`, then the Architect reports the confirmed brief, complete evidence, and complete plan to project-manager for the architecture-plan Gate.`;
 }

package/dist/shared/constants.js

@@ -26,15 +26,15 @@ export const CORE_VCM_ROLE_DEFINITIONS = [
         dispatchable: true
     }
 ];
-export const GATE_REVIEWER_ROLE_DEFINITION = {
-    name: "gate-reviewer",
-    label: "Gate Reviewer",
-    commandAgent: "gate-reviewer",
+export const REVIEWER_ROLE_DEFINITION = {
+    name: "reviewer",
+    label: "Reviewer",
+    commandAgent: "reviewer",
     dispatchable: false
 };
 export const VCM_ROLE_DEFINITIONS = [
     ...CORE_VCM_ROLE_DEFINITIONS,
-    GATE_REVIEWER_ROLE_DEFINITION
+    REVIEWER_ROLE_DEFINITION
 ];
 export const TRANSLATOR_TOOL_ROLE_DEFINITION = {
     name: "translator",
@@ -69,8 +69,8 @@ export function isRoleName(value) {
 export function isVcmRoleName(value) {
     return VCM_ROLE_NAMES.includes(value);
 }
-export function isGateReviewerRoleName(value) {
-    return value === GATE_REVIEWER_ROLE_DEFINITION.name;
+export function isReviewerRoleName(value) {
+    return value === REVIEWER_ROLE_DEFINITION.name;
 }
 export function isToolRoleName(value) {
     return TOOL_ROLE_NAMES.includes(value);

package/dist/shared/types/memory.js

@@ -3,6 +3,6 @@ export const VCM_MEMORY_ROLE_NAMES = [
     "architect",
     "coder",
     "tester",
-    "gate-reviewer",
+    "reviewer",
     "harness-engineer"
 ];