feat(skill): pedigree ревью, idle-guard и запрет поиска чужого хоста

- Зачем:
  - реальный инцидент 2026-07-03: Codex-координатор искал механизм Claude
    вместо своих субагентов, пропустил ревью и записал выдуманную причину;
    там же трижды воспроизведён недоставленный отчёт живого ревьюера.
- Что:
  - Step 7: строка **Reviewer:** (pedigree) во всех трёх итоговых шаблонах;
    в Rules — запрет молча пропускать/подменять ревью.
  - Step 6: idle-уведомление больше не «авторитетный сигнал смерти» —
    unreachable только после повторного idle-without-report вслед за nudge;
    указатель из Step 3 (действует и на Round 1).
  - Step 2: спавн только на исполняющем хосте, запрет щупать чужой механизм;
    две новые строки в Red Flags.
- Проверка:
  - adversarial team review порта: APPROVED (вердикт тиммейта-ревьюера,
    Claude, Agent Teams), NIT-правки формулировок применены.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>

SKILL.md

@@ -118,6 +118,11 @@ pass it the briefing assembled from `reviewer-prompt.md`.
   as the host can spawn a subagent and (optionally) route follow-up
   messages to it.
 
+Spawn on the host that is executing this skill. Do not probe for or
+shell out to **another** host's mechanism (e.g. looking for the Claude
+Code CLI or Agent Teams env vars from inside Codex) — "the other host's
+mechanism is unavailable" is never a reason to skip the review.
+
 The reviewer is a full agent session — it explores the repo, runs git
 commands, and reads files on its own. **Do not pre-collect diffs or file
 lists for it.** Pass mode-specific context only:
@@ -206,6 +211,11 @@ Then check the verdict line:
 | Unclear / missing   | Send a message back asking for a clear verdict line  |
 | Round 5 reached     | Step 7 with the "Max rounds reached" terminal state  |
 
+If instead of a response the host delivers an idle notification with no
+report attached, apply the idle guard from Step 6 ("Detecting a dead
+reviewer"): request the report once before concluding the reviewer is
+gone. This applies to Round 1 as much as to re-review rounds.
+
 ---
 
 ## Step 4: Evaluate findings (do NOT apply yet)
@@ -436,9 +446,13 @@ one of the following is true:
 - The host surfaces an explicit shutdown / "teammate exited" / "no such
   teammate" event. On Claude Code + Agent Teams this includes the
   documented case where a resumed session no longer has the previous
-  teammates alive, and idle notifications (`TeammateIdle` /
+  teammates alive.
-  message-delivery events) — when present, these are the authoritative
+- An idle-without-report **repeats after a nudge**: the reviewer went
-  liveness signal.
+  idle with no report delivered, you requested the report once, and the
+  answer was another idle-without-report. (A single idle notification
+  alone is not a death signal — a live reviewer sometimes goes idle
+  with its report undelivered on the first attempt, and the nudge
+  retrieves it; observed repeatedly in practice.)
 - Send fails outright (error response, not a success ack).
 - The reply is overdue (no `TeammateIdle` / message-delivery notification
   in a reasonable window) **and** an operator is present to confirm —
@@ -505,11 +519,16 @@ This is a soft signal, not a hard gate.
 
 ## Step 7: Final result
 
+The **Reviewer:** line reports the actual pedigree — what performed the
+review (e.g. `Agent Teams teammate, Claude Opus` or `Codex native
+subagent, GPT`), not what was planned.
+
 **Approved:**
 ```
 ## Team Review — Summary (mode: <mode>)
 
 **Status:** Approved after N round(s)
+**Reviewer:** <mechanism, agent type, model line>
 
 [Final review verbatim]
 
@@ -523,6 +542,7 @@ chose to conclude, or the run is headless):
 ## Team Review — Summary (mode: <mode>)
 
 **Status:** NOT VERIFIED — fixes applied, reviewer did not re-verify
+**Reviewer:** <mechanism, agent type, model line>
 
 **Round N findings:**
 [Verbatim findings from the last reviewer round]
@@ -540,6 +560,7 @@ by the reviewer. Manual review of the fixes is required before merging.**
 ## Team Review — Summary (mode: <mode>)
 
 **Status:** Maximum reached (5 rounds) — not fully approved
+**Reviewer:** <mechanism, agent type, model line>
 
 **Remaining findings:**
 [Unresolved issues]
@@ -574,6 +595,10 @@ Do NOT delete plan files that existed before the review.
 - Avoid creating auxiliary files (memory files, state files, logs, temporary
   markdown) — prefer working within the conversation context
 - If a fix contradicts user requirements — skip it and explain why
+- Never skip or silently substitute the review. Declaring a spawn or
+  continuation mechanism unavailable without having attempted it is a
+  process violation — the **Reviewer:** line in the summary reports
+  what actually ran
 - For re-review, prefer continuation (cheap). Fresh-spawn is the
   expensive path — always confirm with the operator before doing it.
   In headless runs without operator access, conclude unverified rather
@@ -600,6 +625,8 @@ the skill. Stop, re-read Steps 4–5.
 | "Just paraphrase the findings to save space" | Verbatim. Always verbatim. Paraphrase loses signal. |
 | "Severity hasn't dropped in 3 rounds, but I'll push through" | Pause. Surface to operator. Something is structurally off. |
 | "Continuation isn't available — let me just spawn a fresh reviewer" | Ask the operator first. Fresh-spawn is expensive; the operator may prefer to conclude unverified. |
+| "This host can't run the skill — skip the review and note why" | Use the host's own subagent mechanism (Step 2). Attempt, then report what actually ran in the **Reviewer:** line. |
+| "The reviewer went idle — it must be dead" | Idle ≠ dead. Request the report once (Step 6 idle guard); reports sometimes fail to deliver on the first attempt. |
 
 ---