# Triage of findings from independent blind reviews of your implementation

Below are the findings of the blind reviews, **verbatim**. Process every
finding ID; change nothing outside their scope. Assign each ID exactly one
disposition:

- FIXED — a TDD fix: first a test reproducing the finding, then the fix;
  name the check that proves closure;
- REJECTED — a reasoned rejection via contract/spec and test; a bare
  "not important" is not accepted;
- OUT_OF_SCOPE — needs a boundary decision; state which one;
- NEEDS_DECISION — a product, architecture, or risk choice a technical
  argument cannot settle; state the open question, the options you see,
  and which one you would take and why. This includes the case where your
  own fix would settle such a choice — the size of the edit is irrelevant.

OUT_OF_SCOPE and NEEDS_DECISION belong to the coordinator — do not
silently decide them yourself. Write both so they can be judged without
reading the code: name what each option costs and what it breaks. The
coordinator holds no code in context, by design.

## The review is evidence, not orders

A review report is a set of claims, not a list of instructions. Verify
every finding yourself. You own the task; the review is there to help.

- **Rejection is a normal outcome, not a conflict.** A REJECTED with an
  argument from contract and test is worth exactly as much as a FIXED. A
  run with no rejection and no finding closed by your own route says
  nothing about the quality of the review — it is a reason to re-read
  what you took on trust.
- **The reviewer's route is a proposal.** Closing a finding another way
  is fine when the argument is stronger; name the route you took and why.

No commits. Do NOT edit the task file: write detailed resolutions and
rejection arguments to your assigned report file — re-checks and fresh
threads will read that file by path; the task file is updated separately
at the end of the run.

Final report: one line per ID — `ID | disposition | one-phrase essence`;
then disposition counters, test command with counters, list of changed
files, and open questions for the coordinator, if any.

Orchestrator notes, if present below, carry task-level decisions (out of
scope / risk accepted) and verified facts you don't have — they are not
findings to fix.