design: TDDs 0073–0075 (review rigor)

[cahenesy]

Designs PRD FR-102–FR-110 (PRD-rev d526c55), which folds in issue #195.
All three are new TDDs and none is superseded. Build them in sequence:
0073, then 0074, then 0075.

• 0073 requirements-review-gate (FR-102–105, plus FR-110 for this
  reviewer):
  • the interview coverage scan, with initial and final status;
  • scripts/lib/prd-lint.sh plus prd_lint.py, reusing 0070's
    requirement parser. It computes the delta against the integration
    branch, checks only inside ## Requirements, and flags placeholders
    only on new lines. It degrades, never stops, with no git, no commits
    or an unparseable base;
  • agents/requirements-reviewer.md (REQUIREMENTS_REVIEW: PASS|BLOCK,
    findings in the shared format);
  • overrides as "<finding>" — overridden: <rationale> lines in Open
    questions, re-checked by a fresh reviewer.
• 0074 tdd-lint-grounding (FR-106, 107):
  • a marked mode for md_bullet_path;
  • tl_lint_grounding, which checks paths with git ls-tree against the
    integration branch. It falls back to HEAD with no integration
    branch, skips outside git, and checks only TDDs not yet on the
    integration branch;
  • deferred-discovery phrases, with backtick skipping for those phrases
    only.
• 0075 reviewer-contracts (FR-108–110):
  • design-reviewer: a cited simulation trace, an alternatives table,
    terminology/duplication checks, a METRICS line, and Non-findings;
  • a new agents/build-reviewer.md, dispatched by file. It diffs from
    the worktree's start commit (base-sha), always applies the security
    checklist, and FAILs only on a blocker or major finding that is not
    pre-existing;
  • /build-tdds step 9 writes down the parent-dispatched fixture
    protocol;
  • tdd-author carries the trace, tables and metrics into the design PR
    body.

Design critique (design-reviewer, a fresh worker each round)

DESIGN_REVIEW: PASS on round 3 (blocker 0, major 0, minor 9, nit 4;
traced 11/11; no rubric row failing).

• Round 1 BLOCKed on 7 majors:
  • M1: placeholder rule fails this repo's own PRD;
  • M2: override matching is fragile;
  • M3: cat-file rc 128 is ambiguous;
  • M4: 0074 relies on inline-code skipping that doesn't exist;
  • M5: FR-108 PR-body acceptance untraced;
  • M6: build-reviewer base ref unpinned;
  • M7: /prd-author stops outside git.
• Round 2 BLOCKed on 2:
  • the id.malformed regex gave 18 false findings on the real PRD;
  • one observation contradicted another.
• All of these were fixed. The round-3 minors and nits were folded in
  after the PASS:
  • FR-102 PR-body text check;
  • unparseable-base line copied into the PR body;
  • base ref printed for the reviewer;
  • fresh report file on resume;
  • requirement rules scoped to ## Requirements;
  • degraded-base strictness;
  • build-reviewer FAIL rule, implementer report as an input, FR-55
    scope note;
  • parent-dispatch protocol written into step 9;
  • nits.

Every round graded against the co-created rubric present in each TDD.
ADR evaluation: none. The reviewer contract is binding as
FR-104/108–110, and the parent-dispatch protocol is a skill step.

Open assumptions & waivers

• Reviewer behaviour is unobservable by text — resolved: parent-dispatched fixture runs named in each verification plan, verdicts appended to the verify report; text checks cover contract presence only.
• Requirements-reviewer delta — resolved: prd-lint emits ids whose block text differs from <integration>:docs/PRD.md; the reviewer gets the ids plus the whole PRD.
• Grounding vs integration ref — resolved (revised in review): git ls-tree against the integration branch, falling back to HEAD with a note, skipped outside git; never a false pass.
• Go-forward detection — resolved: a TDD absent from the integration branch is new and grounding-checked; merged TDDs are never checked.
• Build-reviewer dispatch on Grok — resolved: dispatch by prompt file agents/build-reviewer.md from the plugin root.
• python3 now required by /prd-author — resolved: degrades with a recorded "pre-pass unavailable" line; the review still runs.

UX coverage: no [UI] requirements in scope.

Refs #195

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

https://claude.ai/code/session_01NpGG21Y2VGGhTQaFr4oshB