Resolve bot review: code-led GROUND authority, sampling rules, tolerance

GROUND no longer lapses silently on code-led builds: with no comp to
sample, the authority is the colors OWN-WORLD and the quality bar name,
and no invented target beyond them. Non-uniform fields get sampling
rules (interior pixel, patch average for texture, both ends of a
gradient, never an edge), and the numeric comparison gets tolerance
semantics so render noise never fails a faithful build. The hunt hint
names the dark-ground prior beside the light one.

AI-assisted change (Cursor), prepared under maintainer direction.

Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>

skill/reference/visualize.md

@@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ After approval, record the choice where tools can find it: the approved comp's p
 
 Before building, read the approved comp as a design system and record it in the brief: component grammar, corner language, line weights, elevation treatment, and the type ramp. Everything the comp does not show gets built from this record; without it the fallback is the model's stock kit of square boxes, 1px grids, bento cells, and hard shadows. Then inventory the comp's major visible ingredients in writing (a short table in the surface brief or working notes; the finish reviewer audits shipped assets against it) and choose an implementation medium for each: semantic HTML/CSS/SVG, existing project asset, generated raster, sourced raster, icon library, canvas/WebGL, or accepted omission. The same inventory names the comp's compositional commitments: navigation items and icons, headline levels and their scale relationship, signature geometry such as seams, masks, and overlaps, and each section's arrangement and density. The primary action gets its own row with its own medium: when the comp dissolves, stamps, erodes, or otherwise physically works the main CTA, that treatment is signature material on the page's most important element, and shrinking it to a border trick is the compliance-token version of commitment. An element never written down is the element the build silently drops; the direction contract's 150 words cannot carry this list, so it lives here.
 
-The record is sampled, never estimated: read the comp's page **ground**, each dominant field, and each accent's actual hex from its pixels (ImageMagick, Python with PIL, any pixel-reading tool on the machine) and write the values into the same record. An adjective is a direction, not a record: cream covers everything from near-white to beige, charcoal a third of the value scale, and wherever no number pins a color, the rendition prior picks the spot. Sampled values supersede the palette chips on the decision and composition cards: those were authored before this comp existed, and a chip that disagrees with the comp's pixels is a draft the approval retired.
+The record is sampled, never estimated: read the comp's page **ground**, each dominant field, and each accent's actual hex from its pixels (ImageMagick, Python with PIL, any pixel-reading tool on the machine) and write the values into the same record. Take a flat field from any interior pixel, a textured or grainy one as the average of an interior patch (crop a swatch, scale it to one pixel), and a gradient as its two end colors; never sample an edge, where antialiasing blends neighbors into colors the design never chose. An adjective is a direction, not a record: cream covers everything from near-white to beige, charcoal a third of the value scale, and wherever no number pins a color, the rendition prior picks the spot. Sampled values supersede the palette chips on the decision and composition cards: those were authored before this comp existed, and a chip that disagrees with the comp's pixels is a draft the approval retired.
 
 The medium column is where an approved design most often dies, so it obeys a gate: the medium is decided by what the comp region shows, never by what feels buildable in the current stack. A human figure, a product object, machinery, or any material with lighting and depth is raster whatever the stack; so is any texture by name alone: woven cloth, paper grain, fabric, leather, brushed metal need no depth argument, because a CSS gradient is not a texture medium and "layered CSS textures" is not a medium at all. Writing "silhouette" for a photographic figure, or "CSS" for a sculpted panel's finish, is not a medium choice; it is the quiet deletion of the approved design, and it is how a comp full of physical material becomes a flat page with the same section order. Style does not move this boundary: a comp region with perspective, shading, figure drawing, or dense mechanical detail is illustration however line-drawn it looks, and no build session can author illustration as vectors, so it regenerates as raster like any photograph. Authored SVG covers what a session can specify exactly (diagrams with countable elements, controls, flat shape systems) and ends where drawing skill begins; an instruction-manual world keeps its illustrations as line-art illustrations, not diagrams. Produce such regions by regenerating them cleanly, with the approved comp and its embedded prompt as the reference for a fresh render at asset resolution; never crop pixels out of the comp itself, whose effective resolution sits far below asset grade. Dropping an image-native region is a scope decision the user makes at the approval point, never a silent flattening after it. Generated imagery is a material, not a claim: evidence rules bind assertions, specs, testimonials, and photographs presented as real, never render fidelity; "no photography on hand" forbids fake proof, not an illustrated hero.