Give the finish reviewer and documenter craft-floor authority

Codex's own post-mortem of the second hamster-wheel session: it loaded
the kicker ban, shipped five kickers anyway, and then the reviewer and
documenter 'compounded it by accepting, and even canonizing, the
invented label style'. Nothing downstream of the builder ever re-read
the floor.

The reviewer gains check 6, Floor: read craft-floor.md (now the one
skill reference it may read, passed in its inputs) and hold the
screenshots against the Refuse list; a banned element is a material fix
even when it matches nothing in the comp, because fidelity cannot
authorize what the floor refuses. The documenter gains the mirror rule:
a floor refusal lands in its not-canonized line as a carried defect,
never in DESIGN.md as a rule future surfaces inherit.

Also updates the live-reference contract test to match the applier's
condensed no-server sentence, which still carries the same guarantee.

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

skill/reference/new-work.md

@@ -104,6 +104,6 @@ Preserve semantics, accessibility, performance, responsiveness, project conventi
 
 Inspect desktop and mobile in one batched screenshot round, critique the render against the user's request and the direction contract, fix material gaps, and confirm with one final round; two rounds is the ceiling, and fixes batch between them rather than earning per-tweak screenshots. When an approved comp exists, the critique is a side-by-side: view the comp region and the build region together, the hero and each section as its own crop at legible scale, never one full-page thumbnail, which hides exactly the failures that matter, crude controls, wrong lettering character, flattened material, behind a superficially similar section order. On a Persuade surface, verify the mode did its job: a first-time visitor should know what this is, why it matters, and what to do within seconds, in the form's own vocabulary.
 
-After the second inspection round the build thread's polishing is over: no further defect hunts, micro-edit scripts, or rebuilds here; whatever remains ships through the handoffs, where a fresh context does the finding better and cheaper. Where this harness runs no design hook, run `node {{scripts_path}}/detect.mjs --json` on the changed targets once here, fix what is mechanical, and pass the remaining findings to the reviewer; a hookless build that skips this ships every tell the hook exists to catch. Capture desktop and mobile screenshots to files, then spawn the shipped finish reviewer, `impeccable-finish-reviewer` (`impeccable_finish_reviewer` in codex; `/impeccable-finish-reviewer` in Cursor; on GitHub Copilot say "Use the impeccable-finish-reviewer agent"), with the original request, confirmed answers, the artifact path, the screenshot paths, its direction contract, existing hook findings, and the QUALITY BAR card and approved comp paths. The reviewer has no browser; screenshots you fail to pass are checks it cannot run. Verify its return carries the five contract sections; on an empty or thrashed return, respawn once with the same inputs before doing anything else. This review never runs inside the build thread and never inherits it: spawn the reviewer fresh, with no forked conversation history (`fork_turns: 0` in codex); a reviewer that inherits your transcript inherits your framing, your optimism, and your abstractions, and everything it needs travels in the inputs above. Only a harness whose tool surface has no subagent capability at all substitutes a fresh in-thread pass after stepping fully out of the build context, run from [degraded/finish-reviewer.md](degraded/finish-reviewer.md), and a substituted or failed-and-replaced review is disclosed in one line at finish, never silently. When the reviewer's first material fix is a rebuild directive, fidelity failed wholesale rather than in patches, so skip the fix batch: put that verdict in front of the user with the named comp regions and let them choose between a re-derivation and shipping as it stands. Otherwise apply the material fixes in one batch, rebuild once, and recapture the same viewports. A recapture measures positions, loading, and overflow; it cannot measure whether a fix reached the quality the finding named, so send the recaptured screenshots back to the same reviewer for a verdict scoring every material fix resolved, partial, or unresolved (through the harness's agent continuation; without one, run the scoring fresh from [degraded/finish-reviewer.md](degraded/finish-reviewer.md)'s Verdict Pass). Fixes scored partial or unresolved get another batch, recapture, and verdict. Two rounds is the budget an unattended run ends at; an attended session's ceiling belongs to the user, so when the second verdict still lists open items, put the table in front of them and let them choose between shipping as it stands and funding another round. Whoever is deciding, stop the moment a round resolves nothing, and the reviewer's findings are the only list you work from, never your own re-opened hunt. Report the final verdict table to the user as it stands, open items included, under the reviewer's own disposition word: a table with open material findings is never announced as a pass, and never under a softer label than the reviewer wrote. Do not run a second detector. <!-- rule:skill-verdict-bounds-the-finish --> <!-- rule:skill-finish-separate-reviewer -->
+After the second inspection round the build thread's polishing is over: no further defect hunts, micro-edit scripts, or rebuilds here; whatever remains ships through the handoffs, where a fresh context does the finding better and cheaper. Where this harness runs no design hook, run `node {{scripts_path}}/detect.mjs --json` on the changed targets once here, fix what is mechanical, and pass the remaining findings to the reviewer; a hookless build that skips this ships every tell the hook exists to catch. Capture desktop and mobile screenshots to files, then spawn the shipped finish reviewer, `impeccable-finish-reviewer` (`impeccable_finish_reviewer` in codex; `/impeccable-finish-reviewer` in Cursor; on GitHub Copilot say "Use the impeccable-finish-reviewer agent"), with the original request, confirmed answers, the artifact path, the screenshot paths, its direction contract, existing hook findings, the QUALITY BAR card and approved comp paths, and the craft-floor reference path. The reviewer has no browser; screenshots you fail to pass are checks it cannot run. Verify its return carries the five contract sections; on an empty or thrashed return, respawn once with the same inputs before doing anything else. This review never runs inside the build thread and never inherits it: spawn the reviewer fresh, with no forked conversation history (`fork_turns: 0` in codex); a reviewer that inherits your transcript inherits your framing, your optimism, and your abstractions, and everything it needs travels in the inputs above. Only a harness whose tool surface has no subagent capability at all substitutes a fresh in-thread pass after stepping fully out of the build context, run from [degraded/finish-reviewer.md](degraded/finish-reviewer.md), and a substituted or failed-and-replaced review is disclosed in one line at finish, never silently. When the reviewer's first material fix is a rebuild directive, fidelity failed wholesale rather than in patches, so skip the fix batch: put that verdict in front of the user with the named comp regions and let them choose between a re-derivation and shipping as it stands. Otherwise apply the material fixes in one batch, rebuild once, and recapture the same viewports. A recapture measures positions, loading, and overflow; it cannot measure whether a fix reached the quality the finding named, so send the recaptured screenshots back to the same reviewer for a verdict scoring every material fix resolved, partial, or unresolved (through the harness's agent continuation; without one, run the scoring fresh from [degraded/finish-reviewer.md](degraded/finish-reviewer.md)'s Verdict Pass). Fixes scored partial or unresolved get another batch, recapture, and verdict. Two rounds is the budget an unattended run ends at; an attended session's ceiling belongs to the user, so when the second verdict still lists open items, put the table in front of them and let them choose between shipping as it stands and funding another round. Whoever is deciding, stop the moment a round resolves nothing, and the reviewer's findings are the only list you work from, never your own re-opened hunt. Report the final verdict table to the user as it stands, open items included, under the reviewer's own disposition word: a table with open material findings is never announced as a pass, and never under a softer label than the reviewer wrote. Do not run a second detector. <!-- rule:skill-verdict-bounds-the-finish --> <!-- rule:skill-finish-separate-reviewer -->
 
 Then spawn the shipped documenter, `impeccable-documenter` (`impeccable_documenter` in codex), with the project root, the artifact path, the direction contract, PRODUCT.md, the [document.md](document.md) reference path, and the boundary to write at; it records DESIGN.md and the sidecar from the built world, ground truth over intention; without subagents the pass runs from [degraded/documenter.md](degraded/documenter.md). A clean detector pass is not finished; finished is the contract kept, the comp honored, the review closed, and the system recorded. <!-- rule:skill-documenter-records-the-world -->