#1203 Bar acceptance-criteria revision prompts to genuine conflicts

[williamthorsen]

What

Revises the code-review guidance to limit the circumstances under which the agent should offer to revise the acceptance criteria (AC). In particular, an implementation that goes beyond the AC or achieves them via a different route is not cause for revision. Revisions are offered only when the implementation materially deviates from or deliberately drops AC; where the review has already raised a finding on that behavior, the guidance is to leave the AC as written rather than restate them around the code. Work that is merely unbuilt, and work beyond what the AC asked, stay in the review's compliance report rather than prompting a ticket edit.

Why

Reviews were prompting for a ticket edit on more than half the tickets they reviewed, and most of those prompts were unwarranted: the implementation satisfied the criteria and only the wording differed. Each prompt cost a decision, and accepting one wrote a local ticket snapshot that then outranked the live issue for later reviews, so an unwarranted revision silently repointed the contract rather than merely costing a round trip.

Details

🐛 Bug fixes

• The compliance status carries a stated bar. A criterion is met when the implementation delivers its substantive guarantee, whatever shape it took, and implementation that exceeds a criterion is met as well; an undelivered guarantee names in its notes whether the work is unbuilt or in conflict with the criterion.
• The deviations menu renders off its own criteria delta rather than off the compliance status rows, so a review with nothing to propose shows no menu at all. An unbuilt criterion and implementation that goes beyond the criteria each contribute no delta line.
• Unplanned work drives no ticket edit anywhere in the next-steps machinery — not as a render condition, not as grounds for a recommendation, and not as a source of delta lines. It stays reported in the review's unplanned-work section.
• The deviations recommendation rules are replaced. An update is recommended where the implementation's direction is deliberate and sound; leaving the criteria alone is recommended where the review raised a finding on the conflicting behavior; neither is recommended where the reviewer cannot tell which side is wrong.
• align-ticket-with-implementation gained a ratified-delta mode, under which a caller-supplied previewed delta is the whole of the revision and a change the delta does not contain stops the edit rather than widening it. It composes with the existing criteria-only mode: one scopes which sections change, the other how much changes within them.
• The deviations trigger is scoped to the ticket's compliance subsection, so a pull-request description at odds with the implementation routes to the source-divergence menu, whose edit targets the description rather than the ticket.

🧪 Tests

• The mode-contract suite anchors the new ratified-delta mode across its caller and callee halves, and the spec-inlining suite anchors the narrowed trigger, the unbuilt carve-out, and the finding carve-out in the replaced recommendation rules.

Closes #1203

[github-actions]

Dependency audit

Production dependency audit passed.