docs(adr): ADR 0064 — deprecate customized/ directory overlay

[ggallen]

Summary

• Adds ADR 0064 to deprecate and remove the customized/ directory overlay mechanism (ADR 0035)
• The overlay is superseded by base: harness composition (ADR 0045), URL-based resource references (ADR 0038), and config-based agent registration (ADR 0058)
• Includes a phased implementation plan in docs/plans/deprecate-customized-directory-overlay.md covering deprecation warnings, workflow cleanup, scaffold removal, docs updates, and final grep sweep

Test plan

• Verify ADR numbering does not collide with existing ADRs on main or open PRs
• Verify all markdown links resolve (pre-commit lint-md-links passes)
• Verify ADR frontmatter passes lint checks
• Review plan completeness against grep -r customized output

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

[qodo-code-review]

PR Summary by Qodo

Add ADR 0064 to deprecate customized/ directory overlay

📝 Documentation 🕐 20-40 Minutes

AI Description

• Add ADR 0064 documenting deprecation of the customized/ overlay mechanism.
• Map overlay use-cases to base: composition, URL resources, and config agent registration.
• Add a phased removal plan covering warnings, workflow/scaffold cleanup, and doc updates.

Diagram

graph TD
  A["ADR 0035: overlay"] --> B["ADR 0064: deprecate"] --> C["Plan: deprecation PRs"]
  B --> D["ADR 0045: base:"] --> F["Replaces overlay"]
  B --> E["ADR 0038: URL refs"] --> F
  B --> G["ADR 0058: agents in config"] --> F

Loading

High-Level Assessment

The following are alternative approaches to this PR:

1. Fold the implementation plan into the ADR body

• ➕ Keeps the decision and rollout steps in one document
• ➕ Simplifies navigation (one file to read)
• ➖ ADRs can become too long and operationally detailed
• ➖ Harder to maintain/update the plan without repeatedly editing an architecture record

2. Track the phased plan in issue tracker only

• ➕ Better fit for task sequencing, owners, and milestones
• ➕ Less churn in repo docs as steps evolve
• ➖ Loses a durable, versioned plan alongside the ADR
• ➖ Harder for contributors to discover the intended cleanup steps from the codebase alone

Recommendation: Current approach (ADR + separate, versioned implementation plan doc) is the best tradeoff: ADR 0064 stays focused on the decision and rationale, while the plan can be iterated as the codebase shifts. Consider optionally adding a short link/index entry in any ADR README/index (if present) so reviewers can quickly find ADR 0064 and its plan.

Files changed (2) +357 / -0

Documentation (2) +357 / -0

0064-deprecate-customized-directory-overlay.mdAdd ADR 0064 deprecating 'customized/' overlay and documenting replacements +89/-0

Add ADR 0064 deprecating 'customized/' overlay and documenting replacements

• Introduces a new accepted ADR that supersedes ADR 0035’s layered overlay model. Explains why the overlay is redundant given 'base:' harness composition, URL-based resource references, and config-driven agent registration, and links to the removal plan.

docs/ADRs/0064-deprecate-customized-directory-overlay.md

deprecate-customized-directory-overlay.mdAdd phased implementation plan to remove overlay plumbing across workflows, scaffold, and docs +268/-0

Add phased implementation plan to remove overlay plumbing across workflows, scaffold, and docs

• Adds a detailed multi-PR removal plan with prerequisites, impacted subsystems/files, and a dependency graph. Breaks the work into warnings, workflow overlay removal, scaffold/embed cleanup, documentation updates, and a final grep sweep.

docs/plans/deprecate-customized-directory-overlay.md

[github-actions]

Site preview

Preview: https://36b7df13-site.fullsend-ai.workers.dev

Commit: d87c93a10091f83811bdb3b3af3561cc1f631d31

[fullsend-ai-review]

🤖 Review · ⚠️ Cancelled · Started 12:58 AM UTC · Ended 1:21 AM UTC
Commit: e6b1ae3 · View workflow run →

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.

📢 Thoughts on this report? Let us know!

[qodo-code-review]

Code Review by Qodo

🐞 Bugs (0) 📘 Rule violations (0) 📜 Skill insights (2)

Context used

✅ Compliance rules (platform): 51 rules

✅ Skills: writing-user-docs, writing-adrs

1. docs/architecture.md not updated 📜 Skill insight ⚙ Maintainability

Description

This PR adds a new Accepted ADR but does not update docs/architecture.md to reflect the decision
with a link to the ADR. This breaks the required workflow of keeping the architecture overview in
sync with accepted decisions.

Code

docs/ADRs/0064-deprecate-customized-directory-overlay.md[3]

+status: Accepted

Relevance

⭐⭐⭐ High

Architecture.md is enforced as living doc; PRs updated it when ADRs accepted.

PR-#161
PR-#1578
PR-#1966

ⓘ Recommendations generated based on similar findings in past PRs

Evidence

PR Compliance ID 1062100 requires that when an ADR is accepted, docs/architecture.md is updated
accordingly with a short decided note and link. The ADR is added with status: Accepted, while
docs/architecture.md contains no reference to ADR 0064 and states it must be updated when ADRs are
accepted.

docs/ADRs/0064-deprecate-customized-directory-overlay.md[3-3]
docs/architecture.md[5-8]
Skill: writing-adrs

Agent prompt

The issue below was found during a code review. Follow the provided context and guidance below and implement a solution

## Issue description
A newly added ADR is marked `Accepted`, but `docs/architecture.md` was not updated to reflect the decision and link to the ADR.

## Issue Context
`docs/architecture.md` explicitly states it must be updated when ADRs are accepted or superseded.

## Fix Focus Areas
- docs/ADRs/0064-deprecate-customized-directory-overlay.md[3-3]
- docs/architecture.md[5-8]
- docs/architecture.md[74-114]

ⓘ Copy this prompt and use it to remediate the issue with your preferred AI generation tools

---

2. First Consequences bullet multi-sentence ✓ Resolved 📜 Skill insight ⚙ Maintainability

Description

The first bullet in Consequences contains multiple sentences, violating the requirement that each
consequence bullet be a single sentence. This reduces consistency and makes consequences harder to
skim.

Code

docs/ADRs/0064-deprecate-customized-directory-overlay.md[R80-82]

+- Users who placed files in `customized/` must migrate to `base:`
+  composition, URL references, or config-based registration. A deprecation
+  warning during install and clear documentation will guide migration.

Relevance

⭐⭐ Medium

No historical evidence enforcing one-sentence Consequences bullets.

ⓘ Recommendations generated based on similar findings in past PRs

Evidence

PR Compliance ID 1062091 requires 3–5 one-sentence bullets in Consequences. The first bullet
includes an additional sentence about deprecation warnings and documentation guidance, making it
multi-sentence.

docs/ADRs/0064-deprecate-customized-directory-overlay.md[78-89]
Skill: writing-adrs

Agent prompt

The issue below was found during a code review. Follow the provided context and guidance below and implement a solution

## Issue description
ADR `Consequences` bullets must be 3–5 bullets and each bullet must be exactly one sentence.

## Issue Context
The first `Consequences` bullet currently contains more than one sentence; split it into separate one-sentence bullets or rewrite into a single sentence.

## Fix Focus Areas
- docs/ADRs/0064-deprecate-customized-directory-overlay.md[78-89]

ⓘ Copy this prompt and use it to remediate the issue with your preferred AI generation tools

---

3. Superseded ADR unmarked ✓ Resolved 🐞 Bug ⚙ Maintainability

Description

ADR 0064 states it supersedes ADR 0035, but ADR 0035 still shows Status: Accepted and documents
customized/ as the chosen mechanism, which creates conflicting guidance for readers starting from
ADR 0035.

Code

docs/ADRs/0064-deprecate-customized-directory-overlay.md[R21-22]

+Supersedes [ADR 0035](0035-layered-content-resolution.md) (layered content
+resolution).

Relevance

⭐⭐ Medium

Cross-references encouraged, but Status-section supersession notes were rejected; unclear if they’ll
change ADR 0035 status.

PR-#1966
PR-#1578
PR-#2650

ⓘ Recommendations generated based on similar findings in past PRs

Evidence

ADR 0064 explicitly says it supersedes ADR 0035, but ADR 0035 still presents itself as Accepted and
documents customized/ as the active decision; the repo’s existing convention is to mark superseded
ADRs as status: Superseded and add an explicit Status note.

docs/ADRs/0064-deprecate-customized-directory-overlay.md[21-22]
docs/ADRs/0035-layered-content-resolution.md[18-21]
docs/ADRs/0035-layered-content-resolution.md[45-55]
docs/ADRs/0010-stored-session-for-e2e-browser-auth.md[1-21]

Agent prompt

The issue below was found during a code review. Follow the provided context and guidance below and implement a solution

### Issue description
ADR 0064 declares it supersedes ADR 0035, but ADR 0035 is not updated to indicate it has been superseded. This leaves conflicting documentation: ADR 0035 continues to present the `customized/` overlay as the accepted approach.

### Issue Context
This repo already uses a consistent pattern for superseded ADRs (frontmatter `status: Superseded` and a Status section note linking to the superseding ADR).

### Fix Focus Areas
- docs/ADRs/0035-layered-content-resolution.md[1-25]
- docs/ADRs/0035-layered-content-resolution.md[40-75]
- docs/ADRs/0010-stored-session-for-e2e-browser-auth.md[1-22]

### What to change
- Update ADR 0035 frontmatter `status:` from `Accepted` to `Superseded`.
- Update ADR 0035 `## Status` section to explicitly say `Superseded by [ADR 0064](0064-deprecate-customized-directory-overlay.md).`
- Keep ADR 0035 body intact (consistent with ADR guidelines), adding only the minimal annotation in Status.

ⓘ Copy this prompt and use it to remediate the issue with your preferred AI generation tools

---

4. Context has 4+ paragraphs 📜 Skill insight ⚙ Maintainability

Description

The ADR Context section is longer than 1–3 short paragraphs, adding extra narrative and structure
beyond the required concise format. This makes the ADR harder to scan and violates the ADR format
constraints.

Code

docs/ADRs/0064-deprecate-customized-directory-overlay.md[R24-66]

+## Context
+
+[ADR 0035](0035-layered-content-resolution.md) introduced a three-tier
+layering model for agent customization: upstream defaults are copied into the
+workspace at runtime, then files from `customized/` (per-org) or
+`.fullsend/customized/` (per-repo) are overlaid on top, replacing upstream
+files with matching names. The overlay is file-level replacement with no
+field-level merging — customizing a single harness field requires copying the
+entire upstream YAML and modifying it.
+
+Three subsequent ADRs have introduced mechanisms that cover every
+customization scenario the overlay handled, with better ergonomics:
+
+- [ADR 0045](0045-forge-portable-harness-schema.md) added `base:`
+  composition for harness files. A thin wrapper inherits an upstream harness
+  by URL and overrides only the fields that differ, with proper merge
+  semantics (scalars override, skills concatenate, runner_env merges).
+
+- [ADR 0038](0038-universal-harness-access.md) added URL-based references
+  for declarative resources (agents, skills, policies, schemas). Resources
+  can be referenced from any trusted source without copying them into a
+  local directory.
+
+- [ADR 0058](0058-agent-registration.md) added config-based agent
+  registration. Agents are discovered from `agents:` entries in config
+  (URLs or local paths), not from directory scanning.
+
+Together these make the `customized/` directory overlay redundant:
+
+| What `customized/` did | Replacement |
+|---|---|
+| Override a harness | `base:` composition (ADR 0045) |
+| Override an agent definition | Harness `agent:` field with path or URL (ADR 0038) |
+| Add/remove agents | `agents:` list in config (ADR 0058) |
+| Add custom skills | Harness `skills:` list with paths or URLs (ADR 0038); concatenated via `base:` (ADR 0045) |
+| Override policies/schemas | Harness fields with paths or URLs (ADR 0038) |
+| Custom scripts | `pre_script`/`post_script` in harness; inherited from `base:` (ADR 0045) |
+| Custom env vars | `env:` in harness; merged via `base:` (ADR 0045) |
+
+The `customized/` directories currently contain only `.gitkeep` placeholders.
+The overlay loop in reusable workflows runs every agent invocation but copies
+zero files.
+

Relevance

⭐ Low

Prior attempt to enforce “Context 1–3 short paragraphs” was rejected.

PR-#2582

ⓘ Recommendations generated based on similar findings in past PRs

Evidence

PR Compliance ID 1062090 requires the ADR Context section to contain 1–3 short paragraphs. The
added Context spans multiple separated paragraphs and additional structured content, exceeding the
allowed size.

docs/ADRs/0064-deprecate-customized-directory-overlay.md[24-66]
Skill: writing-adrs

Agent prompt

The issue below was found during a code review. Follow the provided context and guidance below and implement a solution

## Issue description
The ADR `Context` section exceeds the allowed size (must be 1–3 short paragraphs).

## Issue Context
This ADR is added as `Accepted`, so it must adhere to the repository ADR format rules.

## Fix Focus Areas
- docs/ADRs/0064-deprecate-customized-directory-overlay.md[24-66]

ⓘ Copy this prompt and use it to remediate the issue with your preferred AI generation tools

---

[fullsend-ai-review]

🤖 Finished Review · ✅ Success · Started 1:24 AM UTC · Completed 1:37 AM UTC
Commit: fc11950 · View workflow run →

[fullsend-ai-review]

Review

Findings

Medium

• [prerequisite-dependency-unclear] docs/ADRs/0064-deprecate-customized-directory-overlay.md — ADR 0064's guard clause lists ADRs 0038, 0045, and 0058 as prerequisites but does not address the relationship to ADR 0044 (deprecate per-org installation mode). ADR 0044 (line 56) explicitly references "the layered content resolution from ADR 0035" as active infrastructure, and its Phase 2 removal depends on ADR 0045 completion. Since ADR 0064 supersedes ADR 0035, the two deprecation plans may have ordering dependencies — but ADR 0064 does not state whether ADR 0044 Phase 2 must complete first, whether the deprecations are independent, or how the 5-PR sequence interleaves with ADR 0044's phased plan.
  Remediation: Add a sentence to the Prerequisites section (or ADR 0064's guard clause) clarifying the relationship to ADR 0044. If the deprecations are independent, state that explicitly. If sequential, document the ordering.

Previous run

Review

Findings

High

• [incomplete-scope] docs/architecture.md:388 — The PR claims base: harness composition, URL resource references, and config-based agent registration now cover all customization scenarios previously handled by the customized/ overlay. However, ADR 0038 (line 135) explicitly prohibits standalone URL references for executable resources (scripts), with an exception only for scripts inherited via base: composition. This means all scripts/env customization must go through harness composition — there is no standalone file-level replacement path. Additionally, ADR 0056 describes L1 full replacement via customized/scripts/.pre-commit-tools.yaml, which would lose its replacement semantics if the overlay is removed. The claim that all scenarios are covered is architecturally inaccurate without addressing the scripts/env gap.
  Remediation: Address the scripts/env gap in ADR 0064. Options: (1) document that scripts/env customization must use base: composition exclusively and update guides accordingly, (2) extend ADR 0038 to allow standalone URL references for scripts/env, or (3) retain the overlay specifically for scripts/env. The ADR should explicitly address the .pre-commit-tools.yaml L1 replacement migration path.

Medium

• [technical-documentation-accuracy] docs/plans/deprecate-customized-directory-overlay.md — The pseudocode block in PR 2 that shows the code to be removed contains a bash syntax error: if [[ -d "${CUSTOM_BASE}/${dir}" ]]; do uses do instead of the correct then. The actual workflow code (e.g., reusable-triage.yml:105) uses ]; then. Since this plan describes what to remove from the workflows, the mismatch could cause an implementer to search for the wrong pattern.
  Remediation: Change ]; do to ]; then in the pseudocode block under PR 2.

Previous run

Review

Findings

Medium

• [missing-authorization] docs/ADRs/0064-deprecate-customized-directory-overlay.md — Non-trivial PR with no linked issue. This PR proposes deprecating the customized/ directory overlay mechanism with a 268-line phased implementation plan spanning 5 PRs. While the PR is docs-only (ADR + plan + status updates) and the ADR itself serves as the authorization artifact, a tracking issue would provide a single place to coordinate the 5-PR implementation sequence and capture stakeholder sign-off.
  Remediation: Consider creating a tracking issue for the 5-PR implementation plan.

• [internal-consistency] docs/architecture.md:388 — The strikethrough ~~The customized/ overlay is deprecated~~ uses a formatting convention inconsistent with the rest of the document. Existing strikethroughs in architecture.md (lines 72, 156, 226) mark resolved open questions, not declarative statements. Applied to a statement, the strikethrough reads as if the deprecation itself is being retracted — the opposite of the intended meaning.
  Remediation: Replace the strikethrough with a direct statement, e.g., "The customized/ overlay is deprecated (ADR 0064)."

---

Labels: Docs-only PR adding an ADR and implementation plan for deprecating the harness customization overlay.

Previous run

Review

Findings

High

• [incomplete-scope] docs/architecture.md:388 — The PR claims base: harness composition, URL resource references, and config-based agent registration now cover all customization scenarios previously handled by the customized/ overlay. However, ADR 0038 (line 135) explicitly prohibits standalone URL references for executable resources (scripts), with an exception only for scripts inherited via base: composition. This means all scripts/env customization must go through harness composition — there is no standalone file-level replacement path. Additionally, ADR 0056 describes L1 full replacement via customized/scripts/.pre-commit-tools.yaml, which would lose its replacement semantics if the overlay is removed. The claim that all scenarios are covered is architecturally inaccurate without addressing the scripts/env gap.
  Remediation: Address the scripts/env gap in ADR 0064. Options: (1) document that scripts/env customization must use base: composition exclusively and update guides accordingly, (2) extend ADR 0038 to allow standalone URL references for scripts/env, or (3) retain the overlay specifically for scripts/env. The ADR should explicitly address the .pre-commit-tools.yaml L1 replacement migration path.

Medium

• [technical-documentation-accuracy] docs/plans/deprecate-customized-directory-overlay.md — The pseudocode block in PR 2 that shows the code to be removed contains a bash syntax error: if [[ -d "${CUSTOM_BASE}/${dir}" ]]; do uses do instead of the correct then. The actual workflow code (e.g., reusable-triage.yml:105) uses ]; then. Since this plan describes what to remove from the workflows, the mismatch could cause an implementer to search for the wrong pattern.
  Remediation: Change ]; do to ]; then in the pseudocode block under PR 2.

Previous run (2)

Review

Findings

Medium

• [missing-authorization] docs/ADRs/0064-deprecate-customized-directory-overlay.md — Non-trivial PR with no linked issue. This PR proposes deprecating the customized/ directory overlay mechanism with a 268-line phased implementation plan spanning 5 PRs. While the PR is docs-only (ADR + plan + status updates) and the ADR itself serves as the authorization artifact, a tracking issue would provide a single place to coordinate the 5-PR implementation sequence and capture stakeholder sign-off.
  Remediation: Consider creating a tracking issue for the 5-PR implementation plan.

• [internal-consistency] docs/architecture.md:388 — The strikethrough ~~The customized/ overlay is deprecated~~ uses a formatting convention inconsistent with the rest of the document. Existing strikethroughs in architecture.md (lines 72, 156, 226) mark resolved open questions, not declarative statements. Applied to a statement, the strikethrough reads as if the deprecation itself is being retracted — the opposite of the intended meaning.
  Remediation: Replace the strikethrough with a direct statement, e.g., "The customized/ overlay is deprecated (ADR 0064)."

---

Labels: Docs-only PR adding an ADR and implementation plan for deprecating the harness customization overlay.

[ggallen]

/fs-review

[fullsend-ai-review]

🤖 Finished Review · ✅ Success · Started 11:24 AM UTC · Completed 11:38 AM UTC
Commit: baf2b89 · View workflow run →

[waynesun09]

Review Squad + ADR Review — 5 agents (Claude ×3, Gemini, Codex)

ADR 0064: LGTM

The ADR is well-structured, concise (78 lines, under 80 target), and technically accurate. All convention checks pass. The replacement mapping table is verified against the actual codebase — base: composition (compose.go), URL resources (resolve.go), and agent registration (config/agents.go) are all shipped and working. Prerequisites are met.

Implementation Plan: 8 findings (MEDIUM)

The plan is solid overall but has coverage gaps — it misses 5 files with real customized/ references and lists 3 files that don't need changes. These should be fixed before implementation begins.

1. MEDIUM — Plan misses repo-maintenance.yml overlay (consensus: 3/5 agents)
internal/scaffold/fullsend-repo/.github/workflows/repo-maintenance.yml (lines 57-63) has its own customized/scripts overlay using hardcoded paths, NOT the CUSTOM_BASE variable. The PR 5 grep for CUSTOM_BASE won't catch it. Additionally, scaffold_test.go:735 asserts this overlay exists.
→ Add to PR 2 or PR 3 scope.

2. MEDIUM — Plan misses e2e/admin/admin_test.go (consensus: 2/5 agents)
Lines 173-180 assert all 8 customized/*.gitkeep files exist after install. Removing scaffold code without updating this e2e test will break CI.
→ Add to PR 3 test updates.

3. MEDIUM — Bash syntax error in removal snippet (consensus: 3/5 agents)
PR 2's code block has ]; do instead of ]; then (invalid bash). The actual workflows use ]; then.
→ Fix the snippet.

4. MEDIUM — Plan misses internal/layers/workflows_test.go (consensus: 2/5 agents)
Line 455 asserts modes["customized/agents/.gitkeep"] has mode "100644".
→ Add to PR 3 test scope.

5. MEDIUM — Plan misses .pre-commit-tools.yaml scaffold comments (consensus: 3/5 agents)
internal/scaffold/fullsend-repo/scripts/.pre-commit-tools.yaml (lines 37-39) documents customized/scripts/ as L1 override.
→ Add to PR 3 or PR 4.

6. MEDIUM — Plan misses docs/plans/deprecate-per-org-install.md (1 agent)
Lines 212-216 describe copying from customized/ directories.
→ Add to PR 4 with supersession annotation.

7. MEDIUM — ADRs 0036/0055 listed in PR 4 but have no customized/ path references (1 agent)
These use "customized" only as an English word. Including them would be unnecessary churn.
→ Remove from PR 4's ADR cross-reference list.

8. MEDIUM — docs/agents/README.md listed in PR 4 but has no customized/ references (1 agent)
grep 'customized/' docs/agents/README.md returns zero matches.
→ Remove from PR 4 file list.

[fullsend-ai-review]

🤖 Review · ⚠️ Cancelled · Started 11:55 PM UTC · Ended 12:01 AM UTC
Commit: 0123b0b · View workflow run →

[ggallen]

/fs-review

[fullsend-ai-review]

🤖 Finished Review · ✅ Success · Started 12:05 AM UTC · Completed 12:19 AM UTC
Commit: 0123b0b · View workflow run →

Superseded by updated review

[ggallen]

/fs-review

[fullsend-ai-review]

🤖 Finished Review · ✅ Success · Started 12:26 AM UTC · Completed 12:36 AM UTC
Commit: 0123b0b · View workflow run →

[fullsend-ai-review]

Review skipped — this PR is already merged.

The /fs-review command only reviews open pull requests.

_{Posted by fullsend pre-review check}

[fullsend-ai-retro]

🤖 Finished Retro · ✅ Success · Started 12:29 AM UTC · Completed 12:40 AM UTC
Commit: 2fae223 · View workflow run →

[fullsend-ai-review]

Review skipped — this PR is already merged.

The /fs-review command only reviews open pull requests.

_{Posted by fullsend post-review check}

[fullsend-ai-retro]

Retro: PR #2811 — ADR 0064 (deprecate customized/ directory overlay)

A 4-file docs-only PR (ADR + implementation plan) by a human author. The review pipeline found a genuinely valuable high-severity finding (scripts/env gap in the deprecation scope) that the human fixed. The multi-agent Review Squad also found 8 MEDIUM findings on the implementation plan, most of which were actionable.

What went well:

• Review agent identified a real architectural gap (scripts/env customization path not covered by replacement mechanisms)
• Qodo and fullsend reviews complemented each other — Qodo caught formatting/convention issues, fullsend caught architectural completeness
• Human fixed all substantive findings before merge

Patterns observed (covered by existing issues):

• Non-deterministic findings across runs (Review agent produces non-deterministic verdicts on unchanged commits #2746, Stabilize review verdicts across re-runs on unchanged code #1389) — one run posts "Success", a later run finds high-severity issues
• Missing-authorization finding on a human-authored docs PR with a descriptive body (Review agent: cap missing-authorization severity at Low for human-authored PRs with descriptive bodies #2200)
• Multiple cancelled review dispatches on push events (Debounce review dispatch on rapid synchronize events #1014, Cancel in-flight review workflow when PR merges during review #2388)
• Review APPROVED with 8 MEDIUM findings (Review bot should align approval status with finding severity on first pass #1319)
• Plan documents receiving code-level review scrutiny (Review agent should deprioritize findings on planning/design documents #2678)

One novel pattern identified: Multiple review runs posted independent status comments ("Finished Review, Success", "Review cancelled", then detailed findings from yet another run), creating a confusing timeline. The human triggered /fs-review 3 times in the final 2 hours, suggesting uncertainty about whether the review had actually completed and what its verdict was. See proposal below.

Proposals filed

• Consolidate review status into a single mutable comment per PR (in fullsend-ai/fullsend)