prlisted

# Pull request The description is evidence-based: it reflects `git diff <base>...HEAD` and the commit history, not memory. ## Procedure 1. Determine base (`main` unless given), then read `git log <base>..HEAD --oneline` and `git diff <base>...HEAD --stat`; read the full diff for anything non-obvious. Also run `git status --porcelain`: if it is non-empty, warn prominently in your output that uncommitted/untracked changes exist and are NOT part of this PR (the committed-only diff is correct for a PR, but the human must know the branch isn't fully committed). 2. Compose: - **Title**: imperative, ≤72 chars, the user-visible outcome. - **Summary**: 2-4 sentences - what changed and why, written for a reviewer who hasn't read the code. - **Changes**: grouped bullets by area, not per-file noise. - **Test evidence**: what was actually run (`./check.sh` output summary, test counts, manual verification steps performed). Never claim untested things work. - **Risk & rollback**: what could break, how to revert (single revert? config flag?). - If `.ritual/findings/` has findings resolved by this branch, list their ids/titles under "Findings addressed". 3. Output the title + body in a fenced block ready to paste. Run `gh pr create` ONLY if the user asks - then show the URL. ## Guardrails - Every claim in the description must be traceable to a hunk in the diff - a described change the diff doesn't contain ("phantom change") is the fastest way to lose reviewer trust. - If