address-review-commentslisted

# Address review comments Take the open review comments on a PR from "what is the reviewer really asking" through to an implemented, replied-to resolution. You steer; the human decides every judgment call. Handles every open thread, human or bot. Closed and resolved threads are context only. ## Process ### 1. Gather Resolve the PR (the argument, or the current branch's PR via `gh pr view`). Pull its open review threads through `gh` / the GraphQL API: each comment with its file, line, author, body, and thread state. Resolved threads are context, not work. Always read the **actual current code**, not your recollection of it; the user may have changed it. ### 2. Triage Sort each open thread into: - **settled** — a pure mechanical fix, or the author already agreed an approach in-thread. Goes straight to implementation. - **needs a decision** — everything else. ### 3. Decide (no code yet) For each *needs a decision* thread, investigate the reviewer's underlying concern, not just the symptom they pointed at, until you can lay out the realistic options with their trade-offs. Then route by what is actually in dispute: - **Correctness dispute** ("this finding is wrong / a false positive"): spawn a validator subagent that adversarially re-checks the finding against the actual code, given the user's rebuttal. One round only. It returns **concede** (a false positive, with a code-grounded reason) or **defend** (the issue holds, with the concrete evidence). Bias to concede when i