code-reviewlisted

# ASK Code Review Review for correctness, requirements, and risk first. Enforce `coding-standards.md` hard rules, including its scoped .NET/C# section when applicable, as correctness — not style. Keep scope clear: code-review checks behavior, requirements, regressions, and design risk. The final `verification` pass owns proportional code-smell scanning and evidence-based test-gap reporting; escalate deeper repository-wide smell analysis to `improve`. This is a mandatory second pass after **every** code edit. Review depth scales with risk — but no edit skips review entirely. ## Completion handoff When review is fully complete, include `review-generation`, `review-scope: REVIEW`, `review-reference`, `review-completed-at`, and `review-result: PASS` metadata, followed by terminal `ASK_REVIEW_COMPLETE`. Generation must match current session state; stale evidence must not clear newer review debt. Do not emit the marker for blocked, partial, or still-actionable reviews. For delegated review, return `ASK_WORKFLOW_PASS phase=REVIEW` only when requirements, regressions, local conventions, and relevant callers were checked. Use `ASK_WORKFLOW_FINDINGS phase=REVIEW` for concrete issues, `ASK_WORKFLOW_BLOCKED phase=REVIEW` when required evidence is unavailable, and `ASK_WORKFLOW_FAILED phase=REVIEW` when the review could not execute. A review is not an audit: do not claim independent counterexample analysis unless that is the assigned audit role. ## Review checklist - Does the diff