review-roundlisted

# Working a review round **Both review bots comment per commit**, and a round of findings can land *after* a reply to the previous round. Before calling a review done, re-check with the head SHA: `gh api --paginate repos/<owner>/<repo>/pulls/<n>/comments --jq '.[] | select(.original_commit_id=="<sha>")'` — with `--paginate`, since a busy PR's comments span pages and the first page is exactly where the older rounds are. **They also circle the same topic, and contradict each other and themselves across rounds.** A bot reviews *this diff* without the argument that produced it, so the same seam comes back round after round from a different angle — and a finding framed as "fresh evidence relative to the prior comment" may be the same claim, or may be genuinely new. Three shapes seen across the four PRs behind `FOLLOWUPS.md` item 34 (#189 to #192), all from the same reviewer: - **Against code that no longer exists.** One round argued about a teardown task the *previous* commit had deleted. Check which commit a comment is anchored to before acting on it. - **Round-tripping a decision.** Successive rounds drove a check out of `Lease::admit` and then asked for it back. Both were right about different properties, and only reading the code settled which — the review text alone could not. - **Right about the fact, wrong about the remedy.** "The SCM will not deliver a control code to a `StartPending` service" was correct (`ERROR_SERVICE_CANNOT_ACCEPT_CTRL` — measured, by holdin