adversarial-reviewlisted

## Orient yourself first ```bash npm run crm -- app inspect --json ``` Read `valid`, then `problems[]`, then `limitations[]`, in that order. Every problem is fixed or reported before anything is built on top of it, and **every limitation is a hard boundary on what you may claim.** Then read `packages[]`, `capabilities[]`, `resources[]`, `actions[]`, `policies[]` and `providers[]`: that list is what exists. A capability absent from the report does not exist, whatever a record name, a label or a document suggests. If the repository documents this skill names are absent, you are in a project built from this framework rather than in the framework itself. The inspection report is then the source of truth and those documents are optional background — do not guess at their contents, and do not assume a path exists because this skill names it. ## The contract you review against This skill reviews a pull request against this repository's own contract, so it needs that repository. Read `AGENTS.md`, `docs/QUALITY_GATES.md`, the PR's ExecPlan under `docs/plans/`, the ADRs it touches, and the JTBD rows it claims. Those four are the contract you are reviewing *against* — the PR body is a claim, not evidence. Where one of those documents is genuinely absent, review against the inspection report's `problems[]` and `limitations[]` and the project's own tests, and say in the report which contract you could not read. A review that invents the standard it reviewed against is not a review.