evaluate-findings

# Evaluate Findings Assess external feedback (code reviews, AI suggestions, PR comments) with adversarial verification. Triage findings into actionable verdicts. Do not apply fixes. ## Step 1: Assess Each Finding If you already assessed a finding earlier in this session and recorded a verdict of Skip or Escalate — for example when an iterating loop re-runs review and the same finding resurfaces — do not re-adjudicate it from scratch. When the re-reported finding matches one you already judged (same location and substance) and presents no new evidence beyond what your recorded reason already accounts for, keep that verdict and reason without re-reading the code, re-verifying, or routing it to the Devil's Advocate in Step 2. Assess fresh only when the finding raises materially new evidence, or when you have not judged it before in this session. For each finding: 1. **Read the referenced code** at the mentioned location — include the full function or logical block, not just the flagged line 2. **Check whether the code has diverged** — if the finding references code that no longer exists or has since changed, skip it and note the divergence. 3. **Determine scope** — clarify whether the issue was introduced by the PR/changeset or is pre-existing. - Pre-existing issues in earlier commits on the same feature branch are in-scope by default — the entire branch is one coherent unit of work. Judge these on their merits like any in-scope finding. - Findings genuinely outside t...