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 the exact marker `ASK_REVIEW_COMPLETE` in the final handoff. This is required when a review runs in a subagent so the parent session can clear its pending review flag. 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 solve the asked problem? - Follows `coding-standards.md`? — intent comments on every function