consultation-looplisted

# Consultation loop A voluntary pre-push interrogation of the branch diff. The reviewer must be a fresh context that did not produce the change: spawn a subagent (or a fresh `claude -p` session) and give it only the diff and the questions below. Never answer these questions from the session that wrote the code; a session reviewing its own work confirms its own assumptions. This loop is advisory. It produces ranked findings for the author to weigh, not a verdict. The blocking review is CI's job (tests, self-check, the Inquisitor); this one exists to catch what you can still fix cheaply, before the PR exists. ## Procedure 1. Compute the diff scope: `git diff origin/main...HEAD` (after `git fetch origin main`). 2. Spawn a fresh reviewer with the framing: "You did not write this code. Assume the author took shortcuts. Answer each question for this diff only. Every claim cites a file:line from the diff; if the diff cannot answer, say 'cannot tell from here' and name what evidence would answer it. Do not reassure." 3. Ask the five questions, one at a time, each with its scope clause: 1. **Are we done?** Enumerate what the task promised (the issue, the spec, the PR body draft) as a list, and mark each item present or absent in the diff. Done-ness is a list, not a feeling. 2. **Is it production ready?** Error handling on the failure paths the diff introduces; logging of the decisions it takes (`domain.event key=value`, `reason=` on skips);