specflow-request-reviewlisted

# Specflow: Request Review ## When to use Review a completed task's diff for craft — naming, structure, duplication, whether it matches the patterns around it — anchored to the plan task and the spec criterion that task cites, never an open-ended sweep of the codebase. Correctness belongs to the test suite: a reviewer who suspects the code is functionally wrong reports a missing-test signal instead of a verdict. Findings are non-blocking on function, with one exception — a compass-rule violation is load-bearing. Use after a task's tests pass, when the user says "review this", "review the diff", "code review", or when specflow-develop reaches its review ladder. Pairs with specflow-receive-review. ## The Iron Law NO FINDING WITHOUT A FILE, A LINE, AND A FIX Violating the letter of this law is violating the spirit. If you find yourself constructing a reading under which this observation is useful without being specific, that construction is the violation. Hardening mechanisms per `skills/_conventions/hardening.md`. ## What this is for Craft. Whether the next person can work with this code: naming, structure, duplication, whether it looks like the code around it, whether it will be understood in six months. **Correctness is not your job here.** The test suite owns that, it is mechanical, and it already ran. This review is additive — it never becomes a second gate over a change whose tests pass. ## Scope: the diff, not the tree You are reviewing **what changed**, agains