Snapshot WIP: solver HP epic progress, BPHX/HX physics, BMAD skill refresh.

Capture uncommitted solver robustness work (regularization, domain errors, linear solver lifecycle, tube DP/MSH), web workbench updates, and synced BMAD skills across IDE agent folders before starting BPHX pressure-drop.

Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>

.agent/skills/bmad-code-review/SKILL.md

@@ -9,6 +9,9 @@ description: 'Review code changes adversarially using parallel review layers (Bl
 
 **Your Role:** You are an elite code reviewer. You gather context, launch parallel adversarial reviews, triage findings with precision, and present actionable results. No noise, no filler.
 
+Subagents, when the capability is available, are an important part of this workflow. Use them as directed by the workflow steps.
+If you need an explicit user instruction to run them, ask once now for the whole workflow run.
+
 ## Conventions
 
 - Bare paths (e.g. `checklist.md`) resolve from the skill root.
@@ -47,7 +50,6 @@ Load config from `{project-root}/_bmad/bmm/config.yaml` and resolve:
 - `date` as system-generated current datetime
 - `sprint_status` = `{implementation_artifacts}/sprint-status.yaml`
 - `project_context` = `**/project-context.md` (load if exists)
-- CLAUDE.md / memory files (load if exist)
 - YOU MUST ALWAYS SPEAK OUTPUT in your Agent communication style with the config `{communication_language}`
 
 ### Step 5: Greet the User
@@ -58,7 +60,7 @@ Greet `{user_name}`, speaking in `{communication_language}`.
 
 Execute each entry in `{workflow.activation_steps_append}` in order.
 
-Activation is complete. Begin the workflow below.
+Activation is complete. If `activation_steps_prepend` or `activation_steps_append` were non-empty, confirm every entry was executed in order before proceeding. Do not begin the main workflow until all activation steps have been completed.
 
 ## WORKFLOW ARCHITECTURE
 

.agent/skills/bmad-code-review/steps/step-02-review.md

@@ -7,23 +7,29 @@ failed_layers: '' # set at runtime: comma-separated list of layers that failed o
 ## RULES
 
 - YOU MUST ALWAYS SPEAK OUTPUT in your Agent communication style with the config `{communication_language}`
-- The Blind Hunter subagent receives NO project context — diff only.
-- The Edge Case Hunter subagent receives diff and project read access.
-- The Acceptance Auditor subagent receives diff, spec, and context docs.
 - All review subagents must run at the same model capability as the current session.
 
 ## INSTRUCTIONS
 
 1. If `{review_mode}` = `"no-spec"`, note to the user: "Acceptance Auditor skipped — no spec file provided."
 
-2. Launch parallel subagents without conversation context. If subagents are not available, generate prompt files in `{implementation_artifacts}` — one per reviewer role below — and HALT. Ask the user to run each in a separate session (ideally a different LLM) and paste back the findings. When findings are pasted, resume from this point and proceed to step 3.
+2. Launch Blind Hunter and Edge Case Hunter in parallel without prior conversation context. If `{review_mode}` = `"full"`, include the Acceptance Auditor in the same parallel launch. If subagents are not available, generate prompt files in `{implementation_artifacts}` for each applicable reviewer role and HALT. Ask the user to run each in a separate session (ideally a different LLM) and paste back the findings. When findings are pasted, resume from this point and proceed to step 3.
 
-   - **Blind Hunter** — receives `{diff_output}` only. No spec, no context docs, no project access. Invoke via the `bmad-review-adversarial-general` skill.
+   - **Blind Hunter** — prompt:
+     > Invoke the `bmad-review-adversarial-general` skill on this diff:
+     >
+     > {diff_output}
 
-   - **Edge Case Hunter** — receives `{diff_output}` and read access to the project. Invoke via the `bmad-review-edge-case-hunter` skill.
+   - **Edge Case Hunter** — prompt:
+     > Invoke the `bmad-review-edge-case-hunter` skill on this diff:
+     >
+     > {diff_output}
 
-   - **Acceptance Auditor** (only if `{review_mode}` = `"full"`) — receives `{diff_output}`, the content of the file at `{spec_file}`, and any loaded context docs. Its prompt:
-     > You are an Acceptance Auditor. Review this diff against the spec and context docs. Check for: violations of acceptance criteria, deviations from spec intent, missing implementation of specified behavior, contradictions between spec constraints and actual code. Output findings as a Markdown list. Each finding: one-line title, which AC/constraint it violates, and evidence from the diff.
+   - **Acceptance Auditor** (only if `{review_mode}` = `"full"`) — prompt:
+     > You are an Acceptance Auditor. Review the provided diff against `{spec_file}` and any loaded context docs. Check for: violations of acceptance criteria, deviations from spec intent, missing implementation of specified behavior, contradictions between spec constraints and actual code. Output findings as a Markdown list. Each finding: one-line title, which AC/constraint it violates, and evidence from the diff.
+     >
+     > Diff:
+     > {diff_output}
 
 3. **Subagent failure handling**: If any subagent fails, times out, or returns empty results, append the layer name to `{failed_layers}` (comma-separated) and proceed with findings from the remaining layers.
 

.agent/skills/bmad-code-review/steps/step-03-triage.md

@@ -6,7 +6,6 @@
 ## RULES
 
 - YOU MUST ALWAYS SPEAK OUTPUT in your Agent communication style with the config `{communication_language}`
-- Be precise. When uncertain between categories, prefer the more conservative classification.
 
 ## INSTRUCTIONS
 
@@ -29,7 +28,15 @@
    - Append any unique detail, reasoning, or location references from the other finding(s) into the surviving `detail` field.
    - Set `source` to the merged sources (e.g., `blind+edge`).
 
-3. **Classify** each finding into exactly one bucket:
+3. **Read the code before rating.** Before assigning severity, open the source at each finding's location and read enough surrounding code to judge reachability -- call sites, guards, and validation that live outside the diff hunk. Do not rate from the diff hunk alone. Severity reflects the real consequence at a real call site, not the worst theoretical reading.
+
+4. **Assign severity** to each finding by consequence for the artifact's main consumer (software user, document reader, etc).
+   Disregard any severity assigned by a reviewing subagent. Review subagents operate under by-design information asymmetry and do not have enough context to set final severity for this workflow.
+   - `low` -- none or cosmetic
+   - `medium` -- tolerable
+   - `high` -- intolerable
+
+5. **Route** each finding into exactly one triage bucket:
    - **decision_needed** -- There is an ambiguous choice that requires human input. The code cannot be correctly patched without knowing the user's intent. Only possible if `{review_mode}` = `"full"`.
    - **patch** -- Code issue that is fixable without human input. The correct fix is unambiguous.
    - **defer** -- Pre-existing issue not caused by the current change. Real but not actionable now.
@@ -37,11 +44,11 @@
 
    If `{review_mode}` = `"no-spec"` and a finding would otherwise be `decision_needed`, reclassify it as `patch` (if the fix is unambiguous) or `defer` (if not).
 
-4. **Drop** all `dismiss` findings. Record the dismiss count for the summary.
+6. **Drop** all `dismiss` findings. Record the dismiss count for the summary.
 
-5. If `{failed_layers}` is non-empty, report which layers failed before announcing results. If zero findings remain after dropping dismissed AND `{failed_layers}` is non-empty, warn the user that the review may be incomplete rather than announcing a clean review.
+7. If `{failed_layers}` is non-empty, report which layers failed before announcing results. If zero findings remain after dropping dismissed AND `{failed_layers}` is non-empty, warn the user that the review may be incomplete rather than announcing a clean review.
 
-6. If zero findings remain after triage (all rejected or none raised): state "✅ Clean review — all layers passed." (Step 3 already warned if any review layers failed via `{failed_layers}`.)
+8. If zero findings remain after triage (all rejected or none raised): state "✅ Clean review — all layers passed." (Step 3 already warned if any review layers failed via `{failed_layers}`.)
 
 
 ## NEXT

.agent/skills/bmad-code-review/steps/step-04-present.md

@@ -86,7 +86,7 @@ Skip this section if `{spec_file}` is not set.
 
 #### Determine new status based on review outcome
 
-- If all `decision-needed` and `patch` findings were resolved (fixed or dismissed) AND no unresolved HIGH/MEDIUM issues remain: set `{new_status}` = `done`. Update the story file Status section to `done`.
+- If all `decision-needed` and `patch` findings were resolved (fixed or dismissed) AND no unresolved `high`/`medium` findings remain: set `{new_status}` = `done`. Update the story file Status section to `done`.
 - If `patch` findings were left as action items, or unresolved issues remain: set `{new_status}` = `in-progress`. Update the story file Status section to `in-progress`.
 
 Save the story file.