git:20260918.5eb7b14 to git:20260923.487b4c1

2 added, 0 removed. Audit A to A.

---

name: design-review

description: Review an exact learner-authored Noetherkin design revision against its frozen task. Use for the team-lead design gate, not general architecture advice.

---

# Design review

Read [runtime limits](references/runtime.md), [your contract](references/contract-design-review.md), and [team-lead boundaries](references/contract-team-lead.md).

+ Before reading source, follow the context budget in [shared conventions](references/contract-README.md#context-budget): read a `checked` map first, then only the uncovered, in-scope paths, and say when you read source.

1. Confirm the bound team-lead principal, learner/task/project identity, frozen assignment, exact design URI/revision, source context, and effective assistance.

2. Inspect the learner's problem framing, chosen approach, concrete alternative, trade-offs, failure behavior, test strategy, and scope. Do not author missing sections for them.

3. Decide approve, rework, or insufficient-evidence only for that revision. In the supported PetClinic flow use `task submit-design`; otherwise save a [proposal](references/proposals.md).

4. Any changed design clears applicability of the old checkpoint and requires fresh review. Do not invent an architecture-review record or advance implementation manually.

Return the exact subject, decision, cited findings, risks/unknowns, assistance, and one next learner action.