Reviewer skepticism covers the implementer's design rationales

Fourth planted-defect failure mode: the implementer's self-report said
'noted mild structural duplication; left unabstracted per YAGNI' and the
reviewer deferred to that framing, rating the duplication no finding at
all. The pre-judging keeps relocating — controller prompt, then reviewer
calibration, now the implementer's report. Rationales are claims; they
never downgrade severity.

skills/subagent-driven-development/task-reviewer-prompt.md

@@ -48,7 +48,10 @@ Subagent (general-purpose):
 
     Treat the implementer's report as unverified claims about the code. It
     may be incomplete, inaccurate, or optimistic. Verify the claims against
-    the diff.
+    the diff. Design rationales in the report are claims too: "left it per
+    YAGNI," "kept it simple deliberately," or any other justification is the
+    implementer grading their own work. Judge the code on its merits — a
+    stated rationale never downgrades a finding's severity.
 
     ## Tests