Adopt audited positive phrasings: evidence rule leads positive; fix-report completeness as checklist

skills/subagent-driven-development/SKILL.md

@@ -178,8 +178,9 @@ final whole-branch review. When you fill a reviewer template:
 - Every fix dispatch carries the implementer contract: the fix subagent
   re-runs the tests covering its change and reports the results. Name the
   covering test files in the dispatch — a one-line fix does not need the
-  whole suite. A fix report without test evidence is incomplete — do not
-  re-review on top of it.
+  whole suite. Before re-dispatching the reviewer, confirm the fix report
+  contains the covering tests, the command run, and the output; dispatch
+  the re-review once all three are present.
 - If the final whole-branch review returns findings, dispatch ONE fix
   subagent with the complete findings list — not one fixer per finding.
   Per-finding fixers each rebuild context and re-run suites; a real

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

@@ -110,9 +110,10 @@ Subagent (general-purpose):
       significantly grow existing files? (Don't flag pre-existing file
       sizes — focus on what this change contributed.)
 
-    Cite file:line evidence for every finding and for any check you would
-    otherwise answer with a bare "yes." Cite, don't narrate — a tight report
-    that points at lines beats a long one that retells the diff.
+    Your report should point at evidence: file:line references for every
+    finding and for any check you would otherwise answer with a bare
+    "yes." A tight report that cites lines gives the controller everything
+    it needs.
 
     ## Calibration