fix(implement): adjudicate review findings

CONTEXT.md

@@ -42,7 +42,7 @@ _Avoid_: Workflow stage, mandatory step
 **Router skill**: A lightweight skill that invokes other skills to produce a combined outcome. It contains only coordination unique to that outcome; called skills remain authoritative and the router neither repeats nor overrides their context.\
 _Avoid_: Pipeline skill
 
-**Implement skill**: The user-invoked workflow that uses tracer bullets to deliver a clear implementation request in verified slices, applying TDD when appropriate. It remediates code-review findings until verified and elicits user intent when a finding would change behaviour, contracts, architecture, or scope.
+**Implement skill**: The user-invoked workflow that coordinates a confirmed implementation through TDD and independent code review. It technically adjudicates review findings, remediates required corrections, accepts optional improvements only when proportionate, and elicits user intent when a finding would change behaviour, contracts, architecture, or scope.
 
 **TDD skill**: The model-invoked workflow that applies red-green-refactor when an existing runnable test suite can exercise the behaviour change through a stable public seam. It uses Test Desiderata to favour valuable tests that respond to behaviour without coupling to code structure.
 

skills/implement/SKILL.md

@@ -8,8 +8,15 @@ disable-model-invocation: true
 
 # Implement
 
-A bounded **Plan–Do–Check–Act (PDCA)** cycle routes confirmed work through `$tdd` and `$code-review` until complete.
+A tailored **Software Formal Inspection** lifecycle routes confirmed work through `$tdd`, independent `$code-review`, technical disposition, and verified rework.
 
 ## Process
 
-Invoke `$tdd` to implement the confirmed work, then invoke `$code-review` on the result. Route every finding through `$tdd`, then repeat `$code-review` until the work is complete and the latest review has no findings.
+Invoke `$tdd` to implement the confirmed work, then invoke `$code-review` on the result. Validate every finding against the confirmed request and current codebase, then disposition it:
+
+- A required correction is a verified violation of confirmed behaviour, the specification, a repository rule, or a necessary safety boundary, or another defect that leaves the change untrustworthy.
+- A proportional improvement is valid but non-blocking; accept it only when its concrete benefit justifies the added change and complexity.
+- A rejected finding is falsified, unsupported, superseded, or outside the confirmed scope.
+- A user decision is required when accepting or rejecting the finding would change behaviour, contracts, architecture, or scope, or when its evidence cannot be obtained safely.
+
+Treat priority as evidence of impact and ordering, not remediation authority. Route each accepted change through `$tdd`, then repeat `$code-review` after any correction. Complete when the requested work is verified, every finding has a technical disposition, and no required finding remains unresolved.