fix(trekbrief): the review stamp covers only text the reviewer saw

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>

commands/trekbrief.md

@@ -177,7 +177,7 @@ Put the task in one of three size classes. In doubt, take the heaviest that fits
 
 | Class | Typical task | What the pipeline does |
 |---|---|---|
-| `small` | one change in one place, no new dependency, no interface change, easy to undo | one round, no follow-up; brief-reviewer runs once and its gaps become written assumptions, not questions; Phase 3.5 is skipped |
+| `small` | one change in one place, no new dependency, no interface change, easy to undo | one round, no follow-up; brief-reviewer runs once and its gaps become written assumptions, not questions, written after the review stamp (Step 4e, passed gate, step 4); Phase 3.5 is skipped |
 | `bounded` | several files or one module behind a clear boundary, no architecture decision | the round + at most one follow-up; at most one brief-review follow-up; Phase 3.5 asks one question for all four phases |
 | `architectural` | a new module, interface, dependency, data model or migration; anything hard to undo | follow-up rounds while answers open new branches; the full brief-review loop; Phase 3.5 asks per phase |
 
@@ -590,8 +590,8 @@ Read the brief template first:
 ### Loop bound
 
 **The cap follows the size class:** `small` 1 review iteration (no
-follow-up question: what fails is written into `## Open Questions /
-Assumptions` and `## Brief Quality`), `bounded` 2 (one follow-up),
+follow-up question: its gaps become assumptions after the stamp on a passed gate
+(Step 4e, step 4), into `## Brief Quality` on an exhausted loop), `bounded` 2 (one follow-up),
 `architectural` 3 (two rounds of targeted follow-ups). A follow-up question
 counts against the class budget; when the reviewer shows the task is bigger
 than its class, raise the class first (Step 3b) and use the new cap.
@@ -723,7 +723,8 @@ stumble.)
    Any later edit to the body makes the stamp stale and `/trekplan` reviews
    again. Exit 1 (not stamped) is said in one line; it only means the review
    runs twice. Only a passed gate is stamped.
-4. Break the loop and proceed to Step 4g.
+4. Class `small` only: now write the reviewer's gaps into `## Open Questions / Assumptions` (and `## Brief Quality` when it applies). They come after the stamp on purpose: the reviewer never saw them, so the stamp reads stale and `/trekplan` reviews the brief once more.
+5. Break the loop and proceed to Step 4g.
 
 **If gate fails AND iteration count < the class cap:**
 1. Identify the weakest dimension (lowest score; tie broken by priority:

tests/validators/brief-review-stamp-order.test.mjs

@@ -0,0 +1,56 @@
+// tests/validators/brief-review-stamp-order.test.mjs
+// /trekbrief stamps only text the reviewer saw. A `small` brief gets one
+// review; its gaps are written as assumptions. When that writing came before
+// the stamp, the stamp covered text no reviewer read and /trekplan skipped its
+// own review. The gaps are now written after the stamp, on purpose, so the
+// stamp reads stale and /trekplan reviews the brief once more.
+
+import { test } from 'node:test';
+import { strict as assert } from 'node:assert';
+import { readFileSync } from 'node:fs';
+import { dirname, join } from 'node:path';
+import { fileURLToPath } from 'node:url';
+import { stampBriefReview, checkBriefReview } from '../../lib/validators/brief-review-stamp.mjs';
+
+const HERE = dirname(fileURLToPath(import.meta.url));
+const ROOT = join(HERE, '..', '..');
+const brief = readFileSync(join(ROOT, 'commands', 'trekbrief.md'), 'utf8');
+
+const STAMP = 'brief-review-stamp.mjs --stamp';
+const GAPS = "Class `small` only: now write the reviewer's gaps";
+const PASS_START = '**If gate passes:**';
+const PASS_END = '**If gate fails AND iteration count < the class cap:**';
+
+function unique(text, needle) {
+  const at = text.indexOf(needle);
+  assert.ok(at >= 0, `found: ${needle}`);
+  assert.equal(text.lastIndexOf(needle), at, `unique in commands/trekbrief.md: ${needle}`);
+  return at;
+}
+
+test('trekbrief: the stamp comes before the small-class gaps are written, both in the passed-gate branch', () => {
+  const start = unique(brief, PASS_START);
+  const end = unique(brief, PASS_END);
+  const stamp = unique(brief, STAMP);
+  const gaps = unique(brief, GAPS);
+  assert.ok(start < end, 'passed-gate branch precedes the failed-gate branch');
+  assert.ok(start < stamp && stamp < end, 'the stamp sits in the passed-gate branch');
+  assert.ok(start < gaps && gaps < end, 'the gaps instruction sits in the passed-gate branch');
+  assert.ok(stamp < gaps, 'order: stamp, then the small-class gaps');
+  const after = brief.slice(gaps, end);
+  assert.match(after, /They come after the stamp on purpose/);
+  assert.match(after, /## Open Questions \/ Assumptions/);
+});
+
+test('guard: stamping a brief and then appending an assumption reads as stale', () => {
+  const text = [
+    '---', 'type: trekbrief', 'brief_version: "2.2"', 'task: t', 'slug: s', 'ceremony: small', '---', '',
+    '## TL;DR', '', 'A toy.', '', '## Intent', '', 'Why it matters.', '', '## Goal', '', 'What.', '',
+    '## Open Questions / Assumptions', '', '- None.', '',
+  ].join('\n');
+  const s = stampBriefReview(text);
+  assert.equal(s.stamped, true);
+  assert.equal(checkBriefReview(s.text).state, 'current');
+  const withGap = s.text + '- Assumed, not asked: the setting defaults to off (reviewer gap).\n';
+  assert.equal(checkBriefReview(withGap).state, 'stale');
+});