fix: close what an independent review found in the trial 2 fixes

- The pre-compact hook read only a checkpoint that started with `git commit`,
  so every plan in the new `git add … && git commit` form rebuilt nothing, and
  an empty match also skipped the session-state refresh. It now finds the
  commit anywhere in the span and always refreshes; first test for the hook.
- A sub-bullet that carries its own command stays a criterion (folding it
  left the command unrun); the shallowest bullet sets the base indent.
- Only a MINOR/SUGGESTION /code-review finding outside the range is released
  from forbidding ALLOW: a MAJOR one may be a break cited at an unchanged
  caller.
- `reuse` is an improvement category; the session-spec template stages too;
  a negated bash 3.2 constraint, an env prefix and `bash -c` are handled.
- Stale comment, Declined-to-Judge wording and rule-key counts brought in line.

Tests fail on 7c11c2a first (9 of 24).

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

lib/review/coordinator-contract.mjs

@@ -388,14 +388,17 @@ export function runContract(reviewerPayloads, options = {}) {
   // Engine findings on files outside the review's SHA range (engine-findings.mjs
   // `out_of_scope`). /security-review diffs against origin's default branch,
   // wider than this review: a real claim nobody here judged, so it forbids
-  // ALLOW. /code-review was given exactly this range, so its citation outside
-  // it is about code the review did not change: declined, listed, never
-  // dropped — but it does not lock the verdict on WARN (voyage-lekerepo
-  // trial 2, 2026-10-08: one remark on a frozen file held ALLOW back for good).
+  // ALLOW. /code-review was given exactly this range: its MINOR or SUGGESTION
+  // finding outside it (an improvement to code the review did not change) is
+  // declined and listed, never dropped, but does not hold ALLOW back
+  // (voyage-lekerepo trial 2, 2026-10-08). A MAJOR+ one still forbids ALLOW:
+  // a changed signature that breaks an unchanged caller is cited AT the
+  // unchanged file (independent review, 2026-10-08).
   const outOfScope = (options.engineOutOfScope ?? [])
     .map((f) => ({ ...f, suppressed_reason: 'engine:out-of-scope' }));
-  const outOfScopeBlocking = outOfScope.filter((f) => f.engine !== 'code-review');
-  const outOfScopeNoted = outOfScope.filter((f) => f.engine === 'code-review');
+  const minorOnly = (f) => f.engine === 'code-review' && (f.severity === 'MINOR' || f.severity === 'SUGGESTION');
+  const outOfScopeBlocking = outOfScope.filter((f) => !minorOnly(f));
+  const outOfScopeNoted = outOfScope.filter(minorOnly);
   const unverified = [...judged.unverified, ...reasoned.unverified, ...outOfScopeBlocking];
   // What the coordinator set aside without ruling on it, one line each, so a
   // reader sees every finding that did not reach a verdict tier. Borrowed:

lib/review/engine-findings.mjs

@@ -33,10 +33,11 @@
 //   - File paths are made repo-relative (an absolute path under `repoRoot`
 //     loses that prefix) before they are compared with the scope.
 //   - A finding on a file outside the review scope is NOT dropped silently: it
-//     lands in `out_of_scope`, which the coordinator counts as unverified
-//     (`engine:out-of-scope`) — it forbids ALLOW and is listed under
-//     Declined to Judge (`/security-review` diffs against origin's default
-//     branch, which can be wider than the review's SHA range).
+//     lands in `out_of_scope`, which the coordinator lists under Declined to
+//     Judge (`engine:out-of-scope`). It forbids ALLOW unless it is a MINOR or
+//     SUGGESTION from /code-review (coordinator-contract.mjs runContract);
+//     `/security-review` diffs against origin's default branch, which can be
+//     wider than the review's SHA range.
 //   - An empty scope list is an error, never "everything is out of scope".
 //
 // CLI: node lib/review/engine-findings.mjs [--scope <file-list.txt>] [--repo-root <dir>] <engine-findings.json>
@@ -79,7 +80,7 @@ function parseLine(v) {
 const tier = (key) => SEVERITY_VALUES.indexOf(getRule(key).severity);
 
 /** /code-review categories that name an improvement, not a defect. */
-export const IMPROVEMENT_CATEGORIES = Object.freeze(new Set(['simplification', 'efficiency', 'style', 'readability']));
+export const IMPROVEMENT_CATEGORIES = Object.freeze(new Set(['simplification', 'efficiency', 'reuse', 'style', 'readability']));
 
 /**
  * Convert one engine's transcribed findings into a coordinator payload.

lib/review/rule-catalogue.mjs

@@ -8,8 +8,8 @@
 // Code's own `/code-review` and `/security-review` enter the coordinator under
 // them when no narrower key fits (wrap, not a new engine). A third engine key,
 // CODE_REVIEW_IMPROVEMENT (MINOR), takes a /code-review finding whose category
-// is an improvement rather than a defect (simplification, efficiency, style,
-// readability): the second voyage-lekerepo trial (2026-10-08) saw a pure
+// is an improvement rather than a defect (simplification, efficiency, reuse,
+// style, readability): the second voyage-lekerepo trial (2026-10-08) saw a pure
 // simplification proposal enter as MAJOR and drive the verdict.
 //
 // `memory_route` decides where a finding class that recurs across two
@@ -128,7 +128,7 @@ export const RULE_CATALOGUE = Object.freeze([
     rule_key: 'CODE_REVIEW_IMPROVEMENT',
     severity: 'MINOR',
     category: 'maintenance',
-    description: "An improvement (simplification, efficiency, style, readability) reported by Claude Code's /code-review, not a defect.",
+    description: "An improvement (simplification, efficiency, reuse, style, readability) reported by Claude Code's /code-review, not a defect.",
     memory_route: null,
   }),
   Object.freeze({