# Review by Principal Systems Engineer (Google/Stripe caliber) (Round 2)

---

## Review Complete — Principal Systems Engineer

**VERDICT: approve**

### Summary

All 9 functional requirements from the PRD are implemented. All 3,110 tests pass (0 failures, 0 regressions). The implementation follows every established pattern in the codebase (budget guards, heartbeat, UI headers, phase append/capture, resume logic).

### What's Done Right
- **Structured sentinel** (`VERIFY_RESULT: PASS/FAIL`) in the instruction template + regex-first parsing eliminates the false-positive problem on stochastic agent output. 16 unit tests on this function alone.
- **Two-agent separation** (verify observes, fix modifies) preserves audit boundaries for post-incident forensics.
- **Budget guards at both entry points** (verify + fix) — no unbounded cost loop possible.
- **Complete resume chain** — `learn → verify → deliver` with `_SKIP_MAP` entries means failed verify runs resume correctly.
- **Hard-block on persistent failure** — the core invariant ("never open a known-broken PR") holds under all tested scenarios.

### Non-blocking Findings (v2 optimizations)
1. `Phase.VERIFY` not in `_SAFETY_CRITICAL_PHASES` — acceptable since verify is read-only and the fix agent (which needs protection) uses `Phase.FIX` which IS protected.
2. `Phase.FIX` reuse makes verify-fix indistinguishable from review-fix in logs — positional inference works but a `Phase.VERIFY_FIX` would improve forensics.
3. Verify defaults to opus instead of haiku — costs more than needed for read-only test execution, easy follow-up.

Review artifact written to `cOS_reviews/reviews/principal_systems_engineer/20260401_230000_round1_when_you_should_run_the_cli_tests_before_deliver_4c1d93388a.md`.
