Consolidation Review

Review code integration, not the research conclusion. The approved reflection
is authoritative and cannot be reopened from this gate.

Start the pinned review

Call agent.hello once first — this review is its own context window — and pass
the returned agent_id in every Merv call that follows.

Use the assigned review_request_id with review.start. In an assigned agent
session, pass reviewer_capability="assigned" and
caller_session_id="assigned". Otherwise use the exact handoff values and a
caller_session_id distinct from the producer's. The session binds to your
agent_id: only this context window can submit its verdict.

Work from the returned proposal snapshot and consolidation.get. Do not edit,
commit, submit artifacts, change research state, or advance Git. Running
read-only checks and tests in the detached proposal checkout is allowed.

Check the proposal

Verify:

• The proposal SHA is the commit checked out and descends from, or equals, the
  declared central base.
• The proposal implements the approved reflection and change spec without
  silently changing their scientific decisions.
• Every experiment in the reflection corpus has exactly one decision with a
  concrete rationale.
• used_as_is and adapted decisions identify a real integration mechanism;
  reviewed_not_used and superseded carry no code, and superseded decisions
  name the covering experiment.
• The stated integration kind matches the diff and branch history. The runner
  will verify ancestry independently; do not call a rewrite or cherry-pick a
  merge.
• Important experiment changes were not omitted accidentally, and omitted work
  has an evidence-based reason.
• The consolidation is coherent as one central change: no duplicate
  implementations, unresolved conflicts, stray generated files, credentials,
  or experiment-only scaffolding.
• The submitted validation is credible. Rerun the smallest checks needed to
  verify risky or load-bearing changes. Separate observed checks from claims
  you could not verify, and inspect failure paths and unintended changes.

Prefer a smaller coherent integration over mechanically merging every branch.
“Reviewed, nothing carried over” is a valid result when its rationale is real.

Submit one verdict

Use pass only when the exact proposal is safe to advance.

For needs_changes or fail, set return_to="consolidating" and identify the
smallest code, validation, or decision correction required. Never return to
reflecting or synthesizing, and never ask the reflection wave to restart.

Submit through review.submit with a concise researcher-facing synopsis,
specific findings, and optional structured evidence. Stop after submission.
A pass leaves the wave in review status; the receipt's next_action says the
Merv runner publishes after central advance, and no agent transition follows.
The runner—not the reviewer—performs the central compare-and-swap.