Tone down review loops: single-pass plan review, raise issue bar

- Remove chunk-based plan review in favor of single whole-plan review
- Add Calibration sections to both reviewer prompts so only serious
  issues block approval
- Reduce max review iterations from 5 to 3
- Streamline reviewer checklists (spec: 7→5, plan: 7→4 categories)

skills/brainstorming/spec-document-reviewer-prompt.md

@@ -19,32 +19,31 @@ Task tool (general-purpose):
     | Category | What to Look For |
     |----------|------------------|
     | Completeness | TODOs, placeholders, "TBD", incomplete sections |
-    | Coverage | Missing error handling, edge cases, integration points |
     | Consistency | Internal contradictions, conflicting requirements |
-    | Clarity | Ambiguous requirements |
-    | YAGNI | Unrequested features, over-engineering |
+    | Clarity | Requirements ambiguous enough to cause someone to build the wrong thing |
     | Scope | Focused enough for a single plan — not covering multiple independent subsystems |
-    | Architecture | Units with clear boundaries, well-defined interfaces, independently understandable and testable |
+    | YAGNI | Unrequested features, over-engineering |
 
-    ## CRITICAL
+    ## Calibration
 
-    Look especially hard for:
-    - Any TODO markers or placeholder text
-    - Sections saying "to be defined later" or "will spec when X is done"
-    - Sections noticeably less detailed than others
-    - Units that lack clear boundaries or interfaces — can you understand what each unit does without reading its internals?
+    **Only flag issues that would cause real problems during implementation planning.**
+    A missing section, a contradiction, or a requirement so ambiguous it could be
+    interpreted two different ways — those are issues. Minor wording improvements,
+    stylistic preferences, and "sections less detailed than others" are not.
+
+    Approve unless there are serious gaps that would lead to a flawed plan.
 
     ## Output Format
 
     ## Spec Review
 
-    **Status:** ✅ Approved | ❌ Issues Found
+    **Status:** Approved | Issues Found
 
     **Issues (if any):**
-    - [Section X]: [specific issue] - [why it matters]
+    - [Section X]: [specific issue] - [why it matters for planning]
 
-    **Recommendations (advisory):**
-    - [suggestions that don't block approval]
+    **Recommendations (advisory, do not block approval):**
+    - [suggestions for improvement]
 ```
 
 **Reviewer returns:** Status, Issues (if any), Recommendations