feat(ship-check): port output-honesty contracts from plan-review

plugins/ship-check/agents/bug-checker.md

@@ -148,6 +148,7 @@ Return a structured summary to the orchestrator:
 ```
 Bug check complete:
 - Files checked: N
+- Reviewed at: <PR head SHA>
 - Bugs found: N (M fixed, K flagged)
 - Flagged breakdown: (include only when K > 0)
   - Uncertain diagnosis: A
@@ -164,13 +165,15 @@ Bug check complete:
   - Platform/encoding: G
 - Confidence: N high, M medium, K low
 - Tests: passing / N failures
+- Dismissed: N (proof-of-dismissal one-liners follow — or "none")
 ```
 
 ### Comment mode
 
 ```
 Bug check complete (comment mode):
 - Files checked: N
+- Reviewed at: <PR head SHA>
 - Bugs found: N (M would-fix, K flagged)
 - Review posted: yes / no (0 findings)
 - By dimension:
@@ -182,4 +185,5 @@ Bug check complete (comment mode):
   - Input validation: F
   - Platform/encoding: G
 - Confidence: N high, M medium, K low
+- Dismissed: N (proof-of-dismissal one-liners follow — or "none")
 ```

plugins/ship-check/agents/code-quality-reviewer.md

@@ -122,6 +122,7 @@ Return a structured summary to the orchestrator:
 ```
 Code quality complete:
 - Files reviewed: N
+- Reviewed at: <PR head SHA>
 - Findings: N total, all fixed
 - By category:
   - Naming: A
@@ -131,13 +132,15 @@ Code quality complete:
   - Module conventions: E
   - Concision: F
 - Tests: passing / N failures
+- Dismissed: N (proof-of-dismissal one-liners follow — or "none")
 ```
 
 ### Comment mode
 
 ```
 Code quality complete (comment mode):
 - Files reviewed: N
+- Reviewed at: <PR head SHA>
 - Findings: N total, all commented
 - Review posted: yes / no (0 findings)
 - By category:
@@ -147,4 +150,5 @@ Code quality complete (comment mode):
   - Simplicity: D
   - Module conventions: E
   - Concision: F
+- Dismissed: N (proof-of-dismissal one-liners follow — or "none")
 ```

plugins/ship-check/agents/pr-reviewer.md

@@ -145,6 +145,7 @@ Return a structured summary to the orchestrator:
 ```
 PR Review complete:
 - Files reviewed: N
+- Reviewed at: <PR head SHA>
 - Findings: N total (M fixed, K flagged)
 - Flagged breakdown: (include only when K > 0)
   - Uncertain diagnosis: A
@@ -158,13 +159,15 @@ PR Review complete:
   - Stale paths: E (or "N/A — no file moves/renames")
 - Tests: passing / N failures
 - Verdict: ship / ship-with-minor-fixes / needs-changes
+- Dismissed: N (proof-of-dismissal one-liners follow — or "none")
 ```
 
 ### Comment mode
 
 ```
 PR Review complete (comment mode):
 - Files reviewed: N
+- Reviewed at: <PR head SHA>
 - Findings: N total (M would-fix, K flagged)
 - Review posted: yes / no (0 findings)
 - By dimension:
@@ -174,4 +177,5 @@ PR Review complete (comment mode):
   - Feature surface docs: D (or "N/A")
   - Stale paths: E (or "N/A")
 - Verdict: ship / ship-with-minor-fixes / needs-changes
+- Dismissed: N (proof-of-dismissal one-liners follow — or "none")
 ```

plugins/ship-check/agents/test-auditor.md

@@ -118,6 +118,7 @@ Return a structured summary to the orchestrator:
 ```
 Test audit complete:
 - Test files audited: N
+- Reviewed at: <PR head SHA>
 - Findings: N total (M fixed)
 - By category:
   - Two-bar violations: A
@@ -129,13 +130,15 @@ Test audit complete:
 - Tests written: J
 - Mutation-tested: L
 - Suite: passing / N failures (total test count)
+- Dismissed: N (proof-of-dismissal one-liners follow — or "none")
 ```
 
 ### Comment mode
 
 ```
 Test audit complete (comment mode):
 - Test files audited: N
+- Reviewed at: <PR head SHA>
 - Findings: N total, all commented
 - Review posted: yes / no (0 findings)
 - By category:
@@ -146,4 +149,5 @@ Test audit complete (comment mode):
   - Coverage regressions: E
 - Coverage gaps reported: K
 - Mutation-tested: L (diagnostic only)
+- Dismissed: N (proof-of-dismissal one-liners follow — or "none")
 ```

plugins/ship-check/skills/bug-check/SKILL.md

@@ -425,6 +425,7 @@ yours. Convention violations in your fixes ship unchecked.
 ```
 Bug check complete:
 - Files checked: N
+- Reviewed at: <PR head SHA>
 - Bugs found: N (M fixed, K flagged for review)
 - By dimension:
   - Description mismatch: A
@@ -435,8 +436,23 @@ Bug check complete:
   - Input validation: F
   - Platform/encoding: G
 - Confidence: N high, M medium, K low
+- Dismissed: N (proof-of-dismissal one-liners follow — or "none")
 ```
 
+**Output honesty (both modes):**
+
+- **State what you reviewed.** The summary names the PR head SHA actually
+  reviewed — a review that doesn't say what it checked is indistinguishable
+  from one that checked nothing. It also lets the orchestrator cross-check
+  what this phase actually saw against the delta-review baseline it records
+  itself at Phase 4 close.
+- **Close with proof of dismissal.** One line per suspicion you seriously
+  considered and dropped, with the reason it doesn't bite — or "none". This
+  extends "No silent skipping" to the negative space: findings you confirmed
+  go in the report, and suspicions you cleared go in the dismissal list —
+  without them, "no findings" could mean a clean diff or an unexamined one,
+  and the reader can't tell which.
+
 ## Comment mode
 
 When the dispatch prompt says **COMMENT MODE**, do not edit files, commit, or push.
@@ -459,7 +475,7 @@ gh api "repos/OWNER_REPO/pulls/PR_NUMBER/reviews" \
   --method POST --input - <<'REVIEW'
 {
   "event": "COMMENT",
-  "body": "## Phase 4: Bug Check\n\nN bugs found across M files.\nConfidence: A high, B medium, C low\n\n---\n*🔍 ship-check · bug-check · MODEL_ID*",
+  "body": "## Phase 4: Bug Check\n\nN bugs found across M files. Reviewed at <HEAD_SHA>.\nConfidence: A high, B medium, C low\n\nDismissed: <proof-of-dismissal one-liners — or \"none\">\n\n---\n*🔍 ship-check · bug-check · MODEL_ID*",
   "comments": [
     {
       "path": "src/file.ts",
@@ -474,7 +490,10 @@ REVIEW
 Replace `OWNER_REPO` and `PR_NUMBER` with values from the dispatch prompt. Replace
 `MODEL_ID` with your own model ID (from your system prompt).
 
-5. **If 0 findings**, skip the API call — report "0 findings" to the orchestrator only.
+5. **If 0 findings and no dismissals**, skip the API call — report "0 findings"
+   to the orchestrator only. With 0 findings but cleared suspicions, post a
+   body-only review carrying the dismissal list — that is the artifact that lets
+   a PR reader tell a clean diff from an unexamined one.
 6. **Footer on every comment.** Append `\n\n---\n*🔍 ship-check · bug-check · MODEL_ID*`
    to the review body AND each inline comment body.
 7. **Format each inline comment body** as:

plugins/ship-check/skills/code-quality/SKILL.md

@@ -314,6 +314,18 @@ clause is load-bearing, keep it and flag the uncertainty instead of trimming.
 3. **Run tests** after all fixes to confirm no behavior change.
 4. **Summarize**: files touched, count by category, test status.
 
+**Output honesty (both modes):**
+
+- **State what you reviewed.** The summary names the PR head SHA actually
+  reviewed — a review that doesn't say what it checked is indistinguishable
+  from one that checked nothing. It also lets the orchestrator cross-check
+  what this phase actually saw against the delta-review baseline it records
+  itself at Phase 4 close.
+- **Close with proof of dismissal.** One line per suspicion you seriously
+  considered and dropped, with the reason it doesn't bite — or "none". The
+  clean-bill claims are part of the review: without them, "no findings" could
+  mean a clean diff or an unexamined one, and the reader can't tell which.
+
 ## Comment mode
 
 When the dispatch prompt says **COMMENT MODE**, do not edit files, commit, or push.
@@ -334,7 +346,7 @@ gh api "repos/OWNER_REPO/pulls/PR_NUMBER/reviews" \
   --method POST --input - <<'REVIEW'
 {
   "event": "COMMENT",
-  "body": "## Phase 2: Code Quality\n\nN findings across M files.\n\n---\n*🔍 ship-check · code-quality · MODEL_ID*",
+  "body": "## Phase 2: Code Quality\n\nN findings across M files. Reviewed at <HEAD_SHA>.\n\nDismissed: <proof-of-dismissal one-liners — or \"none\">\n\n---\n*🔍 ship-check · code-quality · MODEL_ID*",
   "comments": [
     {
       "path": "src/file.ts",
@@ -349,7 +361,10 @@ REVIEW
 Replace `OWNER_REPO` and `PR_NUMBER` with values from the dispatch prompt. Replace
 `MODEL_ID` with your own model ID (from your system prompt).
 
-4. **If 0 findings**, skip the API call — report "0 findings" to the orchestrator only.
+4. **If 0 findings and no dismissals**, skip the API call — report "0 findings"
+   to the orchestrator only. With 0 findings but cleared suspicions, post a
+   body-only review carrying the dismissal list — that is the artifact that lets
+   a PR reader tell a clean diff from an unexamined one.
 5. **Footer on every comment.** Append `\n\n---\n*🔍 ship-check · code-quality · MODEL_ID*`
    to the review body AND each inline comment body.
 6. **Format each inline comment body** as:

plugins/ship-check/skills/pr-review/SKILL.md

@@ -222,6 +222,18 @@ comment mode.
 5. **Summarize**: count by dimension, test status, verdict
    (ship / ship-with-minor-fixes / needs-changes).
 
+**Output honesty (both modes):**
+
+- **State what you reviewed.** The summary names the PR head SHA actually
+  reviewed — a review that doesn't say what it checked is indistinguishable
+  from one that checked nothing. It also lets the orchestrator cross-check
+  what this phase actually saw against the delta-review baseline it records
+  itself at Phase 4 close.
+- **Close with proof of dismissal.** One line per suspicion you seriously
+  considered and dropped, with the reason it doesn't bite — or "none". The
+  clean-bill claims are part of the review: without them, "no findings" could
+  mean a clean diff or an unexamined one, and the reader can't tell which.
+
 ## Comment mode
 
 When the dispatch prompt says **COMMENT MODE**, do not edit files, commit, or push.
@@ -245,7 +257,7 @@ gh api "repos/OWNER_REPO/pulls/PR_NUMBER/reviews" \
   --method POST --input - <<'REVIEW'
 {
   "event": "COMMENT",
-  "body": "## Phase 1: PR Review\n\nN findings across M files.\n\n**Verdict**: ship / ship-with-minor-fixes / needs-changes\n\n---\n*🔍 ship-check · pr-review · MODEL_ID*",
+  "body": "## Phase 1: PR Review\n\nN findings across M files. Reviewed at <HEAD_SHA>.\n\n**Verdict**: ship / ship-with-minor-fixes / needs-changes\n\nDismissed: <proof-of-dismissal one-liners — or \"none\">\n\n---\n*🔍 ship-check · pr-review · MODEL_ID*",
   "comments": [
     {
       "path": "src/file.ts",
@@ -260,7 +272,10 @@ REVIEW
 Replace `OWNER_REPO` and `PR_NUMBER` with values from the dispatch prompt. Replace
 `MODEL_ID` with your own model ID (from your system prompt).
 
-5. **If 0 findings**, skip the API call — report "0 findings" to the orchestrator only.
+5. **If 0 findings and no dismissals**, skip the API call — report "0 findings"
+   to the orchestrator only. With 0 findings but cleared suspicions, post a
+   body-only review carrying the dismissal list — that is the artifact that lets
+   a PR reader tell a clean diff from an unexamined one.
 6. **For findings without a specific line** (e.g., missing docs, cross-cutting concerns),
    put them in the review `body` rather than as inline comments.
 7. **Footer on every comment.** Append `\n\n---\n*🔍 ship-check · pr-review · MODEL_ID*`

plugins/ship-check/skills/test-audit/SKILL.md

@@ -327,6 +327,18 @@ This proves the test is load-bearing, not decorative.
 - **Summarize**: files audited, count by category, tests mutation-verified,
   coverage gaps found and tests written.
 
+**Output honesty (both modes):**
+
+- **State what you reviewed.** The summary names the PR head SHA actually
+  reviewed — a review that doesn't say what it checked is indistinguishable
+  from one that checked nothing. It also lets the orchestrator cross-check
+  what this phase actually saw against the delta-review baseline it records
+  itself at Phase 4 close.
+- **Close with proof of dismissal.** One line per suspicion you seriously
+  considered and dropped, with the reason it doesn't bite — or "none". The
+  clean-bill claims are part of the review: without them, "no findings" could
+  mean a clean diff or an unexamined one, and the reader can't tell which.
+
 ## Comment mode
 
 When the dispatch prompt says **COMMENT MODE**, do not edit files, write tests, commit,
@@ -356,7 +368,7 @@ gh api "repos/OWNER_REPO/pulls/PR_NUMBER/reviews" \
   --method POST --input - <<'REVIEW'
 {
   "event": "COMMENT",
-  "body": "## Phase 3: Test Audit\n\nN test quality findings, K coverage gaps across M files.\n\n---\n*🔍 ship-check · test-audit · MODEL_ID*",
+  "body": "## Phase 3: Test Audit\n\nN test quality findings, K coverage gaps across M files. Reviewed at <HEAD_SHA>.\n\nDismissed: <proof-of-dismissal one-liners — or \"none\">\n\n---\n*🔍 ship-check · test-audit · MODEL_ID*",
   "comments": [
     {
       "path": "src/file.test.ts",
@@ -376,7 +388,10 @@ REVIEW
 Replace `OWNER_REPO` and `PR_NUMBER` with values from the dispatch prompt. Replace
 `MODEL_ID` with your own model ID (from your system prompt).
 
-4. **If 0 findings**, skip the API call — report "0 findings" to the orchestrator only.
+4. **If 0 findings and no dismissals**, skip the API call — report "0 findings"
+   to the orchestrator only. With 0 findings but cleared suspicions, post a
+   body-only review carrying the dismissal list — that is the artifact that lets
+   a PR reader tell a clean diff from an unexamined one.
 5. **Footer on every comment.** Append `\n\n---\n*🔍 ship-check · test-audit · MODEL_ID*`
    to the review body AND each inline comment body.
 6. **Format each inline comment body** as: