Add context for review process

[Malcolmnixon]

This pull request updates the documentation and standards for using ReviewMark, focusing on clarifying the structure and requirements for review-sets, introducing explicit context file handling, and improving the organization and readability of the review process. The changes provide more detailed guidance on how to configure and conduct reviews, especially regarding the use of context files to aid reviewers, and refine the documentation for different types of reviews.

The most important changes are:

Major Documentation and Standards Updates:

• Expanded the explanation of context files, including how to configure global and per-review-set context in .reviewmark.yaml, and added a dedicated section and table explaining which context files to include for each review type.
• Clarified and restructured the definitions for each review type (Purpose, Decomposition, Architecture, Design, Verification, AllRequirements, subsystem/unit reviews, OTS, and Shared Package), including explicit context file requirements for each. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7]
• Improved the review procedure in the formal review agent instructions to clarify the distinction between context and files under review, and to ensure reviewers use context files appropriately.

Process and Quality Check Enhancements:

• Updated the quality checklist to require explicit context configuration per the new context files section.
• Streamlined and clarified several review-set configuration examples, removing redundant comments and improving the sample .reviewmark.yaml for clarity and accuracy.

These changes make the review process more rigorous and reviewer-friendly by ensuring all necessary background information is provided as context, and by making the documentation more prescriptive and easier to follow.

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

This PR refines the repository’s distributable standards and agent instructions around ReviewMark usage, particularly clarifying review-set structure and the intended role of context files during formal reviews.

Changes:

• Updated the ReviewMark usage standard with clearer review type definitions, examples, and explicit context file guidance.
• Expanded design documentation guidance about avoiding dependency version numbers while permitting stable standard identifiers.
• Adjusted the formal review agent procedure to distinguish “context” vs “files under review.”

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 3 out of 3 changed files in this pull request and generated 2 comments.

File	Description
src/.github/standards/reviewmark-usage.md	Restructures ReviewMark guidance, adds context file section/table, and refines review-set definitions/examples.
src/.github/standards/design-documentation.md	Clarifies what “version numbers” means in design docs and provides allowed exceptions/examples.
src/.github/agents/formal-review.agent.md	Updates the formal review steps to explicitly incorporate ReviewMark’s Context vs Files distinction.

---

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.