test(ceo-mode-routing): accept the skill-mandated Note form and Recommendation reason as HOLD posture

HOLD Defer/Keep briefs must use 'Note: options differ in kind' (preamble),
but the answered-HOLD path demanded a Completeness score, rejected a
one-line Net with a semicolon, and read posture only from ELI10. The rerun's
brief applied HOLD SCOPE in its Recommendation reason. Revert the
ineffective 'always'/'handoff chat' wording: two runs still skipped the
mode handoff.

test/ceo-mode-option.test.ts

@@ -824,6 +824,23 @@ const mutations:Record<string,(x:any)=>void>={
 };
 for(const [name,mutate] of Object.entries(mutations))test(name,()=>{const x=clone();mutate(x);expect(check(x)).toBe(false)});
 test('later quoted withdrawal is not current withdrawal',()=>{const x=clone();x.transcript.assistantMessages.push({sessionId:decision(x).sessionId,timestamp:new Date().toISOString(),text:'Example: "I withdraw this decision."'});expect(check(x)).toBe(true)});
+{
+  const briefs = require('./fixtures/ceo-hold-note-briefs-36597762183.json');
+  const withBrief = (brief: any, change: (q: any) => void = () => {}) => {
+    const x = clone(); const c = decision(x); const before = c.questions[0].question;
+    const q = structuredClone(brief); change(q); c.questions[0] = q; delete c.answers[before]; c.answers[q.question] = q.options[0].label;
+    x.tools.find((t: any) => t.kind === 'use' && t.toolUseId === c.toolUseId).input.questions = structuredClone(c.questions);
+    return check(x);
+  };
+  test('census HOLD Defer/Keep brief with the Note form and a one-line Net applies HOLD in its ELI10', () => expect(withBrief(briefs.census)).toBe(true));
+  test('rerun HOLD Defer/Keep brief applies HOLD in its Recommendation reason', () => expect(withBrief(briefs.rerun)).toBe(true));
+  test.each([
+    ['no HOLD rationale', (q: any) => { q.question = q.question.replace('HOLD SCOPE preserves stated scope by default, ', ''); }],
+    ['a second sentence after Net', (q: any) => { q.question = q.question.replace(/(Net:[^\n]*)$/, '$1 Also add shared views.'); }],
+    ['a foreign-mode context', (q: any) => { q.question = q.question.replace('HOLD SCOPE review', 'SCOPE EXPANSION review'); }],
+    ['a missing Note or score', (q: any) => { q.question = q.question.replace(/Note: options differ[^\n]*\n/, ''); }],
+  ])('rerun brief with %s is not HOLD posture', (_name, change) => expect(withBrief(briefs.rerun, change)).toBe(false));
+}
 test('new proof path is unavailable without explicit fixture source binding',()=>{const x=clone();expect(hasNativePostAnswerCeoPosture(x.transcript,'HOLD SCOPE',posture,x.selectionStartedAt,x.tools)).toBe(false)});
 
 test('retry source cat requires the actual owned project',()=>{const x=clone(1);x.tools.find((t:any)=>t.kind==='use'&&t.input?.command?.includes('cat PLAN.md')).input.command=x.tools.find((t:any)=>t.kind==='use'&&t.input?.command?.includes('cat PLAN.md')).input.command.replace(x.source.path.replace('/PLAN.md',''),'/foreign');expect(check(x)).toBe(false)});

test/fixtures/ceo-hold-note-briefs-36597762183.json

@@ -0,0 +1,37 @@
+{
+ "provenance": {
+  "census": "36597762183 eval-slices-4 HOLD D2",
+  "rerun": "local repair rerun HOLD D3",
+  "note": "Defer/Keep briefs use the preamble's Note form; posture appears in ELI10 (census) or the Recommendation reason (rerun)"
+ },
+ "census": {
+  "question": "D2 — R2: Keep or defer the saved-view update endpoint?\nProject/branch/task: gstack-plan-count-PhqSAE on main, HOLD SCOPE review of saved project views.\nELI10: The plan lists four endpoints: create, list, update, delete. \"Update\" is what lets a member rename a view or overwrite its filters after tweaking them. The stated goal (save a named view, reopen it later) still works without it: delete the old view and save a new one. HOLD SCOPE asks me to flag anything deferrable, so this is that flag. Deferring saves one endpoint, one UI flow and their tests; keeping it means a member who adjusts a filter can hit \"update\" instead of rebuilding the view from scratch.\nStakes if we pick wrong: Defer and the pilot's reuse metric may drop because stale views get abandoned instead of fixed; keep and we spend a small amount more before adoption is proven.\nRecommendation: B) Keep because the endpoint reuses the create path's validation and authorization almost verbatim (human: ~half a day / CC: ~5 min), and \"my view drifted, let me fix it\" is the exact moment a user decides whether this feature is worth using.\nNote: options differ in kind, not coverage — no completeness score.\nPros / cons:\nA) Defer update to TODOS.md\n  ✅ Removes one endpoint, one UI flow and two tests from the first ship; smaller diff to review and roll out\n  ✅ Lets the two-week pilot show whether anyone actually edits views before building it\n  ❌ A member whose filters drift has to delete and recreate; stale views quietly stop being used and the reuse metric under-reads\nB) Keep update in scope (recommended)\n  ✅ Rename and overwrite reuse the create endpoint's validation, ownership check and project scoping, so the marginal cost is small\n  ✅ Views stay alive as the project changes (new statuses, new assignees), which is exactly the \"reopen after task changes\" acceptance criterion\n  ❌ Slightly more surface to test: concurrent edits from two tabs and rename-to-duplicate-name need explicit handling\nNet: A trades a small first-ship saving for a real risk of the pilot under-measuring; B costs little because it is mostly the create path again.",
+  "header": "R2 update",
+  "multiSelect": false,
+  "options": [
+   {
+    "label": "Defer update to TODOS.md",
+    "description": "Effort S, risk low. Reuse: none removed. Verification: no update tests. Drops the PATCH endpoint plus rename/overwrite UI to TODOS.md; users delete and re-save. ✅ Smaller first ship. ✅ Pilot decides if editing is wanted. ❌ Stale views get abandoned, reuse metric under-reads."
+   },
+   {
+    "label": "Keep update in scope (recommended)",
+    "description": "Effort S, risk low. Reuse: create path's validation, ownership and project scoping. Verification: PATCH request spec (owner, non-owner, other project, missing view) + UI rename/overwrite flow test. ✅ Marginal cost is small. ✅ Views survive project drift. ❌ Must handle two-tab concurrent edits and duplicate names."
+   }
+  ]
+ },
+ "rerun": {
+  "question": "D3 — UPDATE-EP: Defer the update endpoint (rename / overwrite a saved view) to TODOS.md, or keep it in scope?\nProject/branch/task: main, HOLD SCOPE review of PLAN.md (saved project views).\nELI10: The plan lists create, list, update and delete. Update is the one piece the goal does not strictly need: a member can delete a view and save a new one. Keeping it means one more route, action, UI edit control and test group; dropping it means renaming a view is a two-step chore and \"overwrite this view with my current filters\" is impossible until it ships later.\nStakes if we pick wrong: Defer wrongly and pilot users hit a papercut on the first rename; keep wrongly and you spend ~10% more effort on a feature whose reuse you are still measuring.\nRecommendation: B) Keep because update is already in the written plan, HOLD SCOPE preserves stated scope by default, and the extra cost is small (human: ~half a day / CC: ~5 min) while the UX cost of a missing rename shows up in the very pilot you are measuring.\nNote: options differ in kind, not coverage — no completeness score.\nNet: a small effort saving now vs. a visible papercut during the pilot.",
+  "header": "Update endpoint",
+  "multiSelect": false,
+  "options": [
+   {
+    "label": "Defer update endpoint to TODOS.md",
+    "description": "Ship create/list/delete only; members rename by delete + re-save. Effort S (removes work), risk low, reuse n/a, verification: existing create/list/delete tests. ✅ Fewer routes, actions and UI states to build and test during the pilot. ✅ Smallest possible surface if the pilot shows nobody reuses views. ❌ Renaming or updating a view becomes a two-step chore that pilot users will notice and report."
+   },
+   {
+    "label": "Keep update endpoint in scope (recommended)",
+    "description": "Keep rename + overwrite-filters as written, with its own tests. Effort S (human: ~half a day / CC: ~5 min), risk low, reuse: same controller and policy as the other three actions, verification: rename, overwrite, cross-member 403, stale-name 404 tests. ✅ Matches the plan as written; no scope change to explain to the team. ✅ \"Save current filters to this view\" is the natural gesture once someone tweaks a view. ❌ One more action, edit affordance and test group before the pilot can start."
+   }
+  ]
+ }
+}

test/helpers/ceo-mode-option.ts

@@ -291,7 +291,8 @@ function singleScopeBrief(text: string, descriptions: readonly string[], compari
     quote => quote.replace(/\?/g, '')) : text;
   const questions = questionText.replace(/\?[A-Za-z_][\w-]*=/g, '=').match(/\?/g);
   if ((questions?.length ?? 0) !== (proposalHeading ? 0 : 1) || /```|~~~|^\s*>/m.test(text)) return false;
-  const comparisonMarker = expansion
+  // The preamble requires the Note form for different-kind menus (Add/Defer/Skip, Defer/Keep).
+  const comparisonMarker = expansion || !comparison
     ? /Completeness:|Note:\s*options differ in kind, not coverage\s*[—–-]\s*no completeness score\./gi
     : /Completeness:/gi;
   const markers = [/Project\/branch\/task:/gi, /ELI10:/gi, /Stakes if (?:we pick )?wrong:/gi,
@@ -312,7 +313,7 @@ function singleScopeBrief(text: string, descriptions: readonly string[], compari
     if (!ratings.length || ratings.some(score => Number(score[1]) > 10)) return false;
   }
   return complete && (comparison ? /^[^.!?;\n]+ (?:vs|versus) [^.!?;\n]+\.$/.test(net)
-    : /^[^.!?;\n]+\.$/.test(net.replace(/\bvs\./gi, 'vs')));
+    : /^[^.!?\n]+\.$/.test(net.replace(/\bvs\./gi, 'vs')));
 }
 
 /** Fixture-owned baseline for a completed scope-preservation decision. */
@@ -388,7 +389,9 @@ function hasAnsweredHoldPosture(transcript: PlanCountTranscript, selected: Nativ
     // standalone prose is published. Metadata and answer echoes do not count.
     // This recognizes posture language; it does not validate every scope choice.
     const context = /Project\/branch\/task:([\s\S]*?)(?=ELI10:)/i.exec(q.question)?.[1] ?? '';
-    const rationale = /ELI10:([\s\S]*?)(?=Stakes if (?:we pick )?wrong:)/i.exec(q.question)?.[1]?.trim() ?? '';
+    // The ELI10 and the Recommendation's reason are both the brief's own rationale.
+    const rationale = [/ELI10:([\s\S]*?)(?=Stakes if (?:we pick )?wrong:)/i, /Recommendation:[^\n]*?\bbecause\b([^\n]*)/i]
+      .map(part => part.exec(q.question)?.[1]?.trim() ?? '').join('\n');
     const offered = q.options.map(o => o.label.trim());
     if (!q.multiSelect && q.options.length >= 2 && q.options.length <= 4 && new Set(offered).size === offered.length &&
         offered.includes(call.answers?.[q.question] ?? '') && /\bHOLD SCOPE\b/i.test(context) &&