refactor(ce-doc-review): anchor-based confidence scoring (#622)

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

plugins/compound-engineering/skills/ce-doc-review/references/walkthrough.md

@@ -25,7 +25,7 @@ D. Report only — take no further action
 
 The per-finding `(recommended)` labeling lives inside the walk-through (option A) and the bulk preview (options B/C), where it's applied per-finding from synthesis step 3.5b's `recommended_action`. The routing question itself does not recommend one of A/B/C/D because the right route depends on user intent (engage / trust / triage / skim), not on the finding-set shape — a rule that mapped finding-set shape to routing recommendation (e.g., "most findings are Apply-shaped → recommend LFG") would pressure users toward automated paths in ways that conflict with the user-intent framing.
 
-If all remaining findings are FYI-subsection-only (no `gated_auto` or above-gate `manual` findings), skip the routing question entirely and flow to the Phase 5 terminal question.
+If all remaining findings are FYI-subsection-only (no `gated_auto` or `manual` findings at confidence anchor `75` or `100`), skip the routing question entirely and flow to the Phase 5 terminal question.
 
 **Append-availability adaptation.** When `references/open-questions-defer.md` has cached `append_available: false` at Phase 4 start (e.g., read-only document, unwritable filesystem), option C is suppressed from the routing question because every per-finding Defer would fail into the open-questions failure path. The menu shows three options (A / B / D) and the stem appends one line explaining why (e.g., `Append to Open Questions unavailable — document is read-only in this environment.`). This mirrors the per-finding option B suppression described under "Adaptations" below — both routing-level and per-finding Defer paths share the same availability signal so the user never sees Defer surfaced at one level and omitted at the other.
 
@@ -42,7 +42,7 @@ If all remaining findings are FYI-subsection-only (no `gated_auto` or above-gate
 
 The walk-through receives, from the orchestrator:
 
-- The merged findings list in severity order (P0 → P1 → P2 → P3), filtered to `gated_auto` and `manual` findings that survived the per-severity confidence gate. FYI-subsection findings are not included — they surface in the final report only and have no walk-through entry.
+- The merged findings list in severity order (P0 → P1 → P2 → P3), filtered to actionable findings (confidence anchor `75` or `100` with `autofix_class` `gated_auto` or `manual`). FYI-subsection findings (anchor `50`) are not included — they surface in the final report only and have no walk-through entry.
 - The run id for artifact lookups (when applicable).
 - Premise-dependency chain annotations from synthesis step 3.5c: each finding may carry `depends_on: <root_id>` or `dependents: [<ids>]`.
 
@@ -246,7 +246,7 @@ Every terminal path of Interactive mode emits the same completion report structu
 
 ### Minimum required fields
 
-- **Per-finding entries:** for every finding the flow touched, a line with — at minimum — title, severity, the action taken (Applied / Deferred / Skipped / Acknowledged), the append location for Deferred entries, a one-line reason for Skipped entries (grounded in the finding's confidence or the one-line `why_it_matters` snippet), and the acknowledgement reason for Acknowledged entries (e.g., `Apply picked but no suggested_fix available`).
+- **Per-finding entries:** for every finding the flow touched, a line with — at minimum — title, severity, the action taken (Applied / Deferred / Skipped / Acknowledged), the append location for Deferred entries, a one-line reason for Skipped entries (grounded in the finding's confidence anchor or the one-line `why_it_matters` snippet), and the acknowledgement reason for Acknowledged entries (e.g., `Apply picked but no suggested_fix available`).
 - **Summary counts by action:** totals per bucket (e.g., `4 applied, 2 deferred, 2 skipped`). Include an `acknowledged` count when any entries land in that bucket; omit the label when the count is zero.
 - **Failures called out explicitly:** any Apply that failed (e.g., document write error, or the defensive no-fix fallback skipping an Apply-set entry), any Open-Questions append that failed. Failures surface above the per-finding list so they are not missed.
 - **End-of-review verdict:** carried over from Phase 4's Coverage section.
@@ -257,7 +257,7 @@ Failures first (above the per-finding list), then per-finding entries grouped by
 
 ### Zero-findings degenerate case
 
-When the routing question was skipped because no `gated_auto` / above-gate `manual` findings remained after `safe_auto`, the completion report collapses to its summary-counts + verdict form with one added line — the count of `safe_auto` fixes applied. The summary wording:
+When the routing question was skipped because no `gated_auto` / `manual` findings at confidence anchor `75` or `100` remained after `safe_auto`, the completion report collapses to its summary-counts + verdict form with one added line — the count of `safe_auto` fixes applied. The summary wording:
 
 No FYI or residual concerns: