docs: apply codex doc-review fixes for v1.62.0.0

- CLAUDE.md: scope the tier-alignment invariant claim (mapped files
  enforced, unmapped files reported)
- docs/skills.md: document the plan-mode auto-select scope gate for
  /plan-eng-review and /plan-design-review
- evals.yml: fix stale comment (PTY smokes register four skills, not two)

Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>

.github/workflows/evals.yml

@@ -169,14 +169,15 @@ jobs:
             console.log("seeded", p);
           '
 
-      # PTY smokes drive the interactive `claude` TUI and send /office-hours and
-      # /plan-ceo-review. Claude Code discovers user-scoped skills from
-      # $HOME/.claude/skills/<name>/SKILL.md, but .claude/skills is gitignored, so
-      # a fresh CI checkout has NO registry — claude prints "Unknown command:
-      # /plan-ceo-review". Mirror setup's --no-prefix registry minimally: a gstack
-      # root symlink (resolves the preamble's absolute ~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/*
-      # and ~/.claude/skills/gstack/<skill>/sections/* paths) plus a per-skill
-      # top-level dir holding SKILL.md (+ sections) symlinks for the two skills
+      # PTY smokes drive the interactive `claude` TUI and send /office-hours,
+      # /plan-ceo-review, /plan-eng-review, and /plan-design-review. Claude Code
+      # discovers user-scoped skills from $HOME/.claude/skills/<name>/SKILL.md,
+      # but .claude/skills is gitignored, so a fresh CI checkout has NO registry
+      # — claude prints "Unknown command: /plan-ceo-review". Mirror setup's
+      # --no-prefix registry minimally: a gstack root symlink (resolves the
+      # preamble's absolute ~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/* and
+      # ~/.claude/skills/gstack/<skill>/sections/* paths) plus a per-skill
+      # top-level dir holding SKILL.md (+ sections) symlinks for the four skills
       # these tests invoke. No ./setup (it builds binaries, launches Chromium,
       # installs fonts, reads a /dev/tty prompt) and no binary build (SKILL.md +
       # bin/ + sections/ are committed). $HOME is /github/home here; the spawned

CLAUDE.md

@@ -71,8 +71,10 @@ periodic tests run weekly via cron or manually. Use `EVALS_TIER=gate` or
 3. Requires external service (Codex, Gemini)? -> `periodic`
 
 Tier declarations are enforced by `test/e2e-tier-alignment.test.ts` (free, runs
-in `bun test`): a `skill-e2e-*` file whose `EVALS_TIER` self-gate disagrees with
-its declared tier in `E2E_TIERS` fails the suite — keep both in sync.
+in `bun test`): a `skill-e2e-*` file named in a touchfiles dep list whose
+`EVALS_TIER` self-gate disagrees with its declared tier in `E2E_TIERS` fails the
+suite. Files not named in any dep list are reported, not enforced — keep both
+in sync.
 
 ## Testing
 

docs/skills.md

@@ -229,6 +229,8 @@ That is `/plan-eng-review`.
 Not "make the idea smaller."
 **Make the idea buildable.**
 
+One note on invocation: in plan mode, the skill skips the "what should I review?" scope question and reviews your active plan automatically, announcing its pick in one line ("Scope gate: plan mode — auto-selected B") so you can redirect it. Name a target explicitly ("review PLAN.md") and your choice wins in any mode. Outside plan mode with nothing named, it asks first — that gate is a hard stop.
+
 ### Review Readiness Dashboard
 
 Every review (CEO, Eng, Design) logs its result. At the end of each review, you see a dashboard:
@@ -263,7 +265,7 @@ Most plans describe what the backend does but never specify what the user actual
 
 `/plan-design-review` catches all of this during planning, when it's cheap to fix.
 
-It works like `/plan-ceo-review` and `/plan-eng-review` — interactive, one issue at a time, with the **STOP + AskUserQuestion** pattern. It rates each design dimension 0-10, explains what a 10 looks like, then edits the plan to get there. The rating drives the work: rate low = lots of fixes, rate high = quick pass.
+It works like `/plan-ceo-review` and `/plan-eng-review` — interactive, one issue at a time, with the **STOP + AskUserQuestion** pattern. It rates each design dimension 0-10, explains what a 10 looks like, then edits the plan to get there. The rating drives the work: rate low = lots of fixes, rate high = quick pass. Like `/plan-eng-review`, it skips the "what should I review?" scope question in plan mode and targets your active plan automatically (announced in one line so you can redirect); an explicitly named target wins in any mode.
 
 Seven passes over the plan: information architecture, interaction state coverage, user journey, AI slop risk, design system alignment, responsive/accessibility, and unresolved design decisions. For each pass, it finds gaps and either fixes them directly (obvious ones) or asks you to make a design choice (genuine tradeoffs).