Docs: deferred review findings get a durable breadcrumb, not a chat mention

CLAUDE.md

@@ -70,7 +70,11 @@ run the review pass **before** anything is committed:
    sweeps stay a deliberate act).
 
 Run the subagents **sequentially**, not in parallel — both may edit the working tree.
-Relay each report back to the user. Arbitrate findings that needed session context:
-either accept them, or overrule them **and** record the missing rationale where the
-reviewer looked for it — an overruled finding without a writing-down will recur. Then
-commit only when invited.
+Relay each report back to the user, then arbitrate each finding to one of three ends —
+**accept and fix**, **accept but defer**, or **overrule** — and **write down the two you
+don't act on now**, because a subagent's report is ephemeral and chat is not a record. A
+deferred finding gets a `// TODO:` at the relevant code site (or a line in the closest doc);
+an overruled one records the missing rationale where the reviewer looked. Out of scope for
+_this session_ is not out of scope for the _project_: with a single maintainer there is no
+"someone else's problem", so an unrecorded deferral or beyond-scope note recurs as work
+handed to your future self. Then commit only when invited.