feat(pr-workflow): add the /mms-evidence orchestrator, runners, and publish gate

domains/pr-workflow/skills/attest/references/dispatched-passes.md

@@ -0,0 +1,41 @@
+# Phase 1 — the three dispatched briefs
+
+Send each to a **fresh instance** with the artifact and nothing else: not the transcript, not
+your reasoning, not what you expect it to find. Context is what you are testing for. An instance
+that knows what you meant will read what you meant.
+
+Run them concurrently — they are independent, and sequencing lets the first one's findings frame
+the others.
+
+## outframe — contest the frame
+
+> You are reading a finished set of findings you did not produce. Do not check whether the
+> findings are correct. Ask what claim was chosen and what a different framing makes visible:
+> what question would a reader with different priorities have asked of the same material, what
+> does the chosen frame make it impossible to notice, and which of the findings only look
+> significant because of how the problem was cut. Return findings the framing hid, not a
+> critique of the writing.
+
+## missing — contest the coverage
+
+> You are auditing a completed run for what it did not do. Enumerate: a modality that was not
+> run, a claim asserted but not verified, a source cited but not read, a case the method
+> structurally cannot reach. For each, say what running it would cost and what it could change.
+> Do not restate what the run found. Absence is the deliverable.
+
+## press — read it as the stranger
+
+> You are the reviewer this lands in front of, with no context and a decision to make. Read only
+> the artifact. Say what you would have to take on trust, which number you could not check if you
+> wanted to, what reads as a measurement but is a sentence, and anything that assumes you were
+> present for work you were not. Flag register slips: hedging that reads as concealment,
+> confidence that outruns the evidence, and any place the author's process shows through.
+
+## Reading the returns
+
+A finding from any pass that invalidates the claim is `BLOCKED`. A finding that qualifies it is
+`ATTESTED WITH` — and the caveat goes **into the published artifact**, not just into the verdict,
+or the reader never sees it.
+
+Disagreement between passes is signal, not noise: `press` clearing something `outframe` flagged
+usually means the artifact reads well and is framed wrong, which is the more dangerous state.

domains/pr-workflow/skills/attest/references/phase-0-checks.md

@@ -0,0 +1,35 @@
+# Phase 0 — what each check catches
+
+Generated from the checks in `mms-evidence/scripts/attest-gate.sh`; that script is the
+authority. Each entry exists because a run shipped without it.
+
+| # | check | run mode | diligence mode |
+|---|---|---|---|
+| 1 | marker pair | ✓ | ✓ |
+| 2 | canonical header | ✓ | ✓ |
+| 3 | verdict line | ✓ | ✓ |
+| 4 | citations pinned | ✓ | ✓ |
+| 5 | captured artifact | ✓ | ✓ |
+| 6 | no prescriptions | ✓ | ✓ |
+| 7 | no process narration | ✓ | ✓ |
+| 8 | verdict is earned | ✓ | ✓ |
+| 9 | verdict matches artifact | ✓ | ✓ |
+| 10 | floats something for review | ✓ | ✓ |
+| 11 | disclaimer present and early | ✓ | ✓ |
+| 12 | destination is open | ✓ | ✓ |
+| 13 | figures trace to an exhibit | ✓ | ✓ |
+
+Checks 1–4 differ by mode: in `--diligence` they test that contract's own marker pair, its
+header, and that citations are pinned to a tag or SHA rather than a branch head, and the
+verdict-line check reports SKIP because a diligence artifact renders none. Checks 8 and 9 SKIP
+for the same reason. Everything from 5 down is shared, because those defects are shared.
+
+**Check 5 is the one that matters, and it asks for a medium.** Every earlier version tested a
+property of the plaintext — does it carry a marker, does the command contain a placeholder — and
+each caught one defect and missed the next, because every property of plaintext is forgeable by
+whatever emits the plaintext. Four runs shipped that way. A `/blob/` permalink is a citation and
+does not satisfy it: it witnesses a line in a file, never a run.
+
+**Check 12 tests the destination**, which no property of the text reveals. Across one register of
+published runs, 22 of 27 comments went to pull requests that had already merged — median 22 days
+after the merge, gate-clean every time.

domains/pr-workflow/skills/attest/skill.md

@@ -0,0 +1,103 @@
+---
+name: attest
+description: The gate an evidence artifact passes before it is published to a pull request, issue or shared tracker. Two halves that do not substitute for each other — a mechanical pass that greps for the properties a reader needs (marker pair, pinned environment, a captured artifact rather than typed prose, a destination that is still open) and a dispatched pass sent to fresh instances that contest the framing, the coverage, and how it reads to a stranger. The author is the wrong checker: they remember running the check, and the memory supplies the provenance the text lacks. Verdicts are attested, attested with named caveats, blocked, or not a run — the last being common and legitimate, because a run that could not execute has produced nothing to publish. Triggers on mms-attest, or before posting any evidence, validation or diligence output to a public surface.
+maturity: experimental
+---
+
+# /mms-attest
+
+The gate an evidence artifact passes before it leaves your hands. Use before posting any
+`/mms-evidence` or diligence output to a pull request, issue, or shared tracker.
+
+## The author is the wrong reader, and the wrong checker
+
+A validation run claims something was measured. Its characteristic failure is not a wrong number
+— it is **prose that reads like a measurement**. An operator who ran the check cannot see this,
+because they remember running it; the memory supplies the provenance the text lacks, before the
+eye registers that it was missing.
+
+This is not hypothetical. A run in this workflow shipped a results section whose commands, exit
+codes and "reached 100%" were typed by hand, while the real logs sat unpublished on disk. The
+author had the skill installed that forbids exactly that.
+
+So the gate has two halves, and neither substitutes for the other.
+
+**The mechanical half is not advisory.** Marker presence, a pinned environment, whether any
+fenced block is a tool's output rather than the author's transcription, whether the destination
+is still open — all greppable. Anything checkable is checked before a model is asked for
+judgement, because a model asked "is this good evidence?" answers from inside the frame that
+produced it.
+
+**The dispatched half is positional.** Contesting the frame, the coverage, and the reading cannot
+be self-run, for the same reason an author cannot proofread their own sentence for a word their
+eye supplies.
+
+## Phase 0 — mechanical, no model
+
+```
+scripts/attest-gate.sh <artifact.md> --target <owner/repo#N>
+scripts/attest-gate.sh <artifact.md> --target <owner/repo#N> --diligence
+```
+
+Thirteen checks; every one a hard fail. `--diligence` swaps the four Validation-Run envelope
+checks for a no-verdict contract's own and shares everything downstream. See
+[references/phase-0-checks.md](references/phase-0-checks.md) for what each check exists to catch
+and the run that caused it to be written.
+
+**Run it as the same command that publishes, or it is a log line.** The gate and the write must
+be one chain — `gate && publish`. Running both and reading the verdict afterwards is how a
+blocked artifact reaches a public PR. The `hooks/pr-evidence-gate.py` PreToolUse hook enforces
+this independently of your discipline, and fails closed; phase 0 is what you run to iterate
+before it does.
+
+## Phase 1 — dispatched, three lenses
+
+| pass | reads for | returns |
+|---|---|---|
+| **outframe** | the frame — what claim was chosen, and what a different framing makes visible | findings the framing hid |
+| **missing** | coverage — modality not run, claim unverified, source unread | the gap list |
+| **press** | the text as it ships, as the stranger who has to act on it | leak and register findings |
+
+Dispatch to fresh instances is the mechanism, not an optimisation: a self-run frame check is
+composed inside the frame it is meant to test. Briefs in
+[references/dispatched-passes.md](references/dispatched-passes.md).
+
+Skipping a pass is allowed. Silently skipping it is not — name it as skipped in the verdict.
+
+## Phase 2 — shape
+
+Front-load the verdict, cut anything that does not change what the reader does, keep every
+artifact and move only its placement. Shape only, after content is settled — a shape pass that
+reaches content is how a capability table gets dissolved into paragraphs and the comment's
+payload disappears.
+
+## Verdict
+
+```
+ATTESTED        phase 0 clean, no blocking finding from phase 1
+ATTESTED WITH   publishable, with named caveats carried INTO the artifact
+BLOCKED         phase 0 failure, or a phase 1 finding that invalidates the claim
+NOT A RUN       nothing was measured; there is no artifact to publish
+```
+
+`NOT A RUN` is legitimate and common. A run that could not execute its check produced no
+evidence, and publishing the attempt with a disclaimer is worse than publishing nothing — the
+disclaimer reads as hedging and the figure is kept anyway.
+
+## Anti-patterns
+
+| Bad | Good |
+|---|---|
+| Running phase 1 to decide phase 0 | Mechanical checks first; cheap and unarguable |
+| Self-running the dispatched passes | Dispatch, or skip and say it was skipped |
+| Attesting your own run | The gate is positional; an author attesting themselves attests nothing |
+| Treating phase 0 items as advisory | Every one is a hard fail |
+| `ATTESTED WITH` as a soft pass | The caveat goes *into the published artifact*, not just the verdict |
+| Softening a check to fit the case in hand | If the new version could be satisfied by better prose alone, it is no longer the check |
+
+## Related
+
+- `mms-evidence` — produces the artifact this gates
+- `mms-instrument-check` — prove the instrument fires before its output counts
+- `mms-unmeasured-join` — audit the inference between the facts
+- `mms-scope-of-search` — what a negative result is a fact about