Complete AL review knowledge readiness (#108)

* Complete AL review knowledge readiness

Fill telemetry and Query coverage, strengthen thin review domains, correct audited content defects, and add deterministic cheap-model evaluation and reference-integrity safeguards.

Co-authored-by: Copilot App <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>

Copilot-Session: 9825b012-e653-496a-9310-c1f4b6f8ac27

* Generalize review fixture discovery

Derive smoke cases from the leaf, domain, and paired-sample conventions so new leaves require no scoring-contract changes. Keep only exceptional selection/context overrides and fail when retrieval metadata cannot rank the selected article.

Co-authored-by: Copilot App <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>

Copilot-Session: 9825b012-e653-496a-9310-c1f4b6f8ac27

* Preserve published field IDs in sample

Keep the existing Email and Contact Email field IDs unchanged, clarify that the sample represents an independent baseline, and use a local breaking-change rule for the generic smoke evaluation.

Co-authored-by: Copilot App <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>

Copilot-Session: 9825b012-e653-496a-9310-c1f4b6f8ac27

* Clarify published field identity rules

State explicitly that a published field keeps its ID, name, and type while a replacement is added as a separate field under an unused ID.

Co-authored-by: Copilot App <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>

Copilot-Session: 9825b012-e653-496a-9310-c1f4b6f8ac27

* Align field obsoletion sample baselines

Use Email field ID 3 as the shared baseline so the bad example demonstrates a same-ID rename while the good example retains the original field and adds a separate replacement.

Co-authored-by: Copilot App <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>

Copilot-Session: 9825b012-e653-496a-9310-c1f4b6f8ac27

---------

Co-authored-by: Jesper Schulz-Wedde <jesper.schulzwedde@microsoft.com>

skills/bcquality-al-review/SKILL.md

@@ -63,11 +63,19 @@ plugin-root environment variable, prefer it.
    `microsoft/skills/review/al-code-review.md`. For each dispatched skill, read the
    file and execute its Source → Relevance → Worklist → Action steps, reading
    `PLUGIN_ROOT/skills/read.md` and `PLUGIN_ROOT/skills/do.md` on demand.
+   When `al-code-review` composes its leaves and the host supports child contexts or
+   separate model calls, run each leaf in an isolated context and roll up the returned
+   JSON. Pass each call the exact index rows for that leaf's domain so references can
+   be copied verbatim. This is the preferred execution profile for fast/small models;
+   do not force one generation to retain all domain knowledge at once.
 
 4. **Emit findings.** Produce the rolled-up findings report in the DO output contract,
    including each review finding's producer-supplied `domain` label (`outcome`,
    `findings`, `references`, `confidence`, `suppressed`). Do not invent a different
    shape; downstream consumers parse the DO contract without skill-specific logic.
+   Apply DO's reference-integrity gate before returning: every knowledge-backed path
+   must exist in the installed tree, must have been opened in full, and must be copied
+   verbatim. Never synthesize a plausible article slug.
 
 If Entry returns `no-match` or `failed`, return the dispatch record unchanged so the
 caller can log the reason.