Only findings whose decision owner is executor wording fix (or that ASK has explicitly handed you to scope) are executor work. Leave the rest where they belong:

• advisor-review issues → not executor work; they return to the advisor surface.
• ASK source-of-intent calls → not executor work; they wait for ASK's decision.
• inheritable identity/design-layer findings (personal-ASK/inheritable):
  • The whole inheritable/ layer is dual-writer (2026-06-27). For any file inside personal-ASK/inheritable/ — context-architecture-decisions.md (ADR) · brand-architecture.md · visual-identity-system.md + .html · voice-style-typography.md · asymptotic-system-key.md · reading-interests.md · devices.md — execution may proceed directly from the ecology / control-surface thread, but only after explicit ASK approval, using the dual-writer controls: offline canonical first · one writer per file per session · explicit ASK authorization · byte-parity ZZZ-ASK/ snapshot · mounted mirrors refreshed after canonical. The whole layer is in ecology jurisdiction — not behind the wall. Two axes — valid execution target ≠ downstream-conformance target: a file being in inheritable/ (and thus editable here after ASK approval) does not make it ecology-consumed; do not turn "valid target" into a downstream-conformance obligation, and do not edit a file to satisfy a conformance relationship no source has named. The explicitly-named downstream-conformance subset is the ADR · brand-architecture.md · visual-identity-system.md · voice-style-typography.md by default; others only when a source names the relationship.
  • Per-file nuances: the ADR additionally syncs its byte-identical personal-TMK twin (+ both ZZZ-ASK/ and personal-TMK/ZZZ/ snapshots, all one md5); visual-identity-system.html is a derived companion (resolve findings against the .md); brand-architecture.md is mirror-not-lead for its public upstream — the ASK site / apexSolarKiss/ASK repo since the 2026-06-27 source-of-truth flip; Notion is legacy/staging, no longer the public upstream (govern the file, not its upstream).
  • The private root outside personal-ASK/inheritable/ remains unreachable and out of scope — never read, summarized, inferred, or mutated.

Do not widen the advisory plan. Do not turn held questions or advisor-review items into authorized work. Do not promote a candidate observation to an edit ASK has not approved.

The critique is ecology-wide; execution is per repo. For each repo a scoped move touches:

• Treat that repo as the unit of work — its own branch, its own scoped diff, its own PR, single-writer per repo.
• Do not mutate more than one repo in an undifferentiated pass. A cross-repo finding becomes one scoped change per repo, each gated separately.
• Honor each repo's AGENTS.md (for a repo without one, control-surface's agent-agnostic AGENTS.md applies).
• A finding about a relationship that crosses repos (an inherited term, a mirror, a consumer registry) is resolved at its source first; downstream surfaces re-sync from the corrected source — not in parallel.

• Verify the target repo's state by fetching the specific named files the move touches, and read any relevant PR by its exact locator (PR number / URL). Do not infer HEAD by branch-ref, list a directory tree, or reconstruct state from a README, a generic repo page, thread history, or operator narrative. If an exact read the move requires is unavailable, say it is unavailable and stop.
• Identify: files in scope · scope out · non-actions · expected terminal state.
• Confirm the move maps to an executor wording fix (or an explicit ASK scope), not an advisor-review or source-of-intent item.
• For a wording fix touching source-of-intent, authorship, or governance vocabulary, read the current operator-side Source of Intent + Image-Making + Source of Intent masters as evidence and synthesis context, then conform public method claims to the owning method-ASK surfaces: docs/normative-apex.md, docs/governance.md, docs/source-of-intent.md, docs/bounded-generativity.md, and examples/image-making-source-of-intent.md. The masters may run ahead as evidence or candidate reasoning; they do not silently override public doctrine. An article's coinage does not become method doctrine through publication or index inclusion: ASK may explicitly adopt it into an operator canonical, while method doctrine changes only through the owning repo surface.

Then implement only what ASK has approved or explicitly asked you to scope, and stop at the exact scoped diff before commit — in the paired path, Stage-1 readiness includes the minimum exact review object (publish it, or identify an already advisor-readable exact surface). Stage-1 review opens on ASK relay of the readiness receipt, and ASK adjudicates on the advisor recommendation — direct execution requires an explicit ASK authorization, never inferred from silence (a FYI or HOLD envelope suppresses the advisor verdict but authorizes nothing); the pre-merge (Stage 2) advisor window and the five-step conditional-approval chain still apply per the advisor prompt — a PR does not merge on conditions-met without ASK's explicit relayed approval.

Paste or attach the advisory synthesis (folded critique + advisory plan) below.