[CLAUDE] Docs: S63 closeout S60-62 — re-tier STATUS/HANDOFF + count-flush (Mig 50, 88 bang, 263 test, 64 gotcha) + reconcile stray reviewer + gotcha #63/#64

Viet bu docs cho S60/S61/S62 (ship code prod-verified nhung chua closeout — drift bat o /session-start S63 qua git log).

- Reconcile stray reviewer cwd-misland: MOVE 2 file con fe-admin/.claude -> canonical + pointer (no overwrite 31KB) + xoa stray

- Commit harvest S61/S62: cicd-monitor MEMORY (Run #286) + gotcha #63 (EF RenameColumn sai-semantics) + #64 (Design-DB vs Dev-DB data-migrate)

- Count-flush 4 file: Mig 49->50, tables 93->88, test 240->263 (45D+218I), gotcha 62->64, menu 57->53, Budget module REMOVED->PeWorkItemBudgets

- Session-log bu 2026-06-12-S60-S62-pe-budget-workitem-softwarning.md. Docs-only -> CI skip.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

.claude/agent-memory/reviewer/MEMORY.md

@@ -4,6 +4,10 @@
 > Update BEFORE every stop. Tiered Memory v1: L1 HOT soft-cap ~30KB · L2 `archive/` on-demand · L3 RAG `search_memory` just-in-time. Keep entry ≤ 1.5K chars (gotcha #53).
 > Full verbatim history pre-S40 → git `d2f52ba` + `archive/2026-05-q1..q2.md`.
 
+## 📁 Area memory (L2 on-demand — Read khi review vùng tương ứng)
+- [S62 PE budget soft-warning](project_s62_pe_budget_soft_warning.md) — PASS: hard-block→soft-warning; submit-guard intact + validator giữ `BudgetPeriodAmount>0`, row8 negative-safe (additive-only). Validator class `PurchaseEvaluationFeatures.cs:317` (reconcile S63: stray cwd-misland → canonical, anchor verified).
+- [Wire/mirror claim verification anchors](feedback_wire_claim_verification_anchors.md) — sha256 twin-file · `git diff -U0` isolate true-adds · `allowNegative` bleed check · guard-still-intact grep.
+
 ---
 
 ## 🎯 Role baseline

.claude/agent-memory/reviewer/feedback_wire_claim_verification_anchors.md

@@ -0,0 +1,18 @@
+---
+name: wire-claim-verification-anchors
+description: Adversarial verification recipe for FE+BE mirror changes — sha256 twin-file check, git diff -U0 to isolate true adds, allowNegative bleed check
+metadata:
+  type: feedback
+---
+
+# Verification anchors that caught/cleared issues in adversarial review
+
+**Rule:** For changes claiming FE-admin/FE-user mirror + a validation relaxation, run these independent checks rather than trusting the spec's self-description.
+
+**Why:** Specs say "2 files byte-identical" and "added allowNegative to ONE field" — both are claims to verify, not facts. The diff context can show pre-existing sibling code (e.g. another `allowNegative` field) that looks like part of the change but isn't.
+
+**How to apply:**
+- **Twin-file identity:** `sha256sum` both mirrored files — equal hash proves byte-identical (don't eyeball). S62: both PeDetailTabs.tsx = same sha256.
+- **Isolate true additions:** `git diff -U0 -- <file> | grep '^\+' | grep -i <token>` shows ONLY added lines, filtering out unchanged context. S62: spec mentioned `allowNegative` but full-context grep showed 2 occurrences — `-U0` proved only 1 was actually added (the other, `bs.adjustmentAmount` CCM row, was pre-existing and already negative-by-design). Prevented a false "scope bleed" flag.
+- **allowNegative bleed:** when a field gains `allowNegative`, confirm sibling currency inputs that must stay positive (e.g. budget input) do NOT have it. S62: row8 has it (1268), row3 budget input (1189) does not. Correct.
+- **Guard-still-intact:** when relaxing one validation rule, grep the related submit/transition guard separately and read ±4 lines to confirm it wasn't loosened in the same edit.

.claude/agent-memory/reviewer/project_s62_pe_budget_soft_warning.md

@@ -0,0 +1,21 @@
+---
+name: s62-pe-budget-soft-warning
+description: S62 review PASS — PE "vượt ngân sách" hard-block→soft-warning; validator drop ExpectedRemaining>=0, FE amber banner + allowNegative row8
+metadata:
+  type: project
+---
+
+# S62 — PE budget over-spend: hard-block → soft-warning (PASS)
+
+Reviewed 2026-06-13. Anh Kiệt FDC directive: phiếu PE khi giá trị NCC vượt ngân sách → ô "Giá trị thực hiện dự kiến còn lại" (row8) ra âm → bị chặn lưu. Chốt: cho lưu, chỉ cảnh báo mềm.
+
+**Why:** Adversarial review of a small (4-file, ~20 LOC) validation-relaxation change. Verdict PASS.
+
+**How to apply:** When a future change touches PE budget validation or `ExpectedRemainingAmount`, recall these verification anchors:
+- BE submit guard `PurchaseEvaluationWorkflowService.cs:198` = `BudgetPeriodAmount is null || <= 0` → adds "chưa nhập Ngân sách kỳ này". This is the budget>0 enforcement; must NOT be loosened when relaxing row8.
+- FE mirror of that guard: `PeDetailTabs.tsx:178` (`budgetPeriodAmount == null || <= 0`). BE+FE predicate kept in sync (S61 lineage).
+- Validator `AdjustPurchaseEvaluationBudgetCommandValidator` keeps `BudgetPeriodAmount.GreaterThan(0)`, drops `ExpectedRemainingAmount.GreaterThanOrEqualTo(0)`.
+
+**Negative-safety chain (row8 can now be negative — verified no break):** `row8 = expectedRemainingAmount ?? row7`; `row9 = row4 + row8`; `cmpFull = full - row9`; `cmpPeriod = row3 - row4`. All pure additive — no division by row8, no sqrt, no unsigned cast. BE projection (PurchaseEvaluationFeatures.cs:1038) + CreateContractFromEvaluation clone (line 155) pass the value through with zero arithmetic.
+
+**Precedent:** mirrors LeaveBalance allowing negative balance (cited in code comment as the in-repo precedent for a domain quantity going negative).