more updates to use ephemeral file location for phase 4 items

src/modules/bmm/workflows/4-implementation/code-review/instructions.md

@@ -16,38 +16,37 @@
 
 <critical>DOCUMENT OUTPUT: Technical review reports. Structured findings with severity levels and action items. User skill level ({user_skill_level}) affects conversation style ONLY, not review content.</critical>
 
-## 📚 Document Discovery - Selective Epic Loading
-
-**Strategy**: This workflow needs only ONE specific epic and its stories for review context, not all epics. This provides huge efficiency gains when epics are sharded.
-
-**Epic Discovery Process (SELECTIVE OPTIMIZATION):**
-
-1. **Determine which epic** you need (epic_num from story being reviewed - e.g., story "3-2-feature-name" needs Epic 3)
-2. **Check for sharded version**: Look for `epics/index.md`
-3. **If sharded version found**:
-   - Read `index.md` to understand structure
-   - **Load ONLY `epic-{epic_num}.md`** (e.g., `epics/epic-3.md` for Epic 3)
-   - DO NOT load all epic files - only the one needed!
-   - This is the key efficiency optimization for large multi-epic projects
-4. **If whole document found**: Load the complete `epics.md` file and extract the relevant epic
-
-**Other Documents (architecture, ux-design) - Full Load:**
-
-1. **Search for whole document first** - Use fuzzy file matching
-2. **Check for sharded version** - If whole document not found, look for `{doc-name}/index.md`
-3. **If sharded version found**:
-   - Read `index.md` to understand structure
-   - Read ALL section files listed in the index
-   - Treat combined content as single document
-4. **Brownfield projects**: The `document-project` workflow creates `{output_folder}/docs/index.md`
-
-**Priority**: If both whole and sharded versions exist, use the whole document.
-
-**UX-Heavy Projects**: Always check for ux-design documentation as it provides critical context for reviewing UI-focused stories.
-
 <workflow>
 
   <step n="1" goal="Find story ready for review" tag="sprint-status">
+    Document Discovery - Selective Epic Loading
+
+    **Strategy**: This workflow needs only ONE specific epic and its stories for review context, not all epics. This provides huge efficiency gains when epics are sharded.
+
+    **Epic Discovery Process (SELECTIVE OPTIMIZATION):**
+
+    1. **Determine which epic** you need (epic_num from story being reviewed - e.g., story "3-2-feature-name" needs Epic 3)
+    2. **Check for sharded version**: Look for `epics/index.md`
+    3. **If sharded version found**:
+      - Read `index.md` to understand structure
+      - **Load ONLY `epic-{epic_num}.md`** (e.g., `epics/epic-3.md` for Epic 3)
+      - DO NOT load all epic files - only the one needed!
+      - This is the key efficiency optimization for large multi-epic projects
+    4. **If whole document found**: Load the complete `epics.md` file and extract the relevant epic
+
+    **Other Documents (architecture, ux-design) - Full Load:**
+
+    1. **Search for whole document first** - Use fuzzy file matching
+    2. **Check for sharded version** - If whole document not found, look for `{doc-name}/index.md`
+    3. **If sharded version found**:
+      - Read `index.md` to understand structure
+      - Read ALL section files listed in the index
+      - Treat combined content as single document
+    4. **Brownfield projects**: The `document-project` workflow creates `{output_folder}/docs/index.md`
+
+    **Priority**: If both whole and sharded versions exist, use the whole document.
+
+    **UX-Heavy Projects**: Always check for ux-design documentation as it provides critical context for reviewing UI-focused stories.
     <check if="{{story_path}} is provided">
       <action>Use {{story_path}} directly</action>
       <action>Read COMPLETE story file and parse sections</action>
@@ -80,17 +79,18 @@
         <check if="option 3 selected">
           <ask>What code would you like me to review?
 
-Provide:
-- File path(s) or directory to review
-- What to review for:
-  • General quality and standards
-  • Requirements compliance
-  • Security concerns
-  • Performance issues
-  • Architecture alignment
-  • Something else (specify)
+          Provide:
+          - File path(s) or directory to review
+          - What to review for:
+            • General quality and standards
+            • Requirements compliance
+            • Security concerns
+            • Performance issues
+            • Architecture alignment
+            • Something else (specify)
 
-Your input:</ask>
+            Your input:?
+          </ask>
 
           <action>Parse user input to extract:
             - {{review_files}}: file paths or directories to review