# Review brief: edge asset cache plans

Plans: `docs/superpowers/plans/2026-10-24-edge-asset-cache-plan-1-declare-publish.md`,
`-plan-2-disk-store.md`, `-plan-3-serve.md`. Spec:
`docs/superpowers/specs/2026-10-24-edge-asset-cache-design.md` rev 9 (rev 8
accepted in round 6; rev 9 only narrows the no-Content-Type rule, review it
too).

You are an independent second reader of implementation plans. An engineer
who has not seen this codebase will build each task from the plan alone.

## Fixed points

The spec as accepted, and Paul's rulings R1 to R3. Do not re-argue the
design; report where a plan fails to implement it.

## What to look for

1. A spec requirement no task implements, or implements differently.
2. A named file, function, field, line range or helper that does not exist
   or does not do what the plan says. Check against the tree.
3. An interface used in a later task that no earlier task produces, or
   produces with a different name or type, within and across the plans.
4. A test that cannot fail for the reason it names, or cannot be written
   as described with the helpers named.
5. Ordering: a task that needs something only a later task or plan builds.
6. Census, copy review, cross-compile or CI rules the plans state wrongly.
7. Every new top-level identifier the plans name, checked against the
   package it lands in for a collision.

## Output

Numbered findings, most severe first: severity (P1 the plan cannot be
built as written, P2 must be fixed before building, P3 worth noting), the
plan and task, the evidence with file:line, and the smallest fix. End with
"accept" or "reject".