# Review: Step 1 plan

Verdict: **approved**.

The current Step 1 plan addresses the concerns from R001/R002. It now treats the prompt's captured line numbers and conflict state as stale, verifies the code/catalog source of truth before judging documentation surfaces, and explicitly records current file paths, line numbers, grep evidence, and whether later remediation steps are still needed or become no-ops.

What is strong:

- Analyzer verification covers PRD wording plus registration/catalog truth via `internal/tools/catalog.go`, `internal/tools/registry.go`, and generated/catalog surfaces where relevant, instead of assuming `registry.go` alone is authoritative.
- `get_planning_parameters` now includes the missing code/catalog registration check before evaluating ROADMAP and README/reference consistency.
- `update_wellness` verification checks the implementation and user-facing surfaces, which is the right order because the task says code wins for the exact error literal.
- The plan requires recording evidence in `STATUS.md`, including current line numbers and later-step impact, which is exactly what Step 1 needs before any edits.

Minor execution note, not a blocker: when carrying out the "website catalog surfaces" checks, name the concrete files in the findings rather than leaving them generic. In the current tree these are likely `web/data/tools.json` and the relevant reference content/generator inputs, plus noting whether `README.md` still contains any tool catalog entry. This will make the Step 1 evidence easier to review.

No further plan changes are required before executing Step 1.
