Intermediate results do not become issue artifacts

Code is preserved in a pull request. Research, plans, alternatives, plan review, and reasons for internal rejection often disappear with a personal session history.

Ordinary code review discovers a major architectural mistake too late: the solution has already been implemented, so the demand to redo everything feels like a process failure. Architecture should be discussed before implementation, leaving code review to focus on local risks and execution quality.

In an agentic pipeline, the planning stage is often more valuable than the implementation itself. This is where architecture is chosen, constraints are recorded, and alternatives are rejected. The lead and the team need access to that plan. Otherwise, after a regression, there is no way to tell whether the defect was in the solution itself or in the implementation of a sound solution.