## Summary
REJECT. Revision 3 removes the Kimi product-provider change appropriately, but two unresolved interface/authority contradictions make the promised daily/weekly/adaptive two-stage path unimplementable without violating final scope. Resolve the stage transport contract and identify a current consent authority for the personal daily route before execution.

## Claims
- Revision 3 requires the existing `_request_physique_coach_completion` to remain untouched while requiring a 256-token stage cap through an existing request-options field (`stage-03-revision.md:99-103`).
- The actual helper accepts only `(system_prompt, user_content)` and owns its request kwargs; it has neither an options parameter nor an output-token cap (`/home/cube/projects/richard/hermes-agent/gateway/platforms/telegram.py:6162-6204`).
- Revision 3 requires consent and enablement before every daily/weekly/adaptive typed input (`stage-03-revision.md:101`).
- Existing personal daily paths call `_humanize_korean_copy` from finalized `PhysiqueCheckinBridge` snapshots (`telegram.py:5643-5650`, `6084-6087`). Their only current gate is `coaching_feedback_enabled` (`telegram.py:6100-6104`), and `PhysiqueCheckinConfig` has no consent/coordinator authority (`gateway/platforms/physique_checkin_config.py:10-50`).

## Analysis
The finite atom/variant design is a sound fail-closed approach: code, not model output, retains control of facts, actions, timing, safety, approval state, and prose rendering. Byte-limited JSON and receipt-only observability are likewise appropriate.

However, the execution boundary is contradictory. A caller cannot impose a provider output-token limit through the current helper without modifying it, and creating a parallel client path would need an explicitly scoped transport contract to avoid silently changing provider selection or ordinary routes. Separately, customer coordinator consent exists for customer delivery (`nutrition_coaching.py:731-763`) but is not available on the personal daily surface. Treating a missing authority as canonical-only is safe, but then the plan cannot meet a two-stage daily success path.

Antithesis: keeping the helper immutable and preserving personal daily canonical-only behavior minimizes change. That is viable only if the plan narrows success criteria to consent-authorized customer surfaces; it is not compatible with the stated all-surface daily requirement.

## Root Cause
Revision 3 tightened safety and scope after Revision 2 but did not reconcile those constraints with the concrete transport signature and the personal-profile authority model.

## Findings
- HIGH — `stage-03-revision.md:103`: Token-cap transport is impossible through the untouched two-argument completion helper. Reported as P1.
- HIGH — `stage-03-revision.md:102`: Personal daily has no existing consent authority to satisfy the required pre-input gate. Reported as P1.

## Recommendations
1. Choose one explicit stage transport: allow a typed, stage-only options extension to `_request_physique_coach_completion` with regression coverage for ordinary callers, or add a named stage transport that preserves current provider selection and passes the supported output-token cap. Specify its capability detection and canonical-only fallback.
2. Either explicitly limit the pipeline to customer-coordinator weekly/adaptive surfaces (and revise daily acceptance) or name an existing authoritative consent binding for the personal daily profile, including its non-sensitive revision-binding digest. Do not add an ad-hoc consent flag or lifecycle.
3. After those decisions, retain the typed factories, offered-atom validation, byte-parity test, fake transports, receipt privacy tests, and no-retry assertions already specified.

## Architectural Status
BLOCK

## Code Review Recommendation
REQUEST CHANGES

## Tradeoffs
- Extend existing helper: smallest client-resolution surface; requires a narrow, tested signature/options change.
- New stage transport: isolates stage limits; must explicitly preserve provider selection and avoid duplicating unrelated routes.
- Customer-only pipeline: preserves current consent model; narrows the requested daily surface.
- New personal consent authority: enables personal daily; violates the stated no-new-lifecycle constraint unless a pre-existing authority is identified.

Verdict: REJECT