feat: unify CAD workflows on DesignIR 3.0

designir-pipeline/skills/cad-experience-builder/references/llm-review-contract.md

@@ -30,7 +30,17 @@ Write `runs/review/experience-draft.json` with this shape:
 
 Allowed kinds are `feature_motif`, `constraint`, `design_rule`,
 `validation_rule`, `failure_repair`, `dimensionless_distribution`, and
-`reconstruction_grammar`.
+`reconstruction_grammar`, plus:
+
+- `parameter_naming`: maps repeated final-B-Rep evidence to a canonical
+  editable name such as `plate_thickness`, `hole_spacing`,
+  `bolt_circle_diameter`, or `rib_count`;
+- `edit_strategy`: defines the expected target change and preservation contract
+  for a named semantic parameter.
+
+These proposal kinds use `evidence_query.required_parameters`. A name is a
+reconstruction-system convention, never a claim that the STEP contained the
+source parameter.
 Distribution proposals also provide `observation_name`; the publisher computes
 the distribution from private evidence and never accepts values from the draft.
 
@@ -86,6 +96,9 @@ Follow these rules:
 - Avoid dimensions, coordinates, source identifiers, face references, and
   numeric literals in prose.
 - Do not infer build order or causal failure mechanisms from final geometry.
+- Do not present inferred parameter names as recovered source parameters.
+- Prefer specific editable names over generic span roles only when repeated
+  geometric evidence supports the distinction.
 - Treat `canonical_stages` as a recommended reconstruction order, never as a
   claim about the source CAD history.
 - For reconstruction grammars, retain only roles and stages repeated by the