docs(review): cross-link the three review skills, drop a false citation

Three similarly-named skills cover orthogonal concerns — what to check
(code-review), how to commission a reviewer (requesting), how to behave when
feedback arrives (receiving) — and none of them mentioned the other two. An
agent landing on one had no way to learn the others existed. One line each,
placed at the core-principle line where a reader is already oriented.

stage-gate-review's gate-prep step now says to run grill-me's Full Grill before
bringing an ask: a council's hard questions are cheaper answered in private, and
a gap found by grilling is one you close rather than one the gate reports.

The bug half: receiving-code-review cited "You're absolutely right!" as an
"explicit CLAUDE.md violation". That is obra's upstream convention leaking
through the vendored copy — `grep -ci "absolutely right" ~/dev/CLAUDE.md` is 0,
and so is AGENT.md. The guidance is right, the citation was inventing authority
it did not have; it now says what it actually is, performative agreement rather
than evaluation.

Closes #16
Bump-Type: patch

skills/superpowers-requesting-code-review/SKILL.md

@@ -12,6 +12,8 @@ Dispatch a code reviewer subagent to catch issues before they cascade. The revie
 
 **Core principle:** Review early, review often.
 
+This skill is the *commissioning* half. What the reviewer should look for is `code-review`; how to handle what comes back is `superpowers-receiving-code-review`.
+
 ## When to Request Review
 
 **Mandatory:**