chore: some more improvements to try and get as close to original as possible

modes.ts

@@ -397,7 +397,18 @@ For simple, well-defined tasks, skip the plan phase and go straight to build.`,
 
    note: the first create_pull_request_review submission may error with a one-time diff-coverage nudge listing unread TOC regions. retry the same call to proceed — optionally after reading the listed ranges. the pre-flight will not block again this session.
 
-   The review body is structured as: \`[optional alert blockquote]\` → \`[PR summary using the default format below]\`. Inline comments are passed via the \`comments\` parameter, not in the body.
+   **Structured submission (preferred)**: use \`preamble\` + \`changes\` for the reviewed-changes block instead of writing it in \`body\`. Pass \`body\` for ONLY the metadata HTML comment and non-anchored \`### \` sections (if any). The server assembles the full preamble block for you. Example call shape:
+   \`\`\`
+   create_pull_request_review({
+     pull_number: N,
+     preamble: "one sentence on what the PR does",
+     changes: ["**Feature X** — description", "**Migration Y** — description"],
+     body: "<!-- shockbot review metadata ... -->\\n\\n### ⚠️ Non-anchored concern...\\n\\n### ℹ️ Nitpicks\\n...",
+     comments: [{ path: "src/foo.ts", line: 42, body: "..." }, ...],
+     approved: false,
+   })
+   \`\`\`
+   Inline comments are passed via the \`comments\` parameter, not in the body.
 
    The opening callout is what the author sees first — pick the one that matches what you want them to do. Five tiers, from loudest to friendliest: