diff --git a/packages/review-kit/src/agent.ts b/packages/review-kit/src/agent.ts
index dd82861..22e0759 100644
--- a/packages/review-kit/src/agent.ts
+++ b/packages/review-kit/src/agent.ts
@@ -211,7 +211,7 @@ function createParsedReviewHandler(
         `${parsed.lens} review harness failed (exit ${run.exitCode}) for PR #${pullRequest.number}`
       );
     }
-    const body = run.output.trim();
+    const body = reviewBody(run.output);
     if (!body) {
       throw new Error(`${parsed.lens} review harness produced no review for PR #${pullRequest.number}`);
     }
@@ -242,6 +242,49 @@ function createParsedReviewHandler(
   };
 }
 
+/**
+ * The review is what follows the verdict line — everything before it is thinking.
+ *
+ * `run.output` is the harness's raw stdout, so it carries whatever the model said
+ * on its way to an answer: "Evidence confirmed.", "I have all evidence needed.",
+ * a draft findings list, "Writing the review now." Posting that verbatim buries
+ * the findings under the search that produced them.
+ *
+ * This cannot be fixed in the charter. A charter can forbid a preamble, and the
+ * model still emits one, because you cannot instruct a model not to think — only
+ * decline to publish the thinking. Measured on a real reviewer against a
+ * 150-word cap: 537 words, then 256 after the ban was sharpened, then 191, then
+ * 187 after the whole contract was moved to the top of the charter where it is
+ * read first. Stripping in code took the same reviewer to 153 on the next run.
+ * The findings were always inside budget; only the preamble was not.
+ *
+ * So the charter owns the SHAPE (which it gets right reliably) and the kit owns
+ * the BOUNDARY. Same reason `agents/review` strips its own trailing `READY`
+ * sentinel rather than trusting the model to omit it.
+ *
+ * Cuts at the LAST verdict line, not the first: a model that drafts its findings
+ * before writing them emits two, and the real review is the final one.
+ *
+ * The match is deliberately tolerant of how the model bolds the line —
+ * `**Verdict:`, `**Verdict**:`, `**Verdict** :`, any casing. The charter asks for
+ * one exact form and the production reviewer emits it, but a stricter pattern
+ * fails OPEN in the worst way: an unmatched line publishes the entire preamble,
+ * which is the thing this function exists to prevent. Being lax here costs
+ * nothing; being strict costs the whole feature on a formatting wobble.
+ *
+ * A body with no verdict line at all means the model ignored the format; return
+ * it unchanged rather than nothing, because a malformed review still beats
+ * silence — for an advisory agent, silence reads as approval.
+ */
+export function reviewBody(output: string): string {
+  const text = (output ?? '').trim();
+  let start = -1;
+  for (const match of text.matchAll(/^\*\*Verdict(?:\*\*)?\s*:/gimu)) {
+    start = match.index ?? start;
+  }
+  return start >= 0 ? text.slice(start).trim() : text;
+}
+
 export function idempotencyMarker(lens: string, headSha: string): string {
   return `<!-- agentworkforce-review:${lens}:${headSha} -->`;
 }
diff --git a/packages/review-kit/src/index.ts b/packages/review-kit/src/index.ts
index de22076..d7a7cd4 100644
--- a/packages/review-kit/src/index.ts
+++ b/packages/review-kit/src/index.ts
@@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
 export {
   defineReviewAgent,
   idempotencyMarker,
+  reviewBody,
   reviewInput,
   reviewMountPaths,
   REVIEW_KIT_VERSION,
diff --git a/packages/review-kit/src/review-kit.test.ts b/packages/review-kit/src/review-kit.test.ts
index 6fc3997..63555c8 100644
--- a/packages/review-kit/src/review-kit.test.ts
+++ b/packages/review-kit/src/review-kit.test.ts
@@ -16,6 +16,7 @@ import {
   defineReviewPersona,
   prDiff,
   readPullRequest,
+  reviewBody,
   reviewInput
 } from './index.js';
 import { createReviewHandler } from './agent.js';
@@ -651,3 +652,59 @@ async function withRelayfileTransportEnv(
     }
   }
 }
+
+test('reviewBody strips the model preamble and keeps the review', () => {
+  // Shape observed in production: the harness stdout carries the model's
+  // thinking, then the review. Only the review should reach the PR.
+  const output = [
+    'Evidence confirmed. The 8 probe commits added only comment lines.',
+    'I have all evidence needed. Writing the review now.',
+    '',
+    '**Verdict: Blocker.** Second stat-math path outside lib/aggregates.ts.',
+    '',
+    '- **Blocker** — `lib/recentForm.ts:15` — duplicate math. Fix: use computeStandings.'
+  ].join('\n');
+
+  const body = reviewBody(output);
+  assert.ok(body.startsWith('**Verdict: Blocker.**'), 'must open on the verdict line');
+  assert.ok(!body.includes('Evidence confirmed'), 'preamble must be gone');
+  assert.ok(!body.includes('Writing the review now'), 'narration must be gone');
+  assert.ok(body.includes('lib/recentForm.ts:15'), 'findings must survive');
+});
+
+test('reviewBody cuts at the LAST verdict line so a drafted review loses to the real one', () => {
+  // A model that drafts before writing emits two verdict lines; the real
+  // review is the final one.
+  const output = [
+    '**Verdict: Note.** draft — I might downgrade this.',
+    'Actually, checking the published-only rule changes it.',
+    '**Verdict: Blocker.** ignores the published-only filter.'
+  ].join('\n');
+
+  assert.equal(reviewBody(output), '**Verdict: Blocker.** ignores the published-only filter.');
+});
+
+test('reviewBody passes through a body with no verdict line', () => {
+  // The model ignored the format. A malformed review still beats silence —
+  // for an advisory agent, silence reads as approval.
+  assert.equal(reviewBody('no verdict here, just prose'), 'no verdict here, just prose');
+  assert.equal(reviewBody('   '), '');
+  assert.equal(reviewBody(''), '');
+});
+
+test('reviewBody tolerates how the model bolds the verdict line', () => {
+  // The charter asks for one exact form and production emits it, but a strict
+  // pattern fails open in the worst way: an unmatched line publishes the whole
+  // preamble. Tolerate the variants LLMs actually drift to.
+  assert.equal(reviewBody('thinking\n**Verdict**: Blocker'), '**Verdict**: Blocker');
+  assert.equal(reviewBody('thinking\n**Verdict:** Blocker'), '**Verdict:** Blocker');
+  assert.equal(reviewBody('thinking\n**Verdict** : Blocker'), '**Verdict** : Blocker');
+  assert.equal(reviewBody('thinking\n**verdict:** Blocker'), '**verdict:** Blocker');
+  assert.equal(reviewBody('thinking\n**VERDICT**: Blocker'), '**VERDICT**: Blocker');
+});
+
+test('reviewBody ignores a verdict mentioned mid-line, not at a line start', () => {
+  // The ^ anchor is what keeps prose about a verdict from being mistaken for one.
+  const prose = 'I think the **Verdict:** below is too harsh, reconsidering.';
+  assert.equal(reviewBody(prose), prose);
+});