diff --git a/internal/templater/templater_test.go b/internal/templater/templater_test.go
index fd0a00c..4711409 100644
--- a/internal/templater/templater_test.go
+++ b/internal/templater/templater_test.go
@@ -301,16 +301,21 @@ func TestSpecAuthorAgentShipped(t *testing.T) {
 	}
 	// Least-privilege tools: it writes spec artifacts, so Edit/Write/Bash are in,
 	// but it must not approve or implement.
-	// effort is high (not medium): spec authoring is the SDD contract — EARS,
-	// the design boundary map, traceability — a judgment task, and the repo runs
-	// every judgment sub-agent at high (code-reviewer, implementer,
-	// security-reviewer). A shallow first draft pushes the real authoring back
-	// onto the opus reviewer via fix-lists, defeating the cost split.
+	//
+	// effort is medium, and it used to be high. The argument for high was that
+	// authoring is judgment — EARS, the boundary map, traceability — and a shallow
+	// draft pushes the real work back onto the opus reviewer as fix-lists, which
+	// defeats the cost split. What a measured run showed is that the split was
+	// already lost at the other end: of one feat's $4.69, $3.15 was sonnet, and
+	// this agent is dispatched three times per feat (requirements, design, tasks)
+	// against a SCAFFOLDED artifact whose shape the template already fixes. High
+	// effort was buying deliberation over a form that is largely filled in, three
+	// times over. If fix-lists grow after this, that is the signal to move it back.
 	for _, want := range []string{
 		"name: spec-author",
 		"tools: Read, Grep, Glob, Edit, Write, Bash",
 		"model: sonnet",
-		"effort: high",
+		"effort: medium",
 	} {
 		if !strings.Contains(body, want) {
 			t.Errorf("spec-author.md frontmatter missing %q", want)
@@ -348,6 +353,19 @@ func TestSpecAuthorAgentEncodesDiscipline(t *testing.T) {
 			t.Errorf("spec-author.md must not instruct approving its own phase: %q", bad)
 		}
 	}
+	// The fix loop is BOUNDED. "Re-validate until it returns 0" is an open loop,
+	// and the finding it cannot resolve — usually a tasks.md shape that does not
+	// match the spec's development_flow — is exactly the one it will not resolve on
+	// the fourth pass either. Each pass re-reads an 800-line spec to retry a fix it
+	// already tried, which costs more than the orchestrator spends deciding.
+	if strings.Contains(body, "re-validate until it returns 0") {
+		t.Error("spec-author.md must not instruct an unbounded validate/fix loop")
+	}
+	for _, want := range []string{"at most twice", "two rounds"} {
+		if !strings.Contains(body, want) {
+			t.Errorf("spec-author.md should bound the fix loop (%q)", want)
+		}
+	}
 }
 func TestImplementerAgentEncodesDiscipline(t *testing.T) {
 	agents, err := AgentFiles(FS)
@@ -576,3 +594,46 @@ func TestPlanSessionEntryCarriesTheLoopContract(t *testing.T) {
 		}
 	}
 }
+
+// TestAgentEffortLadder pins where each sub-agent's reasoning effort sits.
+//
+// The dial is not per-agent taste. It is dispatch frequency weighed against what
+// being shallow costs, and the two pull in opposite directions:
+//
+//   - `implementer` fires ~7 times per feat, but each dispatch is one small,
+//     already-bounded task with a cycle skill to follow. It stays high because it
+//     WRITES the code — a shallow implementation is the expensive kind.
+//   - `spec-author` fires 3 times per feat against a SCAFFOLDED artifact whose
+//     shape the template already fixes. Medium: deliberation over a form that is
+//     largely filled in, three times over, was not buying its cost.
+//   - `code-reviewer` / `security-reviewer` fire once or twice, and they are pure
+//     judgment. Lowering them saves almost nothing and risks the defect the gate
+//     exists to catch: one measured feat arrived "implemented" with 691 green
+//     tests and a drawer that never collapsed at any width — the ARIA and state
+//     were there, the layout was not. The review is what found it.
+//   - `quality-gate` runs commands and relays their real output; its own prompt
+//     says it decides nothing about the code. Low.
+//
+// Change a value here only with the reasoning that moved it, in this comment.
+func TestAgentEffortLadder(t *testing.T) {
+	agents, err := AgentFiles(FS)
+	if err != nil {
+		t.Fatal(err)
+	}
+	for name, want := range map[string]string{
+		"implementer.md":       "effort: high",
+		"spec-author.md":       "effort: medium",
+		"code-reviewer.md":     "effort: high",
+		"security-reviewer.md": "effort: high",
+		"quality-gate.md":      "effort: low",
+	} {
+		body, ok := agents[name]
+		if !ok {
+			t.Errorf("AgentFiles is missing %s", name)
+			continue
+		}
+		if !strings.Contains(body, want) {
+			t.Errorf("%s should carry %q", name, want)
+		}
+	}
+}
diff --git a/internal/templater/templates/agents/quality-gate.md.tmpl b/internal/templater/templates/agents/quality-gate.md.tmpl
index 23165fc..2cf18c1 100644
--- a/internal/templater/templates/agents/quality-gate.md.tmpl
+++ b/internal/templater/templates/agents/quality-gate.md.tmpl
@@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ name: quality-gate
 description: Runs the feat-exit verification gate — the plan's Quality Gate commands plus the Tier-3 test-report with coverage — and reports pass/fail with the real output. Use at feat exit, once every implementer has finished, dispatched alongside code-reviewer and security-reviewer. Not for per-task verification: that is the implementer's Tier-2 gate.
 tools: Read, Grep, Glob, Bash
 model: sonnet
-effort: medium
+effort: low
 color: cyan
 ---
 
diff --git a/internal/templater/templates/agents/spec-author.md.tmpl b/internal/templater/templates/agents/spec-author.md.tmpl
index e824e3d..6250fd2 100644
--- a/internal/templater/templates/agents/spec-author.md.tmpl
+++ b/internal/templater/templates/agents/spec-author.md.tmpl
@@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ name: spec-author
 description: Authors ONE spec phase artifact (requirements, design, or tasks) for a feat — scaffolds it with `csdd spec generate`, consults the knowledge graph for the governing code/ADRs/stack, writes the body to EARS and traceability, validates, and reports. Sonnet writes; the orchestrator (opus) reviews, validates, and approves. Does not implement, does not approve, does not touch the approved plan.
 tools: Read, Grep, Glob, Edit, Write, Bash
 model: sonnet
-effort: high
+effort: medium
 skills:
   - graph
 color: purple
@@ -75,10 +75,14 @@ so reading past what the phase needs costs real time and buys nothing.
      `_Depends:_` IDs exist; no two `(P)` tasks share a boundary. Shape follows
      `development_flow` — the scaffolded template already carries the right
      shape; keep it. Sub-tasks are 1–3 hours of focused work.
-4. **Validate — and fix what it finds.**
-   `csdd spec validate <feat>` returns 2 on findings. Fix every finding in the
-   artifact body and re-validate until it returns 0. Do not `--force` past a
-   real finding.
+4. **Validate — and fix what it finds, at most twice.**
+   `csdd spec validate <feat>` returns 2 on findings. Fix them in the artifact
+   body and re-validate — but give it **two rounds, not an open loop**. A finding
+   that survives two honest attempts is one you are reading wrong, and each
+   further round re-reads a spec that is commonly 800+ lines for a fix you have
+   already tried: it costs more than the orchestrator spends deciding. Report
+   what is left, quoting the finding verbatim and what you tried. Do not
+   `--force` past a real finding.
 5. **Report.** State the phase, the artifact path, a one-line summary of what it
    covers, the validate result (0 / findings left), and any unresolved gap or
    open question for the orchestrator. Your report **is** the handoff the
@@ -114,8 +118,9 @@ so reading past what the phase needs costs real time and buys nothing.
 - [ ] The named phase artifact is scaffolded and authored under `specs/<feat>/`.
 - [ ] EARS (requirements) / traceability + boundary map + stack-ADR conformance
       (design) / annotations + flow-correct shape (tasks) hold.
-- [ ] `csdd spec validate <feat>` returns 0 (or the remaining findings are named
-      and explicitly left for the orchestrator).
+- [ ] `csdd spec validate <feat>` returns 0 (or, after two fix rounds, the
+      remaining findings are quoted verbatim and explicitly left for the
+      orchestrator, with what you tried).
 - [ ] No `spec approve` called; `spec.json` frontmatter, the plan, and `.csdd/`
       untouched.
 - [ ] Report states: phase, artifact path, summary, validate result, open gaps.
\ No newline at end of file