format: apply repo prettier (3.8.1) to the folded skills tree

963 markdown files reformatted with the repository's pinned prettier so
pnpm format:check covers the folded tree like every other repo file.

The formatter's embedded-language pass also normalized code fences
(TS semicolons, closed HTML tags in examples, lowercased CSS hex colors,
one renumbered list that skipped an index). Alphanumeric token deltas vs
the fold commit were audited file-by-file; all are formatter-equivalent
markup normalizations plus the four sanitized skills.

packages/mosaic/framework/skills/code-review-excellence/reference/code-review-best-practices.md

@@ -7,6 +7,7 @@ Comprehensive guidelines for conducting effective code reviews.
 ### Goals of Code Review
 
 **Primary Goals:**
+
 - Catch bugs and edge cases before production
 - Ensure code maintainability and readability
 - Share knowledge across the team
@@ -14,6 +15,7 @@ Comprehensive guidelines for conducting effective code reviews.
 - Improve design and architecture decisions
 
 **Secondary Goals:**
+
 - Mentor junior developers
 - Build team culture and trust
 - Document design decisions through discussions
@@ -29,11 +31,11 @@ Comprehensive guidelines for conducting effective code reviews.
 
 ### When to Review
 
-| Trigger | Action |
-|---------|--------|
-| PR opened | Review within 24 hours, ideally same day |
-| Changes requested | Re-review within 4 hours |
-| Blocking issue found | Communicate immediately |
+| Trigger              | Action                                   |
+| -------------------- | ---------------------------------------- |
+| PR opened            | Review within 24 hours, ideally same day |
+| Changes requested    | Re-review within 4 hours                 |
+| Blocking issue found | Communicate immediately                  |
 
 ### Time Allocation
 
@@ -44,18 +46,21 @@ Comprehensive guidelines for conducting effective code reviews.
 ## Review Depth Levels
 
 ### Level 1: Skim Review (5 minutes)
+
 - Check PR description and linked issues
 - Verify CI/CD status
 - Look at file changes overview
 - Identify if deeper review needed
 
 ### Level 2: Standard Review (20-30 minutes)
+
 - Full code walkthrough
 - Logic verification
 - Test coverage check
 - Security scan
 
 ### Level 3: Deep Review (60+ minutes)
+
 - Architecture evaluation
 - Performance analysis
 - Security audit
@@ -66,11 +71,13 @@ Comprehensive guidelines for conducting effective code reviews.
 ### Tone and Language
 
 **Use collaborative language:**
+
 - "What do you think about..." instead of "You should..."
 - "Could we consider..." instead of "This is wrong"
 - "I'm curious about..." instead of "Why didn't you..."
 
 **Be specific and actionable:**
+
 - Include code examples when suggesting changes
 - Link to documentation or past discussions
 - Explain the "why" behind suggestions
@@ -86,6 +93,7 @@ Comprehensive guidelines for conducting effective code reviews.
 ## Review Prioritization
 
 ### Must Fix (Blocking)
+
 - Security vulnerabilities
 - Data corruption risks
 - Breaking changes without migration
@@ -93,6 +101,7 @@ Comprehensive guidelines for conducting effective code reviews.
 - Missing error handling for user-facing features
 
 ### Should Fix (Important)
+
 - Test coverage gaps
 - Moderate performance concerns
 - Code duplication
@@ -100,6 +109,7 @@ Comprehensive guidelines for conducting effective code reviews.
 - Missing documentation for complex logic
 
 ### Nice to Have (Non-blocking)
+
 - Style preferences beyond linting
 - Minor optimizations
 - Additional test cases
@@ -108,6 +118,7 @@ Comprehensive guidelines for conducting effective code reviews.
 ## Anti-Patterns to Avoid
 
 ### Reviewer Anti-Patterns
+
 - **Rubber stamping**: Approving without actually reviewing
 - **Bike shedding**: Debating trivial details extensively
 - **Scope creep**: "While you're at it, can you also..."
@@ -115,6 +126,7 @@ Comprehensive guidelines for conducting effective code reviews.
 - **Perfectionism**: Blocking for minor style preferences
 
 ### Author Anti-Patterns
+
 - **Mega PRs**: Submitting 1000+ line changes
 - **No context**: Missing PR description or linked issues
 - **Defensive responses**: Arguing every suggestion
@@ -123,6 +135,7 @@ Comprehensive guidelines for conducting effective code reviews.
 ## Metrics and Improvement
 
 ### Track These Metrics
+
 - Time to first review
 - Review cycle time
 - Number of review rounds
@@ -130,6 +143,7 @@ Comprehensive guidelines for conducting effective code reviews.
 - Review coverage percentage
 
 ### Continuous Improvement
+
 - Hold retrospectives on review process
 - Share learnings from escaped bugs
 - Update checklists based on common issues