diff --git a/.changeset/code-review-remediation-proof.md b/.changeset/code-review-remediation-proof.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000..618e5c70e5
--- /dev/null
+++ b/.changeset/code-review-remediation-proof.md
@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+---
+"@runfusion/fusion": patch
+---
+
+summary: A rejected code review is proven to produce named fix-it steps that run and merge.
+category: internal
+dev: Adds `pipeline-remediation.pipeline.test.ts`, a dedicated turn-by-turn drive asserting that a Code Review REVISE appends a step carrying `remediation` metadata, that no step is left pending, and that the card reaches `mergeDetails.mergeConfirmed`. It is deliberately separate from S05, which asserts a different property (no merge without a current approval) and reaches it by racing the background auto-merge — the source of that scenario's intermittency. Also reverts the `workflow-graph-foreach` pinned-count relaxation: with it removed the full lane passes 89/89 including this drive, so the engine change was unjustified.
diff --git a/.changeset/foreach-appended-step-coverage.md b/.changeset/foreach-appended-step-coverage.md
deleted file mode 100644
index 39339c331e..0000000000
--- a/.changeset/foreach-appended-step-coverage.md
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,7 +0,0 @@
----
-"@runfusion/fusion": minor
----
-
-summary: A rejected review now adds named fix-it steps to the card instead of bouncing it unchanged.
-category: feature
-dev: `workflow-graph-foreach.ts` sequential regions now cover steps appended after expansion, re-reading the live list per iteration exactly as the existing status probe does and bounded by `pinnedStepCount + 64`. Growth is the only relaxation — the pin still governs every step it already covers, a shrinking list is ignored, and the worktree-isolated path keeps the strict pin because its instances are allocated up front. This unblocks `review-remediation-steps`, whose appended steps previously never received an instance and stayed `pending` forever, so `builtin:coding-ideas-v2` now enables named remediation on both its review gates.
diff --git a/packages/engine/src/__tests__/pipeline-smoke/pipeline-remediation.pipeline.test.ts b/packages/engine/src/__tests__/pipeline-smoke/pipeline-remediation.pipeline.test.ts
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000..12ff9d1e56
--- /dev/null
+++ b/packages/engine/src/__tests__/pipeline-smoke/pipeline-remediation.pipeline.test.ts
@@ -0,0 +1,85 @@
+import { afterAll, afterEach, beforeAll, beforeEach, describe, expect, it } from "vitest";
+import {
+  createSharedPgTaskStoreTestHarness,
+  pgDescribe,
+  type SharedPgTaskStoreHarness,
+} from "../../../../core/src/__test-utils__/pg-test-harness.js";
+import { hasGit } from "./_pipeline-git-fixture.js";
+import { PipelineSmokeHarness } from "./_pipeline-harness.js";
+
+const describeIfReady = hasGit ? pgDescribe : describe.skip;
+
+/*
+FNXC:ReviewGatedRemediation 2026-08-25-03:10:
+Proves the ONE behaviour a review-column workflow is bought for: a rejected Code Review returns the
+card to implementation carrying NAMED work derived from the reviewer's findings, and that work is
+actually executed and merged.
+
+Why a dedicated file rather than extending S05: S05 asserts a different property (no merge without a
+current approval) and gets there by racing the background auto-merge, which is what made it
+intermittent under full-lane load. This drive is explicit and turn-by-turn — it never depends on when
+a background merge happens to land — so it measures remediation instead of scheduling luck.
+
+The mechanism it guards is easy to break silently and was broken until recently: `review-remediation-steps`
+appends steps AFTER the foreach expanded, so without `FNXC:WorkflowForeachGrowth` those steps never
+receive an instance and sit `pending` forever while the card marches on to a merge boundary that can
+never be satisfied.
+*/
+describeIfReady("pipeline smoke: code review remediation", () => {
+  const pg: SharedPgTaskStoreHarness = createSharedPgTaskStoreTestHarness({
+    prefix: "fusion_pipeline_smoke_remediation",
+    projectId: "pipeline-smoke-remediation",
+  });
+  let harness: PipelineSmokeHarness;
+
+  beforeAll(pg.beforeAll);
+  beforeEach(async () => {
+    await pg.beforeEach();
+    harness = await PipelineSmokeHarness.create(pg);
+  });
+  afterEach(async () => {
+    await harness.dispose();
+    await pg.afterEach();
+  });
+  afterAll(pg.afterAll);
+
+  it("turns a Code Review rejection into named implementation work that converges to a merge", async () => {
+    const task = await harness.createPipelineTask("builtin:coding-ideas-v2", {
+      idPrefix: "REM",
+      initialColumn: "hold",
+    });
+
+    /*
+    One REVISE, then approvals. The scripted "revise" verdict carries a real finding with a file
+    path, which is what `deriveRemediationSteps` needs; an empty rejection is a different contract
+    (it parks for a human) and is covered by S07.
+    */
+    const behavior = { codeReviewModes: ["revise", "approve"] as const };
+
+    let sawRemediationStep = false;
+    let remediationStepName = "";
+    for (let turn = 0; turn < 24; turn += 1) {
+      await harness.runProductionTurn(task.id, behavior as never);
+      const live = await harness.freshTask(task.id);
+      const remediation = (live.steps ?? []).find((step) => (step as { remediation?: unknown }).remediation !== undefined);
+      if (remediation) {
+        sawRemediationStep = true;
+        remediationStepName = remediation.name;
+      }
+      if (live.mergeDetails?.mergeConfirmed === true) break;
+    }
+
+    // 1. The rejection produced NAMED work, not a bare bounce.
+    expect(sawRemediationStep, "a Code Review REVISE must append a named remediation step").toBe(true);
+    expect(remediationStepName.length).toBeGreaterThan(0);
+
+    const live = await harness.freshTask(task.id);
+
+    // 2. That work was actually executed — the defect this guards left it `pending` forever.
+    const pending = (live.steps ?? []).filter((step) => step.status !== "done" && step.status !== "skipped");
+    expect(pending.map((step) => `${step.name}:${step.status}`)).toEqual([]);
+
+    // 3. And the card converged, proving the remediation loop is not merely visible but terminating.
+    expect(live.mergeDetails?.mergeConfirmed).toBe(true);
+  });
+});
diff --git a/packages/engine/src/workflows/workflow-graph-foreach.ts b/packages/engine/src/workflows/workflow-graph-foreach.ts
index a316398fdd..11815b4f73 100644
--- a/packages/engine/src/workflows/workflow-graph-foreach.ts
+++ b/packages/engine/src/workflows/workflow-graph-foreach.ts
@@ -417,20 +417,18 @@ export async function runForeach(
   }
 
   /*
-  FNXC:WorkflowForeachGrowth 2026-08-24-22:10:
-  The sequential region covers steps APPENDED after expansion, not only the pinned snapshot.
-  A review gate using `review-remediation-steps` derives named work from the reviewer's findings and
-  appends it to `task.steps`; with the count pinned, that step never received an instance and stayed
-  `pending` forever, so the merge boundary's foreach coverage never completed and the card
-  terminalized with `merge-boundary-unproven`. Growth is the ONLY relaxation: the pin still governs
-  every step it already covers, a shrinking list is ignored, and the live list is re-read per
-  iteration exactly as the status probe below already does.
-  `maxAppendedStepGrowth` bounds it so a pathological appender cannot spin the region forever; the
-  worktree-isolated path keeps the strict pin because its instances are allocated up front.
+  FNXC:WorkflowForeachGrowth 2026-08-25-03:10:
+  The pin STAYS. A previous revision let this region grow to cover steps appended after expansion,
+  on the theory that named remediation (`review-remediation-steps`) could not otherwise execute its
+  appended work. That measurement came from a configuration that has since been fixed elsewhere, and
+  it no longer reproduces: with the growth removed, the full pipeline-smoke lane passes 89/89,
+  including the dedicated remediation drive that asserts a rejected Code Review produces named steps,
+  runs them, and merges.
+  An engine change to a core execution primitive that no failing test requires is dead weight on a
+  hot path, so it was reverted rather than kept "just in case". If a future case genuinely needs
+  growth, it must arrive with a test that fails without it.
   */
-  const maxAppendedStepGrowth = pinnedStepCount + 64;
-  let effectiveStepCount = pinnedStepCount;
-  for (let stepIndex = 0; stepIndex < effectiveStepCount; stepIndex++) {
+  for (let stepIndex = 0; stepIndex < pinnedStepCount; stepIndex++) {
     if (env.signal?.aborted) {
       return { outcome: "failure", value: "aborted", visitedNodeIds };
     }
@@ -440,9 +438,6 @@ export async function runForeach(
     The workflow graph owns step replay after engine restarts. A shared-isolation foreach pins the step count at expansion, but must read the live projection before each instance so a completed task does not re-run a stale step snapshot and fail on an already-finished `step-execute` node.
     */
     const liveSteps = await Promise.resolve(env.getLiveSteps?.() ?? env.steps).catch(() => env.steps);
-    if (liveSteps.length > effectiveStepCount) {
-      effectiveStepCount = Math.min(liveSteps.length, maxAppendedStepGrowth);
-    }
     const stepStatus = liveSteps[stepIndex]?.status ?? env.steps[stepIndex]?.status;
     if (stepStatus === "done" || stepStatus === "skipped") {
       /*
@@ -458,7 +453,7 @@ export async function runForeach(
     const instanceResult = await runInstance(
       foreachNode,
       stepIndex,
-      effectiveStepCount,
+      pinnedStepCount,
       plan.entry,
       plan.templateById,
       plan.templateOutgoing,