diff --git a/tasks/implementation/review/graph-complete.md b/tasks/implementation/review/graph-complete.md
index 58638f2..defbf0c 100644
--- a/tasks/implementation/review/graph-complete.md
+++ b/tasks/implementation/review/graph-complete.md
@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 ---
 id: review/graph-complete
 name: Review TaskGraph class implementation for correctness and API compliance
-status: pending
+status: completed
 depends_on:
   - graph/construction
   - graph/mutation
@@ -21,22 +21,22 @@ Review the TaskGraph class implementation before building analysis functions on
 
 ## Acceptance Criteria
 
-- [ ] Construction methods match [graph-model.md](../../../docs/architecture/graph-model.md) error handling table exactly:
+- [x] Construction methods match [graph-model.md](../../../docs/architecture/graph-model.md) error handling table exactly:
   - `fromTasks`: silent orphan nodes, `DuplicateNodeError`, idempotent duplicate edges
   - `fromRecords`: `TaskNotFoundError` for dangling edges, `DuplicateNodeError`, `DuplicateEdgeError`
   - `fromJSON`: validated against schema, orphans preserved
   - `addTask`: `DuplicateNodeError`
   - `addDependency`: `TaskNotFoundError`, `DuplicateEdgeError`
-- [ ] Edge direction is prerequisite→dependent throughout (matches Rust CLI convention)
-- [ ] Deterministic edge keys `${source}->${target}` used via `addEdgeWithKey` (ADR-006)
-- [ ] `topologicalOrder` throws `CircularDependencyError` with `cycles` populated (ADR-003)
-- [ ] `findCycles` returns actual cycle paths (not just SCCs)
-- [ ] `subgraph` returns internal-only edges (ADR-007)
-- [ ] Validation methods return arrays, never throw
-- [ ] Mutation error semantics match [errors-validation.md](../../../docs/architecture/errors-validation.md) table (no-op for remove, throws for update on nonexistent)
-- [ ] `export()`/`toJSON()` round-trips correctly
-- [ ] `raw` getter exposed, warning about direct mutation documented in code comments
-- [ ] All tests pass, including edge cases (empty graphs, single-node, cyclic graphs, disconnected components)
+- [x] Edge direction is prerequisite→dependent throughout (matches Rust CLI convention)
+- [x] Deterministic edge keys `${source}->${target}` used via `addEdgeWithKey` (ADR-006)
+- [x] `topologicalOrder` throws `CircularDependencyError` with `cycles` populated (ADR-003)
+- [x] `findCycles` returns actual cycle paths (not just SCCs)
+- [x] `subgraph` returns internal-only edges (ADR-007)
+- [x] Validation methods return arrays, never throw
+- [x] Mutation error semantics match [errors-validation.md](../../../docs/architecture/errors-validation.md) table (no-op for remove, throws for update on nonexistent)
+- [x] `export()`/`toJSON()` round-trips correctly
+- [x] `raw` getter exposed, warning about direct mutation documented in code comments
+- [x] All tests pass, including edge cases (empty graphs, single-node, cyclic graphs, disconnected components)
 
 ## References
 
@@ -46,8 +46,173 @@ Review the TaskGraph class implementation before building analysis functions on
 
 ## Notes
 
-> To be filled by implementation agent
+See "Code Review Report" section below for detailed findings.
 
 ## Summary
 
-> To be filled on completion
\ No newline at end of file
+**Approved with changes.** The TaskGraph implementation is solid and well-aligned with architecture specifications. All 561 tests pass, TypeScript compiles clean (`tsc --noEmit`), and construction/mutation/query/validation behavior matches the spec tables. Two warnings identified (one semantic concern with `updateEdgeAttributes` error type, one minor API surface divergence). No critical/blocking issues found.
+
+---
+
+# Code Review: review/graph-complete
+
+## Summary
+
+- Files reviewed: 6 (`src/graph/construction.ts`, `src/graph/mutation.ts`, `src/graph/queries.ts`, `src/graph/validation.ts`, `src/schema/graph.ts`, `src/error/index.ts`)
+- Critical issues: 0
+- Warnings: 2
+- Suggestions: 4
+- Tests: **passing** (561/561 across 12 test files)
+- Lint: **clean** (`tsc --noEmit` passes with zero errors)
+- Overall: **approved with changes**
+
+---
+
+## Acceptance Criteria Verification
+
+### 1. Construction methods match graph-model.md error handling table ✅
+
+| Method | Spec Requirement | Implementation | Status |
+|--------|------------------|----------------|--------|
+| `fromTasks` | Silent orphan nodes | `orphanIds` set tracked, added with `{ name: orphanId }` | ✅ |
+| `fromTasks` | `DuplicateNodeError` | Pre-scan with `seenIds` Set, throws before any mutation | ✅ |
+| `fromTasks` | Idempotent duplicate edges | `edgeSet` dedup, only one edge per pair | ✅ |
+| `fromRecords` | `TaskNotFoundError` for dangling edges | Both `prerequisite` and `dependent` checked against `taskIdSet` | ✅ |
+| `fromRecords` | `DuplicateNodeError` | Same pre-scan as `fromTasks` | ✅ |
+| `fromRecords` | `DuplicateEdgeError` | `edgeSet` checked before adding each edge | ✅ |
+| `fromJSON` | Validated against schema | `Value.Check(TaskGraphSerializedSchema, data)`, throws `InvalidInputError` | ✅ |
+| `fromJSON` | Orphans preserved | `graph.import(data)` preserves all nodes from JSON | ✅ |
+| `addTask` | `DuplicateNodeError` | `hasNode()` check before `addNode()` | ✅ |
+| `addDependency` | `TaskNotFoundError` | Both endpoints checked with `hasNode()` | ✅ |
+| `addDependency` | `DuplicateEdgeError` | `hasEdge(edgeKey)` check before `addEdgeWithKey()` | ✅ |
+
+### 2. Edge direction is prerequisite→dependent ✅
+
+- `addDependency(prerequisite, dependent)` creates edge `prerequisite → dependent`
+- `dependencies(taskId)` uses `graph.inNeighbors(taskId)` (prerequisites)
+- `dependents(taskId)` uses `graph.outNeighbors(taskId)` (dependents)
+- `topologicalOrder` returns prerequisites before dependents
+- Tests confirm: `tg.raw.source('a->b')` is `'a'`, `tg.raw.target('a->b')` is `'b'`
+
+### 3. Deterministic edge keys ✅
+
+- `addEdgeWithKey(edgeKey, ...)` used in `addDependency` via `_edgeKey(source, target)` → `${source}->${target}`
+- `fromTasks` and `fromRecords` build `edgeEntries` with deterministic keys before `graph.import()`
+- Test confirms all construction paths produce deterministic keys
+
+### 4. `topologicalOrder` throws `CircularDependencyError` with `cycles` ✅
+
+- Catches `topologicalSort` errors, then throws `new CircularDependencyError(findCycles(graph))`
+- Test confirms `CircularDependencyError.cycles.length >= 1` and contains expected cycle nodes
+- Message includes cycle path descriptions (e.g., "A → B → C")
+
+### 5. `findCycles` returns actual cycle paths (not just SCCs) ✅
+
+- SCC used as fast pre-check only (skip DFS if no multi-node SCCs)
+- 3-color DFS (WHITE/GREY/BLACK) extracts cycle paths from recursion stack
+- Returns `string[][]` where each inner array is `[A, B, C]` meaning A→B→C→A
+- Test confirms last→first is an edge in the graph
+- Returns one representative cycle per back edge, not exhaustive enumeration
+
+### 6. `subgraph` returns internal-only edges ✅
+
+- Uses `graphology-operators.subgraph` which only keeps edges where both endpoints are in the filtered set
+- Creates a new `TaskGraph` and imports the subgraph data
+- Test confirms: diamond filtered to `{B, D}` keeps only `B→D`, removes `A→B` and `C→D`
+
+### 7. Validation methods return arrays, never throw ✅
+
+- `validateSchema()`, `validateGraph()`, `validate()` all return arrays
+- No exceptions thrown — errors collected and returned
+- Test confirms empty arrays for valid/acyclic graphs
+
+### 8. Mutation error semantics match errors-validation.md ✅
+
+| Operation | Spec | Implementation | Status |
+|-----------|------|----------------|--------|
+| `removeTask(id)` | No-op | `if (!graph.hasNode(id)) return` | ✅ |
+| `removeDependency(src, tgt)` | No-op | `if (!graph.hasEdge(key)) return` | ✅ |
+| `updateTask(id, attrs)` | Throws `TaskNotFoundError` | `if (!graph.hasNode(id)) throw new TaskNotFoundError(id)` | ✅ |
+| `updateEdgeAttributes(src, tgt, attrs)` | Throws `TaskNotFoundError` | `if (!graph.hasEdge(key)) throw new TaskNotFoundError(key)` | ⚠️ (see W1) |
+| `addDependency(prereq, dep)` | Throws `TaskNotFoundError` | Both endpoints checked | ✅ |
+
+### 9. `export()`/`toJSON()` round-trips correctly ✅
+
+- `export()` delegates to `graphology.export()`, cast as `TaskGraphSerialized`
+- `toJSON()` is alias for `export()` (enables `JSON.stringify`)
+- Tests verify: empty graph, graph with nodes+edges, re-export stability, `JSON.stringify` round-trip
+
+### 10. `raw` getter exposed with warning ✅
+
+- `get raw(): TaskGraphInner` returns `this._graph`
+- JSDoc warning: "Mutating the underlying graphology instance directly bypasses TaskGraph's validation and invariants. Consumers using `raw` should treat the graph as read-only for structural changes and use TaskGraph methods for all mutations."
+- Class-level JSDoc also documents the warning
+
+### 11. All tests pass ✅
+
+- 12 test files, 561 tests, all passing
+- Edge cases covered: empty graphs, single-node, cyclic, disconnected components, two-node cycles, multiple independent cycles
+
+---
+
+## Critical Issues
+
+None.
+
+## Warnings
+
+### W1: `updateEdgeAttributes` throws `TaskNotFoundError` with edge key as `taskId` — semantically misleading
+
+**File**: `src/graph/mutation.ts:93-94`
+
+```typescript
+const key = `${prerequisite}->${dependent}`;
+if (!graph.hasEdge(key)) {
+  throw new TaskNotFoundError(key); // key = "x->y", not a task ID
+}
+```
+
+The errors-validation.md spec says `updateEdgeAttributes` should throw `TaskNotFoundError`, and the implementation does. However, `TaskNotFoundError.taskId` is set to the edge key (e.g., `"x->y"`) rather than a task ID. This is semantically incorrect — `TaskNotFoundError` is documented as representing a missing *task* (node), not a missing edge. The `taskId` field name implies a node key. The spec states: "Throws `TaskNotFoundError` — cannot update attributes of a non-existent edge (implies at least one endpoint missing)", acknowledging this is edge-not-found, but the error class is node-focused.
+
+**Impact**: Consumers catching `TaskNotFoundError` and reading `.taskId` will get an edge key string (`"x->y"`) where they expect a node key. This breaks the type contract of `TaskNotFoundError.taskId: string` (the field is named for task IDs, not edge keys).
+
+**Recommendation**: Consider either (a) introducing an `EdgeNotFoundError` with `prerequisite`/`dependent` fields (breaking change, probably too late), or (b) documenting in `updateEdgeAttributes` JSDoc that the thrown `TaskNotFoundError.taskId` will contain the edge key, not a task ID.
+
+### W2: `addDependency` has a third parameter not shown in api-surface.md
+
+**File**: `src/graph/construction.ts:498`
+
+```typescript
+addDependency(prerequisite: string, dependent: string, qualityRetention: number = 0.9): void
+```
+
+The architecture spec in `api-surface.md` shows `addDependency(prerequisite: string, dependent: string): void` (2 params only). The implementation adds an optional `qualityRetention` parameter with default 0.9. While this is a reasonable extension (the graph-model.md construction paths table mentions "Default or explicit" for incremental construction), it technically diverges from the documented API surface.
+
+**Impact**: Low — the parameter is optional with a default, so it's backward-compatible. However, if a consumer relies on the API surface doc, they won't know this capability exists.
+
+**Recommendation**: Update `api-surface.md` to reflect the optional third parameter.
+
+## Suggestions
+
+### S1: `fromTasks` and `fromRecords` use `graph.import()` bulk loading — consider validation of `qualityRetention` range
+
+The `qualityRetention` value (0.0–1.0 per the cost-benefit model) is not validated at construction time. While the architecture says "Construction methods enforce uniqueness, not data quality", a `qualityRetention` of e.g., 2.5 or -0.3 would silently propagate into `workflowCost` calculations and produce nonsensical results. Consider adding a `validateSchema()` call in consumer code or documenting that `qualityRetention` bounds are only checked via validation, not at construction.
+
+### S2: `findCycles` DFS recurses without explicit stack depth limit
+
+For very large, deep graphs, the recursive DFS in `findCycles` (`queries.ts:82-108`) could exceed the call stack. Given the architecture constraint that "realistic task graphs are 10–200 nodes" (ADR-002), this is unlikely to be a problem in practice, but an iterative version would be more robust if the graph size constraint is relaxed.
+
+### S3: `validateGraph` dangling reference check iterates all edges but graphology guarantees no dangling refs in well-formed graphs
+
+In `validation.ts:74-94`, the dangling reference check iterates all edges and checks if both endpoints exist as nodes. In a graphology graph with proper API usage (all mutations through `TaskGraph` methods), this can never occur — graphology doesn't allow edges with missing endpoints, and `removeTask` cascade-deletes edges. This check is only useful if someone mutates `raw` directly, which the docs discourage. The check is harmless but adds O(E) overhead for a practically unreachable state. Consider adding a comment explaining when this would fire.
+
+### S4: `subgraph` creates two temporary graphs (subgraph + result)
+
+In `construction.ts:620-625`, the `subgraph` method creates a graphology subgraph, exports it, creates a new `TaskGraph`, and imports the data. This involves creating two graph instances. An alternative would be to construct the `TaskGraph` directly from the subgraph's nodes/edges without the intermediate export-import. However, this is a minor performance concern given the small graph sizes (10–200 nodes per ADR-002).
+
+## Recommendations
+
+1. **(Warning W1)** Document or adjust the `updateEdgeAttributes` error type — the `TaskNotFoundError.taskId` containing an edge key is a semantic mismatch. At minimum, add a JSDoc note.
+2. **(Warning W2)** Update `api-surface.md` to include the optional `qualityRetention` parameter on `addDependency`.
+3. **(Suggestion S3)** Add a comment on the dangling reference check explaining when it would actually fire.
+4. **(Suggestion S1)** Document in graph-model.md that `qualityRetention` bounds are not validated at construction time.
\ No newline at end of file