feat(templates): add missing escalation targets + concept-intake stage

fix-test-fixture-sonnet@1, review-spec-opus@1, replan-spec-opus@1 — the
dangling escalation refs from airouter-impl-*/spec-draft/feature-delivery-loop.
Sonnet-authored, Opus-reviewed; review HIGH fixes applied (explicit model: opus
on both opus nodes — node model: sets runtime model, composite name does not).
Known gap filed in work-items epic (E1-escalation-state-gap.md): escalation
edges from non-primary states 422 state_mismatch pending escalation_input_states.
concept-intake@1: optional idea-elaboration pre-stage (output state
idea-elaborated — not yet wired into spec-draft-opus input).
All four validate against controlplane WorkflowTemplate schema.

task-templates/workflow/review-spec-opus@1.yaml

@@ -0,0 +1,47 @@
+name: review-spec-opus
+version: 1
+description: Architecture review of a spec draft, Opus (escalation from review-spec-arch-opus contract_ambiguous)
+runtime: best-practices-opus-repo
+input:
+  state: spec-draft
+  tags_forbidden: [security-sensitive]
+  required_artifacts: [spec_file]
+output:
+  state: spec-reviewed-arch
+scope_budget:
+  files_modified_max: 2
+  lines_diff_max: 150
+  wall_clock_seconds_max: 1800
+nodes:
+  - id: agent
+    kind: agent
+    template: best-practices-opus-repo
+    model: opus
+    prompt: |
+      The agent-runtimes project repo is cloned at /workspace/project.
+      Change to that directory before doing any work.
+
+      The standard architecture review of this spec draft (review-spec-arch-opus, an
+      airouter model) reported the contract as ambiguous and could not reach a confident
+      PASS/REWORK verdict. You are the stronger-model escalation — review the spec draft
+      for the following concept and resolve the ambiguity.
+
+      **Title**: ${item.title}
+
+      **Original concept**:
+      ${item.body}
+
+      Steps:
+      1. cd /workspace/project
+      2. Find the spec file: ls spec/ and look for a file matching the concept title slug
+      3. Read the spec file completely
+      4. Review it against architectural best practices:
+         - Are requirements testable and unambiguous?
+         - Are there security implications not addressed?
+         - Are interfaces and data contracts clearly and unambiguously defined (request/
+           response shapes, error codes, state transitions)?
+         - Are edge cases and failure modes covered?
+      5. Write your review findings to /workspace/.agent-output/review.md with a PASS or
+         REWORK verdict and specific findings. Explicitly resolve whatever made the
+         contract ambiguous on the first pass.
+      6. Call task_complete with "PASS" or "REWORK: <one-line reason>"