#2774 gatorwalk-factory: prepare to ship (fast_forward) for work already done

issue-lifecycle has a path for ad-hoc work that is already committed. swamp-extensions.yaml has none, and swamp-extensions.md does not list it as a gap.

What issue-lifecycle does

In the skill's "Prepare to Ship" flow (.claude/skills/issue-lifecycle/SKILL.md:63-127), the agent files a tracking issue, runs start, and then runs fast_forward with a summary, retroactive plan steps and a testing strategy (extensions/models/issue_lifecycle.ts:2016-2168). In one call, fast_forward:

• writes a classification (platform, high), a v1 plan, an adversarial review with no findings, and a conformance review marking every step implemented;
• sets the type and steps the status through triaged to in_progress;
• posts a fast_forwarded entry.

Verification, attestation, the PR and close-out then run as usual, starting at verify. The flow runs without a person approving each step.

What gatorwalk does

A work item always starts at triage, the stage marked initial (:38). Reaching implement needs a plan-review recorded this cycle (a dispatch stage) and the plan-approval human gate (:332-340). Work already done has to be walked through triage, planning, review and approval after the fact, with a person approving a plan that describes finished work.

Why it matters

"Prepare to ship" is how this team ships small fixes found during other work. If gatorwalk cannot run it, the pilot has to fall back to issue-lifecycle for that kind of work, and the two drivers run side by side for longer.

Fix direction

A manual exit from triage, named fast-forward and taken on a person's word, that goes to implement or straight to conformance-review. Its gates require a retroactive plan and a change-summary. The exit posts a fast_forwarded entry, through a new stage or through an entry on the transition (see the entry-detail issue).

Decisions for the implementer:

• Records. Record a synthetic conformance review, as issue-lifecycle does, or run the real conformance-review dispatch against the retroactive plan. The real review is cheap and keeps "every exit past implement is bound to the reviewed commit" true.
• Type. Use platform, as issue-lifecycle does, or the tracking issue's own type (the CLI cannot file a platform issue: SKILL.md:78-81).
• Where the path lives. A separate small lifecycle (for example swamp-extensions-ship) that starts at conformance review might be cleaner than another exit on triage. The graph analysis limits apply to either.

Done when

• A work item for committed work goes from claim to verify without a plan approval. This is covered by a walk test and against the Lab fake, and the Lab gets the type, status moves and a fast_forwarded entry.
• The driving skill documents the flow, and swamp-extensions.md maps fast_forward in the Phases table.