Cross-file data-flow bugs in a housing-authority PR are missed by single-file comments. Where should that analysis live?

Cross-file data-flow bugs in a housing-authority pull request are routinely missed by single-file comments because callees, shared state, and authorization checks live outside the file under review. That analysis should live in a dedicated integration pass reserved for cross-file concerns—call graphs, schema propagation, and privilege boundaries across services. Isolating the concern prevents local passes from pretending they saw the whole system. Parking the analysis only inside unrelated documentation edits with no code context does not exercise the actual change set. Declaring cross-file issues out of scope for review architectures abandons a major class of production defects in multi-service civic platforms. Limiting analysis solely to the first file's local pass without seeing callees guarantees missed housing-system defects when helpers or policy modules change behavior. Exam caveat: integration passes need enough context (interfaces, tests, threat notes) without dumping entire repositories into one prompt. Operational check: define an integration checklist for housing PRs—authz across modules, ID propagation, fee or subsidy totals spanning files—and require that checklist's pass in CI separately from per-file lint-style review.