diff --git a/LESSONS.md b/LESSONS.md
index c75b35c..1e75083 100644
--- a/LESSONS.md
+++ b/LESSONS.md
@@ -110,6 +110,14 @@ When skill-audit's qualitative checks for description quality and body disciplin
 
 The agentskills.io spec defines scripts/ for bundled executable scripts — it says nothing about test infrastructure. Bats test files placed in scripts/ (or scripts/tests/) are invisible to auditors following the spec and create silent README drift if not documented. Fix: place test files directly in scripts/ (no subdirectory), add a row to the README file table for each with a "dev tooling, not shipped with the plugin" note, and don't nest them in a tests/ subdirectory since that creates a non-spec directory structure.
 
+## 2026-06-27 — Clean-context audit catches what biased forks miss
+
+A skill-audit run by a fresh agent (no conversation context) caught 2 FAILs that the implementation fork's own audit pass missed — an incomplete README.md file table and `references/sources.md` paths invalid in the plugin cache. Forks that built the artifact are biased toward their own output: they know what was intended and fill in gaps silently. A fresh agent has no such priors and audits what is actually written. Fix: always run a clean-context audit as a named final step after implementation forks complete. It is not redundant with the in-process audit — it is a different check.
+
+## 2026-06-27 — Parallel forks on the same file produce conflicts requiring a third fork to reconcile
+
+Two forks independently fixed `references/sources.md` with different approaches — one added a header comment, the other replaced the paths with relative references. Both were plausible; neither read the spec first. Reconciling required a third fork to read the authoritative source and revert to the correct format (repo-root-relative, per skill-author Step 5). Fix: when multiple forks are in scope for the same file, either (a) scope them to non-overlapping files explicitly, or (b) sequence them rather than parallelise. If a fix is spec-governed, always read the spec before applying it — the "obvious" fix is wrong as often as it is right.
+
 ## 2026-05-18 — Planning meta-commentary does not belong in deployed artifacts
 
 During write-skill refactor, an "open thread" note (about a deferred research step) was written directly into the SKILL.md Process section. The user caught it. The rule it violated: a deployed artifact (SKILL.md, a runtime file loaded by agents) must not contain planning meta-commentary — deferred items, open threads, and implementation notes belong in the issue file, which is the planning artifact. The skill body should contain only content relevant to runtime execution. If a decision is deferred, record it in the issue and leave no trace in the skill. The distinction: issue = planning record; skill = executable instruction.