### expert_build/propose.py:cmd_propose_beliefs
VERDICT: PASS
CORRECTNESS: VALID
SPEC_COMPLIANCE: N/A
ISSUE_COMPLIANCE: N/A
BELIEF_COMPLIANCE: N/A
TEST_COVERAGE: COVERED
INTEGRATION: WIRED
REASONING: The refactoring to incremental batch writing is sound. By writing proposals and updating the processed entries list after each successful batch, the tool becomes significantly more resilient to network or LLM failures during long runs. The updated regex for belief identification correctly handles the `[ACCEPT/REJECT]` placeholder often used in LLM prompts.
---

### tests/test_propose.py
VERDICT: PASS
CORRECTNESS: VALID
SPEC_COMPLIANCE: N/A
ISSUE_COMPLIANCE: N/A
BELIEF_COMPLIANCE: N/A
TEST_COVERAGE: COVERED
INTEGRATION: WIRED
REASONING: The new test file provides excellent coverage for the modified logic. It specifically verifies the crash-recovery behavior (ensuring data from previous batches is preserved), the deduplication logic, and the new regex matching for placeholders.
---

### SELF_REVIEW
LIMITATIONS: Review was based on provided diffs and observed function bodies. The O(N^2) complexity of hashing entries in `_save_processed` during a single session (re-hashing all session-processed files for every batch) was noted but deemed acceptable for the typical scale of this tool.
---
