diff --git a/.github/workflows/claude-review.yml b/.github/workflows/claude-review.yml
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..c880092b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/.github/workflows/claude-review.yml
@@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
+name: Claude Auto Review
+
+# Thin caller for the org-wide review workflow in source-cooperative/.github.
+# Only the trigger, permissions, and the token live here; the prompt, plugins,
+# concurrency, and action version are shared. See that repo's README.
+on:
+  pull_request:
+    # No ready_for_review: drafts are already reviewed on opened/synchronize, so
+    # flipping to ready re-runs the same review against an unchanged diff.
+    types: [opened, synchronize, reopened]
+    # Skip when a PR touches workflow files: the action can't validate/run
+    # against modified workflows and fails with "401 Unauthorized - Workflow
+    # validation failed".
+    paths-ignore:
+      - '.github/workflows/**'
+
+jobs:
+  review:
+    uses: source-cooperative/.github/.github/workflows/claude-pr-review.yml@main
+    # Granted here because a called workflow can only maintain or reduce the
+    # caller's token permissions, never elevate them.
+    permissions:
+      contents: read
+      pull-requests: write
+      id-token: write
+    # Mapped explicitly rather than `secrets: inherit` so the review job gets
+    # only this token, not every secret this repo holds.
+    secrets:
+      CLAUDE_CODE_OAUTH_TOKEN: ${{ secrets.CLAUDE_CODE_OAUTH_TOKEN }}
diff --git a/.github/workflows/pr-review-comprehensive.yml b/.github/workflows/pr-review-comprehensive.yml
deleted file mode 100644
index 0a7c4e58..00000000
--- a/.github/workflows/pr-review-comprehensive.yml
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,64 +0,0 @@
-name: Claude Auto Review
-on:
-  pull_request:
-    types: [opened, synchronize, reopened]
-    # Skip when a PR touches workflow files: the action can't validate/run
-    # against modified workflows and fails with "401 Unauthorized - Workflow
-    # validation failed".
-    paths-ignore:
-      - '.github/workflows/**'
-
-# Cancel an in-flight review when a new commit is pushed: the latest commit is
-# the only one worth reviewing, and all runs share one sticky comment anyway.
-concurrency:
-  group: claude-review-${{ github.event.pull_request.number }}
-  cancel-in-progress: true
-
-jobs:
-  review:
-    if: github.event.pull_request.user.type != 'Bot'
-    runs-on: ubuntu-latest
-    permissions:
-      contents: read
-      pull-requests: write
-      id-token: write
-    steps:
-      - uses: actions/checkout@v6
-        with:
-          fetch-depth: 1
-
-      - uses: anthropics/claude-code-action@v1
-        with:
-          claude_code_oauth_token: ${{ secrets.CLAUDE_CODE_OAUTH_TOKEN }}
-          # Allow the github-actions bot to trigger the review so that
-          # Claude-authored PRs get reviewed. Without this, the action
-          # aborts on bot actors ("Workflow initiated by non-human 
-          # actor").
-          allowed_bots: "github-actions"
-          # Deliver the review as ONE sticky PR comment that updates in place each
-          # run. track_progress forces tag mode (a single tracking comment the
-          # action owns and updates with the final result on these pull_request
-          # events); use_sticky_comment makes it the SAME comment across pushes.
-          # Replaces the prior formal-review approach, which left multiple reviews
-          # per run and accumulated undismissable COMMENTED reviews across runs
-          # (GitHub can't dismiss or delete a submitted COMMENTED review).
-          track_progress: true
-          use_sticky_comment: true
-          prompt: |
-            REPO: ${{ github.repository }}
-            PR: ${{ github.event.pull_request.number }}
-
-            Review this pull request's diff for correctness bugs, security issues,
-            and clear best-practice problems. Skip nits and anything the linter or
-            formatter already enforces.
-
-            Your final message is delivered as the PR review comment automatically —
-            do NOT post any comment or review yourself. Just produce the review:
-            - Start with a single bold verdict line: `**✅ No blocking issues — safe
-              to merge.**` when nothing is blocking, or `**❌ Changes requested — see
-              findings below.**` when there are blocking issues.
-            - Follow with a short bullet list of findings, each citing `path:line`
-              and, where a concrete fix exists, a fenced code block with the fix.
-            - If nothing is blocking, say so briefly; do not pad.
-          claude_args: |
-            --allowedTools "Bash(gh pr diff:*),Bash(gh pr view:*)"