diff --git a/.github/workflows/pr-policy.yml b/.github/workflows/pr-policy.yml
index 1322bdcc7..74e113acb 100644
--- a/.github/workflows/pr-policy.yml
+++ b/.github/workflows/pr-policy.yml
@@ -64,14 +64,24 @@ jobs:
               files: changedFiles.map((file) => file.filename),
             });
 
+            const warnings = result.warnings || [];
             await core.summary
               .addHeading("PR policy")
               .addRaw(`Clinical risk: ${result.classification.clinicalRisk ? "yes" : "no"}<br>`)
               .addRaw(`Operational risk: ${result.classification.operationalRisk ? "yes" : "no"}<br>`)
               .addRaw(`UI change: ${result.classification.ui ? "yes" : "no"}<br>`)
+              .addRaw(`Blocking issues: ${result.errors.length}<br>`)
+              .addRaw(`Advisory warnings: ${warnings.length}<br>`)
               .write();
 
+            // Advisory metadata nudges (title/summary/verification/UI/risk) are
+            // surfaced but never fail the check. Only a clinical-risk PR with an
+            // incomplete Clinical Governance Preflight blocks the merge.
+            for (const warning of warnings) core.warning(warning);
+
             if (!result.ok) {
               for (const error of result.errors) core.error(error);
-              core.setFailed(`PR policy found ${result.errors.length} issue(s). Edit the PR title/body and rerun.`);
+              core.setFailed(
+                `PR policy found ${result.errors.length} blocking clinical-governance issue(s). Complete the Clinical Governance Preflight and rerun.`,
+              );
             }
diff --git a/scripts/pr-policy.mjs b/scripts/pr-policy.mjs
index 01cd65cfd..3e6a1b6a6 100644
--- a/scripts/pr-policy.mjs
+++ b/scripts/pr-policy.mjs
@@ -146,7 +146,12 @@ export function classifyPullRequestFiles(files) {
 }
 
 export function evaluatePullRequestPolicy({ title, body, headRef, files }) {
+  // Only genuine clinical-risk governance gaps block the PR (hard failure).
+  // Every other metadata expectation (title, summary, verification, UI, risk
+  // and rollout) is advisory: it is surfaced as a warning so authors still get
+  // the nudge, but it never fails the check or blocks a merge.
   const errors = [];
+  const warnings = [];
   const classification = classifyPullRequestFiles(files);
   const summary = section(body, "Summary");
   // The summary must be its own prose: content nested under a sub-heading
@@ -158,14 +163,17 @@ export function evaluatePullRequestPolicy({ title, body, headRef, files }) {
   const governance = section(body, "Clinical Governance Preflight");
 
   if (String(title ?? "").trim().length < 12)
-    errors.push("Use a specific, outcome-focused PR title (at least 12 characters).");
-  if (branchLikeTitle(title, headRef)) errors.push("Replace the branch-style PR title with an outcome-focused title.");
+    warnings.push("Use a specific, outcome-focused PR title (at least 12 characters).");
+  if (branchLikeTitle(title, headRef))
+    warnings.push("Replace the branch-style PR title with an outcome-focused title.");
   if (!meaningfulText(summaryDirect))
-    errors.push("Complete the `## Summary` section with the outcome and affected area.");
+    warnings.push("Complete the `## Summary` section with the outcome and affected area.");
   if (!meaningfulText(verification)) {
-    errors.push("Complete the `## Verification` section with exact results or a reason checks were not run.");
+    warnings.push("Complete the `## Verification` section with exact results or a reason checks were not run.");
   } else if (!/-\s*\[[xX]\]/.test(verification) && !explicitNotRun(verification)) {
-    errors.push("Verification must contain a checked result or an explicit `Verification not run: <reason>` entry.");
+    warnings.push(
+      "Verification should contain a checked result or an explicit `Verification not run: <reason>` entry.",
+    );
   }
 
   if (
@@ -173,9 +181,13 @@ export function evaluatePullRequestPolicy({ title, body, headRef, files }) {
     !checkedCommand(verification, "npm run verify:ui") &&
     !explicitNotRun(verification, "UI verification")
   ) {
-    errors.push("UI changes require checked `npm run verify:ui` evidence or `UI verification not run: <reason>`.");
+    warnings.push(
+      "UI changes should include checked `npm run verify:ui` evidence or `UI verification not run: <reason>`.",
+    );
   }
 
+  // Blocking gate: a clinical-risk PR must carry a complete Clinical Governance
+  // Preflight. This is the only condition that fails the check.
   if (classification.clinicalRisk) {
     if (!meaningfulText(governance)) {
       errors.push("Clinical-risk paths require the `## Clinical Governance Preflight` section.");
@@ -195,18 +207,18 @@ export function evaluatePullRequestPolicy({ title, body, headRef, files }) {
 
   if (classification.clinicalRisk || classification.operationalRisk) {
     if (!meaningfulText(riskAndRollout)) {
-      errors.push("High-risk changes require the `## Risk and rollout` section.");
+      warnings.push("High-risk changes should include the `## Risk and rollout` section.");
     } else {
       if (!substantiveRisk(fieldValue(riskAndRollout, "Risk"))) {
-        errors.push("Risk and rollout must include `Risk: <low|medium|high and rationale>`.");
+        warnings.push("Risk and rollout should include `Risk: <low|medium|high and rationale>`.");
       }
       if (!substantiveRollback(fieldValue(riskAndRollout, "Rollback"))) {
-        errors.push("Risk and rollout must include a concrete `Rollback: <plan>`.");
+        warnings.push("Risk and rollout should include a concrete `Rollback: <plan>`.");
       }
     }
   }
 
-  return { classification, errors, ok: errors.length === 0 };
+  return { classification, errors, warnings, ok: errors.length === 0 };
 }
 
 function selfTest() {
@@ -221,22 +233,22 @@ function selfTest() {
     }).ok,
     true,
   );
-  assert.match(
-    evaluatePullRequestPolicy({
-      title: "Codex/pr-policy",
-      body: "",
-      headRef: "codex/pr-policy",
-      files: [],
-    }).errors.join(" "),
-    /branch-style/,
-  );
+  // Advisory metadata issues are surfaced as warnings and NEVER block the check.
+  const branchStyle = evaluatePullRequestPolicy({
+    title: "Codex/pr-policy",
+    body: "",
+    headRef: "codex/pr-policy",
+    files: [],
+  });
+  assert.match(branchStyle.warnings.join(" "), /branch-style/);
+  assert.equal(branchStyle.ok, true, "advisory-only issues must not fail the check");
   assert.match(
     evaluatePullRequestPolicy({
       title: "fix: update search behavior",
       body: completeBody.replace("- [x] `npm run verify:ui`\n", ""),
       headRef: "codex/search-fix",
       files: ["src/components/search.tsx"],
-    }).errors.join(" "),
+    }).warnings.join(" "),
     /verify:ui/,
   );
   // Outline semantics: a ### sub-heading inside a required section must not
@@ -258,7 +270,7 @@ function selfTest() {
       body: "## Summary\n\n### Verification\n\n- [x] `npm run verify:pr-local`\n",
       headRef: "codex/x",
       files: ["docs/a.md"],
-    }).errors.join(" "),
+    }).warnings.join(" "),
     /## Summary/,
   );
   // ...but a level-1 heading is shallower than ## and DOES end the section, so
@@ -269,7 +281,7 @@ function selfTest() {
       body: completeBody.replace("- [x] `npm run verify:ui`\n", "# Appendix\n\n- [x] `npm run verify:ui`\n"),
       headRef: "codex/search-fix",
       files: ["src/components/search.tsx"],
-    }).errors.join(" "),
+    }).warnings.join(" "),
     /verify:ui/,
   );
   // Tolerant governance: a lightly reworded but still-checked item passes — the
@@ -324,8 +336,8 @@ function selfTest() {
       body: completeBody.replace("Risk: low; metadata-only validation.", "Risk: low"),
       headRef: "codex/pr-policy",
       files: [".github/workflows/pr-policy.yml"],
-    }).errors.join(" "),
-    /Risk and rollout must include/,
+    }).warnings.join(" "),
+    /Risk and rollout should include/,
   );
   assert.match(
     evaluatePullRequestPolicy({
@@ -333,7 +345,7 @@ function selfTest() {
       body: completeBody.replace("Rollback: revert the workflow commit.", "Rollback: none because this is small"),
       headRef: "codex/pr-policy",
       files: [".github/workflows/pr-policy.yml"],
-    }).errors.join(" "),
+    }).warnings.join(" "),
     /concrete `Rollback/,
   );
   assert.match(
@@ -342,7 +354,7 @@ function selfTest() {
       body: "## Summary\n\n- Useful documentation.\n\n## Verification\n\n- [ ] `npm run verify:pr-local`\n<!-- Use `Verification not run: <reason>` when blocked. -->",
       headRef: "codex/review-docs",
       files: ["docs/process-hardening.md"],
-    }).errors.join(" "),
+    }).warnings.join(" "),
     /checked result/,
   );
   assert.deepEqual(classifyPullRequestFiles(["src/app/api/search/route.ts"]), {
@@ -376,6 +388,25 @@ function selfTest() {
     }).ok,
     true,
   );
+  // Block-only contract: a completely bare body on non-clinical files raises
+  // several advisory warnings but never blocks the check.
+  const bare = evaluatePullRequestPolicy({
+    title: "x",
+    body: "",
+    headRef: "codex/whatever",
+    files: ["src/components/ui/button.tsx"],
+  });
+  assert.equal(bare.ok, true, "non-clinical PRs must never be blocked by advisory metadata gaps");
+  assert.ok(bare.warnings.length > 0, "advisory gaps should still be surfaced as warnings");
+  // ...but a clinical-risk PR with no governance section is the one hard block.
+  const clinicalBlocked = evaluatePullRequestPolicy({
+    title: "fix: adjust answer synthesis grounding",
+    body: "## Summary\n\n- Tweak synthesis.",
+    headRef: "codex/answer-fix",
+    files: ["src/lib/answer-synthesis.ts"],
+  });
+  assert.equal(clinicalBlocked.ok, false, "clinical-risk PRs missing governance must still block");
+  assert.match(clinicalBlocked.errors.join(" "), /Clinical Governance Preflight/);
   assert.equal(
     section("### Summary ###\n\n- concise summary\n\n### Verification\n\n- [x] `npm run verify:pr-local`\n", "Summary"),
     "- concise summary",