Implement enquiry/contact route and routing model

[iainherd]

Goal

Create the enquiry/contact experience according to the PRD, without introducing unnecessary attack surface.

Source artefacts

• Lir_Website_PRD_v0.1-2.md §5
• Lir_Website_Compliance_Copy_Review_v0.1.md

Acceptance criteria

• Contact/enquiry route exists with clear senior tone.
• Form/routing approach is documented and minimally exposed.
• Spam protection or alternative email-routing approach is selected.
• Privacy/GDPR implications are listed before deploy.
• No secrets are client-exposed.

[iainherd]

Agent allocation

Primary profile: agent:frontend-implementer
Required reviewer profiles: agent:compliance-reviewer, agent:code-security-reviewer, agent:browser-qa-reviewer, agent:devops-deployer

Reason: Allocation reviewed after independent subagent analysis; profile set reflects primary ownership and required verification gates.

Orchestration rules:

• Morwenna/orchestrator retains final repo, PR, deployment, and closeout verification.
• Use fresh bounded subagents for implementation/review slices; do not ask child agents to ingest the full artefact set unless their issue explicitly requires it.
• Spec/brief/content/design compliance review happens before code-quality/security review.
• Subagent reports are evidence, not proof: parent must inspect diff/status and rerun relevant checks before closure.
• Spawn the named Hermes profile only for long-running independent work; otherwise use delegate_task with a self-contained, profile-specific prompt.

[iainherd]

Compliance claim references

This issue cannot close until the relevant claim IDs have an explicit status in docs/compliance/claims-register.md once #18 lands.

Relevant claim IDs: CL-002, CL-003, CL-012, CL-013, CL-017

Closeout must state: final status, exact approved/fallback wording used, owner/sign-off or exclusion reason, and agent:compliance-reviewer verdict.