diff --git a/docs/backlog/P3/B-0107-codeql-peer-call-dismiss-pattern-2026-04-30.md b/docs/backlog/P3/B-0107-codeql-peer-call-dismiss-pattern-2026-04-30.md
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..929b76bcb
--- /dev/null
+++ b/docs/backlog/P3/B-0107-codeql-peer-call-dismiss-pattern-2026-04-30.md
@@ -0,0 +1,88 @@
+---
+id: B-0107
+priority: P3
+status: open
+title: CodeQL `js/indirect-command-line-injection` dismissal pattern for peer-call siblings (gemini.ts, codex.ts)
+tier: factory-hygiene
+effort: S
+ask: surfaced during slice-15 PR #896 review on 2026-04-30
+created: 2026-04-30
+last_updated: 2026-04-30
+composes_with: [B-0086]
+tags: [ci-codeql, peer-call, by-design-suppression, missing-mechanism]
+---
+
+# CodeQL by-design dismissal pattern for peer-call siblings
+
+When porting `tools/peer-call/grok.sh` to TS in slice 15 (PR #896),
+CodeQL flagged `js/indirect-command-line-injection` (medium severity)
+on the `runContextCmd` shell-out. This is **by-design** — the script
+contract is "user explicitly supplies a shell command via
+`--context-cmd`"; same trust boundary as the bash original's `eval`.
+
+Resolution on PR #896: dismiss the alert via API with a 280-char
+justification:
+
+```bash
+gh api repos/Lucent-Financial-Group/Zeta/code-scanning/alerts/<N> \
+  -X PATCH \
+  -f state=dismissed \
+  -f "dismissed_reason=won't fix" \
+  -f "dismissed_comment=<280-char justification>"
+```
+
+The two sibling ports — `tools/peer-call/gemini.sh` and
+`tools/peer-call/codex.sh` — will hit the same alert when ported
+(slices 16 + 17 candidates) since they have the same `runContextCmd`
+pattern.
+
+## Two options
+
+**A — Per-PR dismissal (status quo)**
+
+- Each sibling-port PR triggers the alert + needs the same
+  dismissal API call.
+- Cost: ~30 seconds per PR.
+- Pro: explicit per-instance acknowledgment.
+- Con: repeated boilerplate; reviewer fatigue; drift risk if a
+  future sibling port subtly changes the shape.
+
+**B — Structural exclusion in `.github/codeql/codeql-config.yml`**
+
+- One-time exclusion of the rule for `tools/peer-call/*.ts`.
+- Cost: ~1 PR (small YAML change).
+- Pro: drift-resistant; no per-PR work; consistent across siblings.
+- Con: blanket suppression — if a real injection bug landed in a
+  future peer-call refactor, CodeQL wouldn't catch it.
+
+## Recommendation
+
+Option B with a tight path scope (`tools/peer-call/*.ts`) and a
+comment in the YAML referencing this row. The `runContextCmd`
+helper has a stable shape; if it ever changes form (e.g., to use
+`shell-quote` per CodeQL's recommendation), the exclusion can be
+removed in the same PR.
+
+## Acceptance criteria
+
+- `.github/codeql/codeql-config.yml` adds a CodeQL filter that
+  scopes `js/indirect-command-line-injection` to exclude
+  `tools/peer-call/*.ts`. The exact syntax should be verified
+  during implementation: CodeQL supports `query-filters` (rule-
+  scoped) and `paths-ignore` (path-scoped); per-rule + per-path
+  scoping requires combining them or using a custom suite — see
+  CodeQL docs at <https://docs.github.com/en/code-security/code-scanning/creating-an-advanced-setup-for-code-scanning/customizing-your-advanced-setup-for-code-scanning>
+  before committing the form.
+- Comment in YAML cites this row + slice 15 + by-design justification.
+- New PR for slice 16 (gemini port) does NOT raise the alert.
+
+## Composes with
+
+- **B-0086** — TS+Bun migration trajectory.
+- **PR #896** — slice 15 (peer-call/grok) where the dismissal pattern
+  first surfaced.
+
+## Effort
+
+**S (small)** — ~10 lines of YAML + commit + verify on next sibling
+PR.