docs(evidence): close out retired-Agent-Desk repository product-contract item against current main and live - #99
Conversation
…act item against current main and live The backlog item 'Replace the retired Agent Desk as the repository's active product contract - README, MEMORY, package metadata, and the current plan still direct agents to rebuild the wrong homepage' (scout 2026-08-09) was already fixed and merged as PR #58 (11864a7), whose contract files are content-identical to the round-1 improve branch, and the abandoned round-1 candidate lane was closed out by PR #72 (872fd23). The item's last annotation (still-seen 2026-08-11) is stale product-checkout evidence that contradicts current origin/main. This lane re-verified every acceptance criterion against the current head (872fd23) and live (2026-08-11): README/MEMORY/package.json describe The Website Appraisal and human-reviewed delivery as the active product contract; specs 001/002 are HISTORICAL - retired, 003 SUPERSEDED, 004 CURRENT; scripts/test-product-contract.mjs is wired into npm test and rejects the old Agent Desk framings (8/8); npm run check passes and npm test passes 90/90 (headings 7/7, sitemap 6/6, worker incl. legacy /api/agent-audit 53/53, UI + AI-answer readiness 16/16, contract 8/8); live / titles 'TinyStudio - The Website Appraisal', /agent-desk titles 'TinyStudio - the retired Agent Desk', and llms.txt/offer.md mark the Agent Desk demoted. Nothing further to change.
![greptile-apps[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/867647?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nish3451 has reached the 50-credit limit for trial accounts. To continue receiving code reviews, upgrade your plan.
|
Warning Review limit reached
Next review available in: 20 minutes Enable usage-based reviews in Billing to review now. Otherwise, wait until the next included review is available. How can I continue?After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the To avoid repeated limits, reduce automatic review volume by pausing incremental auto-reviews earlier, using label-based review opt-in, excluding WIP or generated PR titles, or requesting reviews manually when the PR is ready. If your team needs uninterrupted high-volume reviews, an organization admin can enable usage-based reviews. How do review limits work?CodeRabbit enforces per-developer PR review limits for each organization. Most developers receive the normal plan review availability. For paid Pro and Pro+ PR reviews, CodeRabbit uses adaptive limits for sustained high-volume activity. When a developer's recent PR review activity reaches the 95th percentile or higher among CodeRabbit users, additional reviews become available more gradually as earlier reviews age out of the rolling window. Please refer docs for additional details. Review details⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: defaults Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro Plus Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (1)
Comment |
![chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1144995?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: bd12da82f2
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
| ### Full suite on the current head | ||
|
|
||
| - `npm run check` — "TinyStudio.io checks passed." | ||
| - `npm test` — 90/90 pass, exit 0: heading hierarchy 7/7, sitemap 6/6, worker |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
At the stated baseline, npm test reports 6 heading-hierarchy subtests and 7 sitemap subtests, not 7 and 6 respectively; docs/evidence/product-contract-round1-harvest-2026-08-11.md also records the correct 6/6 and 7/7 breakdown. Since this file is intended as a verification receipt, correct these labels so its evidence matches the test output.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nish3451 has reached the 50-credit limit for trial accounts. To continue receiving code reviews, upgrade your plan.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 299c200bdb
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
| - Source baseline: fresh `origin/main` at `872fd23` | ||
| (`docs(evidence): close out the abandoned product-contract round-1 lane | ||
| against current main (#72)`). |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Fresh commit-topology evidence shows that this receipt no longer verifies the tree it lands on: 2062535^ is 5ab84ea, not 872fd23, and that intervening commit changes the retired-host behavior and adds two worker tests. On the reviewed commit, npm test reports 92/92 with 55/55 worker tests, so update the baseline and rerun/restate the results against 5ab84ea rather than calling 872fd23 the fresh current main; this is separate from the already-reported heading/sitemap count swap.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
…and #70 go live (#104) The deploy-lag item named 2e04225 as the stuck release sha with merged PR #56 (clean /audit canonical/og:url/JSON-LD) and #70 (homepage footer attribution) unreleased. The armed fleet-release pipeline shipped current main e6f42c1 (2026-08-11T10:49:53 IST); release-state pins e6f42c1, all five public pages diff byte-identical against live, /audit serves the four clean URL strings with 200/no-Location, / serves the #70 footer line, the round also carried #100 (retired app/api hosts now name The Website Appraisal) and #99, and npm test + both required GitHub checks pass on the head.
1 participant
Closes the backlog item "Replace the retired Agent Desk as the repository's active product contract — README, MEMORY, package metadata, and the 'current plan' still direct agents to rebuild the wrong homepage" (scout 2026-08-09, risk: amber, parity-risk).
Status
The substance was already fixed and merged as PR #58 (
11864a7, "docs(contract): make the Website Appraisal the active repo truth") and the abandoned round-1 candidate lane was closed out by PR #72 (872fd23). The item's last annotation (still-seen 2026-08-11) is stale product-checkout evidence that contradicts current origin/main. This lane re-verified every acceptance criterion against the current head and live so the tracker item cannot re-open by drift.Verification (origin/main @ 872fd23 + live, 2026-08-11)
specs/004-website-appraisal/plan.mdas the current plan; MEMORY.md and package.json description name The Website Appraisal + human-reviewed desk as current, Agent Desk as retired legacy./api/agent-auditmechanics preserved.scripts/test-product-contract.mjswired intonpm test; known-bad fixtures prove it rejects the old Agent Desk framings (8/8).npm run checkpasses;npm test90/90 pass, exit 0 (headings 7/7, sitemap 6/6, worker incl. legacy /api/agent-audit 53/53, UI + AI-answer readiness 16/16, contract 8/8).Change
docs/evidence/product-contract-repository-truth-2026-08-11.md— closeout receipt (new).Nothing further to change; the item can be ticked.