Carry WORKFLOW.md Section 4 Into workflow-ci-contract as an Include - #1385
Merged
Conversation
Class 5 of #1317. The condensed D-guarantees catalog in the skill's references/d-guarantees.md is replaced by one include region filled from WORKFLOW.md section 4, so the skill carries the contract's own text and the condensation that #1205, #1212, #1250, and #1240 found drifting no longer exists. Section 4 names its two cross-section references by document and heading, drops the "See Section 2" from the D9 heading for a sentence naming what section 2 resolves, and ends with the sentence naming its includer, the constraints an included source carries. The eighteen SKILL.md rows the inventory lists against GOVERNANCE.md homes become pointers naming the home by document and heading, keeping only the skill's own consequence. The ledger drops the six entries for units the retired catalog and the renamed heading no longer hold. Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com>
|
ⓘ Qodo reviews are paused because your trial has ended. Ask your workspace admin to add credits to resume reviews. Manage billing |
|
Important
This repository does not receive automatic reviews because it has fewer than 10 stars. ⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml Review profile: CHILL Plan: Team Run ID: Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🟡 Changes recommended
A small grammar error in newly added WORKFLOW.md section 4 text is duplicated into the generated include, so it should be fixed before merge.
Once you've addressed the issues Copilot identified, you can request another Copilot review.
Pull request overview
This PR updates the workflow-ci-contract skill to carry WORKFLOW.md section 4 as a generated include (instead of a condensed, drift-prone catalog), and rewrites several skill text blocks to point back to the authoritative GOVERNANCE.md sections rather than restating them.
Changes:
- Replace the condensed D-guarantees catalog with an include region filled from
WORKFLOW.md > 4. Behavioral Contract: Expected Outcomes. - Update
WORKFLOW.mdsection 4 to be include-friendly (explicit cross-section references, D9 heading tweak, includer note). - Convert several
workflow-ci-contractSKILL.mdrule restatements into pointers to theirGOVERNANCE.mdhomes, and regenerate distributed skill copies + source digests.
File summaries
| File | Description |
|---|---|
| WORKFLOW.md | Makes section 4 safe to include verbatim (cross-references, D9 heading/notes, includer note). |
| reports/canonical-review.json | Updates canonical review ledger entries/digests for the touched units. |
| .agents/skills/workflow-ci-contract/SKILL.md | Replaces restatements with pointers to GOVERNANCE.md homes; updates framing for the new include model. |
| .agents/skills/workflow-ci-contract/references/d-guarantees.md | Retires the condensed catalog and adds an include region for WORKFLOW.md section 4. |
| .github/skills/workflow-ci-contract/SKILL.md | Regenerated GitHub Copilot skill distribution copy of the updated skill. |
| .github/skills/workflow-ci-contract/references/d-guarantees.md | Regenerated GitHub Copilot distribution copy of the included section 4 contract. |
| .claude-plugin/fleet-skills/skills/workflow-ci-contract/SKILL.md | Regenerated Claude plugin distribution copy of the updated skill. |
| .claude-plugin/fleet-skills/skills/workflow-ci-contract/references/d-guarantees.md | Regenerated Claude plugin distribution copy of the included section 4 contract. |
| .claude-plugin/fleet-skills/.source-digests/workflow-ci-contract | Updates the plugin source digest for the regenerated skill unit. |
Review details
- Files reviewed: 9/9 changed files
- Comments generated: 1
- Review effort level: Lite
💡 Configure MCP servers for context-aware, tailored reviews. Learn more in the docs.
This was referenced Sep 5, 2026
The third round the maintainer granted past the two-round budget, for the three surfaces the diff pass found still describing the retired catalog: skill-lifecycle's doc-packaging examples name workflow-ci-contract under both shapes it now uses, section 5 kept and section 4 included, and docs/fleet-map.md's resolution and overlap lines say the same. The ledger prune stays, with the engine's missing prune path filed as #1387. The D9 pointer says "requires" where Copilot read "applies" as needing "to", so the sentence has one reading. Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🟢 Approval recommended
The include conversion and accompanying pointer/reference updates are internally consistent, and the regenerated distributions/digests align with the updated .agents/ sources.
Review details
- Files reviewed: 14/14 changed files
- Comments generated: 0 new
- Review effort level: Lite
The fourth round the maintainer granted, for what the second diff pass and the packaging-section read found. The two spec/project-types.json workflowRef values that named the D9 heading's old slug name its current one. skill-lifecycle's kept-authority example says the skill keeps that shape for WORKFLOW.md outside section 4, since sections 1, 3, and 6 are summarized the same way section 5 is, and docs/fleet-map.md says the same. "Reached, not carried" keeps the job-graph qualifier GOVERNANCE.md carries, so a repo owning its release task is not graded as a defect. Section 4's closing paragraph is the one-sentence formula the included GOVERNANCE.md sections use, which is the shape skill-lifecycle prescribes. Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🟢 Approval recommended
The include migration and reference updates are consistent across sources and regenerated distributions, with no broken in-repo references found.
Review details
- Files reviewed: 15/15 changed files
- Comments generated: 0 new
- Review effort level: Lite
The fifth round the maintainer granted, for the one item the third diff pass found: the Style Rules pointer named GOVERNANCE.md alone, and the workflow-YAML-is-LF rule the deleted bullet carried lives in WORKFLOW.md section 2, so the pointer names both homes. Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🔵 Needs a closer look
The updated workflow-ci-contract skill text introduces (or preserves) an internally inconsistent sentence about “phase” and “graded as below” that does not match the referenced rollout doc or any criteria in the skill.
Review details
Suppressed comments (1)
Previously missed (1) — in code that hasn't changed since the last review.
.agents/skills/workflow-ci-contract/SKILL.md:18
- The last sentence claims the workflow's "phase" and that "its copy is graded as below", but this skill does not define any grading criteria below, and the referenced
docs/reusable-workflows.mdis organized by "Stage" (not "phase"). This makes the guidance internally inconsistent and points readers at terminology the source doc does not use.
- Files reviewed: 15/15 changed files
- Comments generated: 0 new
- Review effort level: Lite
Owner
Author
|
Answering the one suppressed finding from Copilot's review of ffa162c, which opened no thread.
Real and pre-existing: that sentence is unchanged by this pull request, and the same two defects are filed as #1386 items 3 and 4, the tracker this class opened for the skill's own file, from the whole-unit reads that found them first. Deferred there rather than fixed here, since the fix is a rewrite of the reached-versus-carried grading rule and not a restatement this class removes. |
This was referenced Sep 6, 2026
ptr727
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 6, 2026
…1388) Class 6 of #1317, `WORKFLOW.md` section 2 against `GOVERNANCE.md` "Workflow YAML Conventions", on the maintainer's call in this session: pointer, not include, since the include generator walks only `.agents/skills/` and an include into `WORKFLOW.md` would need an engine change first. ## What changed - **Section 2 becomes a pointer.** It keeps its heading and number, so every "section 2" reference and its slug still resolve, and its eleven condensed bullets, the twelve inventory rows against the home, become one paragraph naming `GOVERNANCE.md` "Workflow YAML Conventions" and nothing of its content. The line-endings bullet had no home in that section, its home being the `comment-and-doc-style` Skill's policy that `GOVERNANCE.md` "Documentation Style Conventions" routes to under "Line Endings", so it becomes a pointer at that route rather than a rule moved into the YAML section. The row that contradicted D7.3, the both-forms boolean comparison, goes with the bullets, and the conflict it exposed is now the home's own, on #1367 item 1 and #1369 item 35. - **The sentences that cited section 2 for a rule name the home.** The preamble's opening sentence, its audit verb, and its canonical-scope note, which used to say section 2 restates the conventions so the file reads on its own, the D9 preamble inside section 4, the D8/D9 walkthrough in 5A, and the operational bullet in section 6. The generated include in `references/d-guarantees.md` and the three distributions regenerate from the D9 sentence. - **The two homes stop claiming to be two.** `GOVERNANCE.md`'s section no longer says it and `WORKFLOW.md` keep the full rules with itself winning on overlap, and the skill's "Style Rules" points at the home and at the line-ending policy's skill instead of at section 2. - **The cut line-endings bullet's rule is retired, not moved.** "Workflow YAML is LF (Actions and Dependabot rewrite it that way)" had its only home in section 2, since the line-endings policy's operational section requires a CRLF default in both files and never exempts workflow YAML. A grant moved it into that policy, and the whole-unit reads the move owed showed its reason false under the configuration the policy prescribes: with the paired `* text=auto eol=crlf` git stores LF and checks out CRLF, so a Dependabot commit of LF bytes leaves nothing mixed, and Actions never writes a workflow file. On the maintainer's call the rule is deleted rather than carried without its reason, and the policy file is back at its `develop` text. The fleet's one CRLF config repo carries such a pin by hand, with the same reason in its comment, and that is left to the maintainer. - **The ledger records a whole-unit pass over each of the eleven units this moves**, per `local-strict-review` "The Carried-Content Pass". ## What did not change The "Release Model" overlap in the canonical-scope note stays, since it is a section 3 row set the inventory lists under that home, not this class. D9's five style guarantees in section 4 stay as written, since section 4 rows were not in this class and D9 states outcomes a workflow must meet rather than the conventions' text. `README.md`'s "Conventions" list is class 13. Two phrases the condensed bullets carried and the home does not go with them: "Lowercase, hyphen-separated" on the Filename bullet, which the inventory row already listed as drift the condensation added to a suffix-only rule, and "Grant least privilege" on the permissions bullet, which D7.2 states as the one entry point that needs the scope. The third diff pass raised the first as a rule retired without a home, and it is declined on the inventory's evidence rather than promoted into the home, since adding a case rule to `GOVERNANCE.md` is class 14's decision list. #1369 items 35 and 50 name "section 2" for a rule that now lives at the home alone, noted on that tracker rather than edited. ## Verification - `python3 scripts/build_dist.py --check`, `python3 scripts/prose_lint.py . --diff origin/develop`, `python3 scripts/repo_gate.py --check eol`, `python3 spec/validate.py`, `python3 scripts/tests/test_build_dist.py`, and markdownlint, editorconfig-checker, and cspell through `scripts/docker_lint.py`: clean. - Carried-content pass: eleven units read whole, one reviewer per unit per round, at the `fable` tier through round 10 and at the `opus` tier from round 11, when that tier stopped being reachable mid-drive, recorded in `reports/canonical-review.json`, two of them the line-endings policy sections no pass had read before, which the final diff no longer touches. Three diff passes per `local-strict-review`, one after each commit, the last recorded as the receipt. ## Read record, `introduced` over total per read Eight units in round 1, then only the units the previous round's fixes changed. Rounds 1 and 2 were the edit budget, round 3 is the read the round 2 fix owed, and rounds 4 to 6 are the maintainer's scoped grants under the stop rule, the first two answering the diff pass before them, the third and fourth answering what the grants' own reads found, the fourth a deletion, rounds 7 and 8 are the reads owed by the fix for Copilot's first round, the second push's two-round budget, and round 9 is the maintainer's fifth grant, un-enumerating the tie-break after the round 8 read found the three-section form naming no winner for a conflict with the Skill text a named section routes to, its Release Model half being #1206's own loop, and round 10 the sixth, dropping the line-endings clause the Copilot fix had added to the scope note after the round 9 read found "live in" false for a section that only routes to a Skill. The diff pass row sits in the column of the round it followed. | Read | R1 | R2 | R3 | R4 | R5 | R6 | R7 | R8 | R9 | R10 | R11 | R12 | R13 | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | WORKFLOW.md (preamble) | 1/5 | 2/4 | 0/4 | 0/2 | | | 1/2 | 1/1 | 1/1 | 0/1 | 0/1 | | | | WORKFLOW.md section 2 | 0/0 | 0/0 | | | | | | | | | 1/1 | 0/0 | | | WORKFLOW.md section 4 | 0/2 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | WORKFLOW.md section 5 | 0/7 | 0/6 | | | 0/2 | | | | | | | | | | WORKFLOW.md section 6 | 0/3 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | GOVERNANCE.md Workflow YAML Conventions | 0/1 | | | 0/2 | | | | | | | 0/3 | | | | Style Rules | 1/1 | 0/0 | | | | | | | | | | | | | The Behavioral Contract (include) | 0/5 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | AGENTS.md Where the Rules Live | | | | 0/3 | | | | | | | | | 0/5 | | line-endings.md Operational (config) repos | | | | | 2/2 | 1/1 | | | | | | | | | line-endings.md Scripts and extensionless executables | | | | | 1/5 | 0/1 | | | | | | | | | Diff pass | | | 2/2 | 2/2 | | 1/1 | | | | 1/1 | | 0/0 | 0/0 | The introduced findings, all on the pointer prose. Round 1: the Style Rules sentence said `GOVERNANCE.md` "Line Endings" keeps the line-ending policy where that subsection only routes to the `comment-and-doc-style` Skill, the same shape in section 2 and 5A, fixed as one class, and the preamble still called the document a mixture that includes code style. Round 2, both on the preamble sentences round 1 rewrote: "the `GOVERNANCE.md` section it points at" named one section where section 2 routes to two and 5C needs a third, and "pointed at rather than carried" was false because D9 carries five style guarantees. Round 3 raised four pre-existing findings and nothing introduced. The first diff pass then raised two introduced findings on surfaces no whole-unit read holds: the `AGENTS.md` "Where the Rules Live" row still said this section and `WORKFLOW.md` keep the full rules, and the two rewritten scope sentences had dropped the tie-break saying `GOVERNANCE.md` wins wherever the two overlap, narrowing the release one to section 3 while sections 3 and 4 still restate that section's bullets and D7.3 contradicts one, an added qualifier where the original had none. Both fixed in the first granted round, the tie-break restored unscoped. The second diff pass raised two more: the cut line-endings bullet, "Workflow YAML is LF", had its only home in section 2, since the line-endings policy's operational section requires a CRLF default in both files and never exempts workflow YAML while the fleet's one CRLF config repo pins its workflows to LF by hand, and the 5A sentence cited D9.5 for `.gitattributes`, which D9.5 does not name. The second grant moved the rule into that policy, its "Operational (config) repos" section stating the pin and its reason and "Scripts and extensionless executables" no longer saying the LF overrides are for POSIX-executed scripts only, and dropped the qualifier. The reads of the two policy sections that grant wrote raised three introduced findings on the granted sentences: the pin was written as a brace glob `.gitattributes` cannot expand, the operational sentence read as the only LF carve-out, and the scripts-section pointer claimed its sibling holds the POSIX-script exception. The third grant rewrote both sentences, and the re-read then showed the pin's reason itself false under the paired attribute, which the fourth grant answered by retiring the rule and returning the policy to its `develop` text, so the two policy sections are not in the final diff and the ledger's two entries for them record passes over text this branch held and no longer does. The granted round's three reads raised seven pre-existing findings and nothing introduced, the restored tie-break judged right on its own terms with the D7.3 conflict it overrules left at the home. One of round 3's four, that "keep workflows legible" mischaracterizes a section that is mostly safety rules, sits on a sentence this change re-routed, and it is classed pre-existing because the claim is #1206's own second item, filed before this change, the edit having touched only the route. The pre-existing findings, 54 in all, are filed: #1336 items 2 to 9, #1367 items 9 to 14, #1369 items 52 to 57, #1370 items 20 to 34, #1371 items 2 to 4, #1389, the tracker this class opens for the line-endings reference, items 1 to 5, and the preamble's on #1206, the open decision issue that already holds most of them, which gains the six it did not. Section 5 widened from 7 to 6 new findings on unchanged text across two reads, and the preamble from 4 to 2 to 4, the pattern #1385 measured. This pull request closes no issue. It removes two of #1206's preamble claims, the "restates them" sentence and the undrawn code-style boundary, and leaves that decision issue open. Copilot ran four rounds, one per head, with full coverage on each. Its first round raised two threads: a missing relative pronoun in two sentences, fixed in 1a8b243, and the opening sentence not naming the style home's section, answered in 1a8b243 by keeping the opening at the document rather than one section, since the round 7 read showed one named section to be one home where section 2 routes to two, and the scope note's attempt to name both drew a finding on each of the next two reads, so it names "Workflow YAML Conventions" alone as it did when rounds 3, 4, and 6 read it clean. Round 10 then raised that one-section form as omitting the line-endings home, the mirror of round 7, and it is classed pre-existing because the same sentence shape and omission stood on `develop` and #1206 already holds section 2's line endings against the overlap partition. The two readings are each right about the sentence and cannot both be satisfied by naming sections, which is the non-convergence #1385 measured, and the home question is #1206's to settle. Its second round raised two threads and one suppressed finding, all wording on sentences this change wrote, fixed in 571e504: the `GOVERNANCE.md` intro sentence split in two, section 2's "every other file" reworded, and "workflow style rules" in the opening. Round 11 read the three units those fixes moved and found one more on this change's own text, section 2's closing clause reworded earlier from a parenthetical into a "since" clause, which fixed the property its "necessary but not sufficient" claim is measured against and made the claim false, so `develop`'s parenthetical is restored verbatim and round 12 read it clean. Its third round raised no thread and two suppressed findings, both on unchanged text: the rules-map row reading as a fragment, fixed in 395024c with the reviewer's own connector, and the canonical-scope note's "(sections 3 to 6)" mislabel, answered in the pull request as byte-identical on `develop` and already #1206's item. Round 13 read the map whole and raised five more, none introduced. Its fourth round raised no thread and re-raised the "(sections 3 to 6)" mislabel alone, declined a second time on the maintainer's call, since the clause is `develop`'s own and #1206 holds both halves of it, the widened labels and the excluded section 1, where this finding would fix only the first. The fourth diff pass raised the un-enumerated tie-break as contradicting "authoritative for sections 3 to 6" two sentences earlier, the pair that stood on `develop` and that #1206 files as one paragraph giving two answers, so it is pre-existing too, and the second diff pass had asked for exactly that unscoped form. The pre-existing findings count is 44, #1206 gaining a fourth. 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) --------- Co-authored-by: Claude Fable 5.1 <noreply@anthropic.com>
ptr727
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 7, 2026
…sh the WORKFLOW.md Reshape (#1397) Closes #1205. Closes #1212. Closes #1240. Closes #1250. Closes #1267. Closes #1268. Closes #1271. Closes #1288. Closes #1305. Closes #1314. Sixteen commits, ten issues. Each was driven as its own feature pull request into `develop`, reviewed by the PR-hosted reviewers, and merged only with CI green and every finding disposed of by one of the five outcomes: fixed, declined on evidence, decided by the maintainer, deferred behind a filed issue, or fixed as a class. ## What this promotes **The one-home include mechanism and its first six classes** (#1317). `scripts/build_dist.py` gained include regions filled from a rule's home and checked by `--check` (#1378), so a Skill carries a rule's whole text without a copy that can drift. Classes 2 to 6 then converted the restatements: `agent-conduct`'s three conduct sections (#1382), `pr-review-conduct`'s five outcomes into `drive-pr` with every step-ref renamed to a heading (#1383), `backlog-burndown`'s two narrowing rows cut to the narrowing with fourteen restatements pointered (#1384), `WORKFLOW.md` section 4 into `workflow-ci-contract` (#1385), and section 2 cut to a pointer at `GOVERNANCE.md` "Workflow YAML Conventions" (#1388). **The `WORKFLOW.md` reshape** (#1311 step 14's six-pull-request sequence, now finished). The verdict clause aligned with section 5's Assessment (#1390), sections 3 and 5 carried into `workflow-ci-contract` as generated includes (#1392), 5A collapsed to a procedure and an evidence rule (#1394), and the preamble decisions settled alongside the reshape of section 4, section 6 and the YAML conventions (#1395). Section 4's two longest items shrank to their outcomes with the displaced knowledge moved rather than deleted, and section 6 now states only what each type adds, carrying no N/A list at all. **The review loop's stop rule and disposition policy** (#1330), rewriting disposal by deletion and committing the condition under which a whole-unit loop ends, which #1267 filed as missing. **The Merge Gate's bound on an out-of-diff prose finding**, with the reviewer footing recorded (#1333), and reviewer bots scoped away from the generated Skill mirrors (#1329) so a mirror's diff is never reviewed in place of its source. **The fleet label set**, declared and applied through `configure.sh` (#1334). **The review ledger and skills digest decoupled from the working tree** (#1328), so concurrent branches no longer conflict in a generated report that cannot be hand-merged. Plus one grouped Dependabot bump, `docker/setup-qemu-action` 4.2.0 to 4.3.0 (#1325). ## What is deliberately not closed `#1311`, `#1317`, `#1206`, `#1367`, `#1369`, `#1370`, `#1371`, `#1386` and `#1237` each still hold findings this work did not settle. #1317 stands at class 6 of fourteen, and #1311's step 17 comment records what the reshape filed rather than fixed. ## Owed on merge `spec/files.json` declares both edited `GOVERNANCE.md` sections at `verbatim` fidelity, so every downstream copy goes stale on this promotion and a fleet resync follows it. 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Class 5 of #1317, the d-guarantees catalog, on the maintainer's call in this session: include
WORKFLOW.mdsection 4 whole, and pointer the skill'sGOVERNANCE.mdrestatements.What changed
references/d-guarantees.mdkeeps its path and is now a title, one framing sentence, and one include region filled fromWORKFLOW.md > 4. Behavioral Contract: Expected Outcomes, so the skill carries the contract's own text and the condensation that The d-guarantees preamble describes section 4's clause convention over a catalog that uses neither label #1205, Six D4 items in the condensed catalog drop the clause that carries their meaning #1212, d-guarantees.md's D2.1 drops the step half of job/step, and fails the contract's own example #1250, and workflow-ci-contract Skill Restates D1.6's uv.lock Guard and D7.3's Unscoped Boolean Rule #1240 found drifting no longer exists. The include carries all nine D-subsections, byte for byte.WORKFLOW.mdsection 3's "Output Seam by Destination" bullet,WORKFLOW.mdsection 5B's S9), the D9 heading's "(See Section 2)" becomes a sentence naming what section 2 resolves for D9.1 and D9.2, and the section ends with the one-sentence formula naming its includer thatGOVERNANCE.md's three included sections use. The twospec/project-types.jsonworkflowRefanchors that named the D9 heading's old slug name its current one.SKILL.mdrows againstGOVERNANCE.mdhomes become pointers, each naming the home by document and heading and keeping only the skill's own consequence: "Why This Exists" no longer restates the precedence claim, "Outcomes, not bytes" and "Reached, not carried" point at "Foundational Principles" and "Hub-Hosted Tooling", the nine style bullets become "Style Rules", a pointer at "Workflow YAML Conventions" andWORKFLOW.mdsection 2, the three spine rows point at "Release Model" and "Workflow YAML Conventions", and "After Any Workflow Edit" points at "Verification Discipline" for the whole-gate rule it used to contradict, dropping the single-linter invocation.skill-lifecycle"The Doc-Packaging Pattern" names it under kept authority forWORKFLOW.mdoutside section 4 and under included content for section 4, anddocs/fleet-map.md's G9 resolution and the skill's overlap line say the same.What did not change
The spine's condensations of section 4 itself are
SKILL.md's summary underskill-lifecycle"Split bulk intoreferences/", one read from the whole text, and section 4 rows were not in the inventory.references/test-methodology.mdstays true as written. The skill's frontmatter description is untouched.docs/fleet-map.md's checked G9 roadmap row still says "guarantee catalog", declined as a record of the delivery that closed the gap at the time, the way G8's row records its own history, with the G9 detail block the file's maintenance rule names updated.Verification
python3 scripts/build_dist.py --check,python3 scripts/prose_lint.py . --diff origin/develop,python3 scripts/repo_gate.py --check eol,python3 spec/validate.py,python3 scripts/tests/test_build_dist.py, markdownlint and editorconfig-checker throughscripts/docker_lint.py: clean. Thesentence-lengthcheck on the diff flags only the included section 4 text, pre-existing sentences on touched lines, and the one-sentence include formula, every other sentence this change wrote is under the cap.fabletier, one reviewer per unit per round, recorded inreports/canonical-review.json. Four diff passes recorded perlocal-strict-review, one after each commit.Read record,
introducedover total per readEight units in round 1, then only the units the previous round's fixes changed. Rounds 1 and 2 were the budget. Rounds 4, 5, and 6 were three maintainer grants under the stop rule, each scoped to the items the preceding diff pass named. The diff pass row sits in the column of the round it followed.
The round 1 introduced findings: the style heading promised rules its pointer body no longer named, its line-ending sentence claimed "Workflow YAML is LF" from a section that does not say so, "the actionlint wrapper" named a single-linter wrapper the hub-only section never describes, the D9 sentence "keeps the conventions behind these items" was false for D9.4, and "section 4" in a rewritten sentence named no document. Round 2: the pointer's "editing a workflow" missed the composite actions the skill also fires on, the rewritten hook sentence had dropped the "for what is its own" clause that made the hook conditional, and deleting the D9 pointer left D9.2's "the suffix rules" with no antecedent, one root cause the two section 4 reads both raised. Round 2 also raised the absence of a summary under the pointer, declined as a preference against the pointer shape, with the four rules the description names each present in the include.
The grants. The first diff pass found
skill-lifecyclestill naming this skill as the kept-authority example,docs/fleet-map.mddescribing the removed shape, and the ledger's never-by-hand note against the prune, and the round 4 read of the packaging section found the closing paragraph in three sentences where that section prescribes one. The second diff pass found the D9 rename had broken twoworkflowRefanchors, the example narrowed to section 5 where sections 1, 3, and 6 are summarized the same way, and "Reached, not carried" without the job-graph qualifier that lets a repo own its release task. The third found the style pointer namingGOVERNANCE.mdalone where the LF rule lives inWORKFLOW.mdsection 2. Every whole-unit read on unchanged text widened again, section 4 going 7, 5, 7, 6, 11 with nothing introduced after round 2, and its pre-existing findings are #1369 items 23 to 51, the skill's own are #1386, and the packaging section's is #1376 item 4.Copilot ran one round with full coverage on the first head and raised one thread, a misparse of the D9 sentence, fixed in 2451e2c.
Closes on promotion: #1205, #1212, #1250, #1240
🤖 Generated with Claude Code