Put the reports, and the limits, on the README and the landing

[peopleworks]

Two releases of work had not reached the README or the landing page. Both now carry it, and one stale claim is fixed.

The stale claim

The landing said the MCP server has seven tools. It has twelve, and the five it never listed include xaf_walkthrough — the headline of 0.15.0. Now six cards covering all twelve.

The new section, and why it argues the opposite way

Every other section on that page claims we found something the reader could not see. This one says the reports are not in the repository at all:

Your reports are not in your repository. Saying so is the feature.

Reports V2 lets users design reports at run time, and those are stored as rows in a database. No tool that reads a repository can see them, this one included. An application with forty reports and none in its source is not unusual — it is what a reporting setup looks like when people actually use it.

So the answer has three shapes rather than one:

The application	What it is told
No ReportsModuleV2	"these are all of them"
Module registered, reports in source	"this list is a lower bound"
Module registered, none in source	"the true number is unknown, not zero"

The third is the common case and the one where a confident tool does real damage, so the landing quotes AGENTS.md's own wording rather than paraphrasing it — including the instruction that matters most:

The number is unknown, not zero — do not tell anyone this application has no reports.

The catalog-version caveat is named in the same section, because it is the same rule applied somewhere else: if the catalog on your machine describes 26.1 and the application declares 23.2, every framework answer says so, with both numbers.

The section closes on the claim the whole thing rests on:

A tool that never says "I cannot see that" is not more capable. It is less checkable.

Also

• A Reports entry in the landing nav, between Screens and Output — placed there because the screens section already ends on "what it refuses to claim", and this continues that thought rather than starting a new one.
• A reports bullet in the README's "What it extracts".

Checked, not assumed

Served the page and read it in a browser rather than reading the markup: the new section, its four cards, the quote block, and the rebuilt MCP grid. Nothing is left unclosed and no new CSS was introduced — every class already existed on the page. 457 tests still pass.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

https://claude.ai/code/session_01W45tzJFX3NoSrk7svtQeKT