Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🟢 Approval recommended
Only a non-blocking documentation nit remains; no approval-blocking issues were identified.
Pull request overview
This documentation-only PR replaces stale planning and handoff history with current guidance while preserving runtime code, evidence, and active decisions.
Changes:
- Updates scope, ownership, architecture, and authoritative links.
- Corrects inventory and evaluation documentation.
- Clarifies historical research and current priorities.
File summaries
| File | Summary |
|---|---|
PLAN.md |
Current scope and maintenance guidance |
inventory/README.md |
Corrected catalog cache behavior |
ideas/README.md |
Updated research-note index |
ideas/per-user-mcp-observability.md |
Clarified historical status |
ideas/observability-r2-retention.md |
Clarified historical retention research |
ideas/architecture-explorations.md |
Consolidated experiment status |
eval/README.md |
Updated evaluation guidance |
eval/qa/README.md |
Clarified corpus lifecycle guidance |
eval/playground/README.md |
Removed stale battery count |
eval/discovery/README.md |
Clarified seed-pool provenance |
ARCHITECTURE.md |
Updated current-state framing |
.agents/TODO.md |
Simplified maintenance references |
.agents/NEXT.md |
Updated current priorities and decisions |
Review details
Suppressed comments (1)
PLAN.md:22
- This ownership sentence contradicts the map in §6:
src/server.ts/src/auth/own MCP authentication, while manifest argument validation is in the policy/executor layers andsrc/adapters/own upstream traffic. Calling all of these responsibilities “Host adapters” can send maintainers to the wrong owner; split the host-side layers from service adapters here.
Host adapters own service traffic, authentication, argument validation, and secrets.
- Files reviewed: 13/13 changed files
- Comments generated: 0
- Review effort level: Lite
💡 Add a code-review agent skill or configure MCP servers for context-aware, tailored reviews. Learn more in the docs.
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.
Summary
Coverage and preservation
The audit inventoried all 1,185 tracked Markdown and text documents.
It used 51 current guidance documents as cleanup candidates.
It preserved 1,134 evidence, generated, contract, and historical documents through explicit exclusions.
This was not a line-by-line truth review of the historical corpus.
The cleanup changes 13 documents and removes about 500 net lines.
No complete document was deleted.
Git history retains the removed duplicate guidance.
The relative Markdown file-link scan found no broken links in the current guidance group.
Three historical references remain unchanged: two quoted upstream anchors and one archived corpus reference.
The scan does not validate external URLs or Markdown heading anchors.
Verification
npm run typecheck: passed.npm test: 2,074 tests passed across 114 files.npm run build: passed.git diff --check: passed.ac1769f.Both reviewers differ from the author and orchestrator.
The reviews checked preservation and documentation contracts, not product design.
The coverage review withdrew its assumption that unchanged files were unread files.
No paid evaluation, merge, or deployment occurred for this documentation change.