`reference/content-validation-status.md` is misleading relative to the repository's actual tooling and metadata state

[yeongseon]

Summary

The published content-validation dashboard implies broader text-validation support than the repository currently implements.

Evidence

• non-tutorial docs with content_validation: 0
• the dashboard describes validation of "all documentation content, including diagrams and text content"
• the repo has validation helper scripts, but no implemented text-level content_validation inventory in document frontmatter
• the page references regeneration workflows that do not match the actual metadata state

Why this matters

The page gives readers a stronger assurance signal than the repository currently supports in practice.

Suggested direction

Align the dashboard with reality by either implementing the missing text-validation workflow or narrowing the page to the diagram/source validation that currently exists.