feat: D19 bounds the review loop; apply nine rulings; close Q46(a) and Q48–Q53
D19 into §3 and swept to all six destinations Pouya named: both agent briefs
(scope + severity filter), /build Phases 2–4 (non-gating questions, scope, stop
signal, two-round cap), /wrap, and CLAUDE.md (comments record decisions, not
history). Sweep verified by command, not recalled.
Rulings applied:
Q46(a) PUBLISHABLE — three §4 Offerings rows flipped; gate 1 records
[Pouya's stated basis], never [verified]. Step 5 unblocked.
Q48 closed, not site-relevant.
Q49 one §4 row, "Mediator"; read as declining Q49(b), so worksFor stays out.
Q50 DEVIATES — ships as name + slogan, not the concatenation. Flagged.
Q51 OBA sections stay; the regulator/voluntary distinction recorded.
Q52 docs/reference/deploy-credential-verification.md — 18 read-only AWS
calls, re-run rather than transcribed, access key ID redacted.
Q53 memberOf emitted on /about/'s Person node.
Two review rounds. The headline finding was this session's own: the Q53 sweep
was asserted and never run, leaving six in-scope records saying memberOf was
withheld — including §12 R10, which is read aloud every session. Round 2 then
found that round 1's simplification had put memberOf on / as well; the per-page
opt-in is restored, because Pouya's ruling turns on /about/'s visible HTML.
Also fixed: MEMBERSHIP_ORGS had orphaned BOUTIQUE's D16 JSDoc; /'s title now
derives from the constants; §7's deploy row stated and retracted three facts.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_0148NztQskLKKApP5SzAA78e
This commit is contained in:
co-authored by
Claude Opus 5
parent
77a7b410b2
commit
fd5f610982
@@ -13,6 +13,38 @@ The site this replaces contained a fictitious founder, invented matter values
|
||||
and a testimonial attributed to a person who does not exist. Your existence is
|
||||
the control that stops that recurring.
|
||||
|
||||
## Scope — D19, and it is a hard boundary
|
||||
|
||||
**In scope:**
|
||||
|
||||
- `dist/` and `src/` — what a visitor actually receives
|
||||
- the specs that direct copy: `docs/01-architecture.md`,
|
||||
`docs/03-content-spec.md`, `docs/04-seo-spec.md`, `docs/07-fees.md`
|
||||
- `AGENTS.md` **§3, §4, §7, §9, §12** — the operative sections
|
||||
|
||||
**Out of scope:**
|
||||
|
||||
- the `AGENTS.md` **Change Log**
|
||||
- the agent briefs in `.claude/agents/`, including this one
|
||||
- `AGENTS.md` prose outside the five sections named above
|
||||
- the **historical accuracy of code comments** — whether a comment's account of
|
||||
how the code got here is still true
|
||||
|
||||
A false statement in a Change Log entry gets corrected when someone notices it.
|
||||
It does not get a review pass, because **no visitor reads it.** Pouya's ruling,
|
||||
2026-08-28 (D19), on the session where most of a second review round's findings
|
||||
were defects in the first round's own fixes: *"they are defects in the record
|
||||
about the record, and that is infinite regress."*
|
||||
|
||||
**What this does not narrow, and read this carefully.** Your subject is **claims
|
||||
about Pouya, his credentials, his experience and his practice** — and one of
|
||||
those in a code comment is in scope wherever it could reach a page or mislead an
|
||||
implementer into writing one. `src/data/site.ts` and `src/data/schema.ts` carry
|
||||
the register's wording in comments *precisely because the wording is the
|
||||
compliance*; audit those exactly as you would copy. What is out of scope is a
|
||||
comment's account of **how the code got here** — which version said what, which
|
||||
review found it.
|
||||
|
||||
## Method
|
||||
|
||||
1. Read `AGENTS.md` §4 in full — the Verified table, the Forbidden table, and
|
||||
@@ -105,6 +137,17 @@ machine-readable misrepresentation is still a misrepresentation.
|
||||
A table: **claim quoted verbatim · location · verdict (VERIFIED / NOT IN
|
||||
REGISTER / FORBIDDEN) · the register line it matches, or what to do instead.**
|
||||
|
||||
### Severity filter — D19
|
||||
|
||||
Report **FORBIDDEN** and **NOT IN REGISTER** findings in full — those are the
|
||||
job, and none of them is optional. Below that line, raise a wording preference
|
||||
only if acting on it would change what ships. Pouya's ruling, 2026-08-28: *"a
|
||||
review that reports twenty things to make twenty small edits has spent more than
|
||||
it saved."*
|
||||
|
||||
This does not soften the rule above it. **A claim not in the Verified table does
|
||||
not ship**, at any count.
|
||||
|
||||
Then a single line: **PASS** — every assertion traced — or **FAIL**, with the
|
||||
count of untraceable claims.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user