Skip to content

docs: update llms-full - #944

Open
github-actions[bot] wants to merge 1 commit into
masterfrom
chore/update-llms-full
Open

github-actions[bot] wants to merge 1 commit into
masterfrom
chore/update-llms-full

Conversation

@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Automated refresh of website/static/llms-full.txt after docs changes on master.

Generated by the llms-full workflow (replaces the previous direct push to master, which failed under branch protection: GH013 — changes must be made through a pull request).

@vercel

vercel Bot commented Sep 29, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.

Project Deployment Actions Updated
nervos-ckb-docs Ready Ready Preview Sep 29, 2026 9:10am UTC

Request Review

@humble-little-bear

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

CKB Docs Writing Review

Summary

This PR is an automated refresh of the generated website/static/llms-full.txt aggregate, so all prose changes originate from source docs (mainly website/docs/dapp/create-token.mdx and website/docs/dapp/simple-lock.mdx). The two Behind the Scene → Behind the Scenes heading fixes and the issueToken/txHash corrections are good catches. The main editorial issue is a byte-count style inconsistency introduced in the xUDT tutorial, plus a few clarity nits in the new SetupProject instructions.

Note: any fix should be applied to the source .mdx pages, not to this generated file — otherwise the next refresh will overwrite it.

Findings

  • website/static/llms-full.txt:L1812 (also L1881): consistency: "32-byte" and "four-byte" are mixed in the same sentence, and "four-byte" appears again at L1881. Site-wide convention is always numeric ("32-byte" ×31, "20-byte", "4-byte", "64-byte"); spelled-out byte counts do not appear anywhere else in the docs. Suggest "4-byte". [confidence: high]
  • website/static/llms-full.txt:L1843: clarity: "Copy the complete **Token xUDT args** from the result into **View Custom Token**, not the \args` field inside the Lock Script JSON displayed in Issue Custom Token." is a garden path — the negated alternative arrives after three prepositional phrases. Suggest splitting: "Copy the complete Token xUDT args from the result into View Custom Token. Do not copy the `args` field inside the Lock Script JSON shown in Issue Custom Token." [confidence: high]`
  • website/static/llms-full.txt:L1840: clarity: "Keep it for this local tutorial or replace it with another Devnet account's private key." — "Keep it" is ambiguous (keep using? keep secret?). Given the Mainnet warning that follows, suggest "Use it only for this local tutorial, or replace it with another Devnet account's private key." [confidence: medium]
  • website/static/llms-full.txt:L1844: clarity: "an amount they own" is vague as transfer instructions. Suggest "an amount within the holder's balance" or "an amount up to their token balance". [confidence: medium]
  • website/static/llms-full.txt:L2189 (also L2261): consistency: "nonempty" is introduced in prose and in the new error string; the docs have no prior usage of either spelling, and general technical prose more commonly uses "non-empty". Low-stakes either way — just pick one spelling and use it in both places (currently consistent). [confidence: low]

Terminology cross-checks

  • Lock Script hash: the PR standardizes this tutorial on lowercase "Lock Script hash" (previously "Lock Script Hash"). Site-wide usage is still mixed (9 lowercase vs 6 title-case in the current aggregate). The lowercase form matches the majority and reads correctly, since only "Lock Script" is the proper noun. No action needed in this PR; worth standardizing site-wide separately.
  • extension Script(s): capital-S "extension Scripts" at L1881 matches existing site usage (19× "extension Script"). OK.
  • xUDT args, capacity, Devnet/Testnet/Mainnet, "on Testnet": all used consistently with the glossary and existing docs. OK.

Questions

  • Since llms-full.txt is generated, can you confirm editorial fixes will land in the source pages (create-token.mdx, simple-lock.mdx) and this file regenerated, rather than edited here directly?

@humble-little-bear

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Factual accuracy review — automated (ckb-docs-fact-checker)

This PR refreshes the generated website/static/llms-full.txt aggregate. Reviewed all added/modified lines against authoritative sources (nervosnetwork/rfcs master, nervosnetwork/ckb develop, the examples/** code in this repo on master, and ckb-devrel/offckb for Devnet account behavior).

Key claims verified:

  • xUDT args = issuer's 32-byte Lock Script hash + four-byte flags field 00000000 — matches RFC 0052 (rfcs/0052-extensible-udt/0052-extensible-udt.md): args: <owner lock script hash> <xUDT args> with xUDT args structured as <4-byte xUDT flags> <Variable length bytes, extension data>.
  • All-zero flags mean no extension Scripts are configured and the standard input Lock Script owner-authorization check remains enabled — matches RFC 0052: "If flags & 0x1FFFFFFF is 0, no extension data is required" and owner mode via input lock script applies "when flags & 0x20000000 is zero or flags is not present".
  • npm run start:testnet (create-token tutorial) — exists in examples/dApp/xudt/package.json on master (start:testnet: cross-env NETWORK=testnet parcel index.html); npm start remains the Devnet default with NETWORK unset.
  • pnpm dev:testnet (hash-lock tutorial) — exists in examples/dApp/simple-lock/frontend/package.json on master (dev:testnet: cross-env NEXT_PUBLIC_NETWORK=testnet next dev).
  • Prefilled Issue Custom Token key is the first pre-funded OffCKB Devnet account's private key, included in the example code — the prefilled key in examples/dApp/xudt/index.tsx (0x610917...78cd6) matches the first entry of offckb's account/account.json (AliceAccount in src/cfg/account.ts).
  • UI labels ("Issue Custom Token", "Issue Token", "Token xUDT args", "View Custom Token", "Query Issued Token") — match examples/dApp/xudt/index.tsx.
  • console.log("The transaction hash is", txHash) — now consistent with the const txHash = await signer.sendTransaction(tx); binding shown in the same snippet.

LGTM, No factual-review issues found.

This branch was successfully deployed

1 active deployment
Preview — 9715b532 Deployed Sep 29, 2026 by vercel[bot]
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant