Skip to content

docs(status): align hygiene-register six-week-plan prose with live 2026-03-05 plan#8551

Merged
scarmani merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
structex/misc-grok-hygiene-register
Jun 22, 2026
Merged

docs(status): align hygiene-register six-week-plan prose with live 2026-03-05 plan#8551
scarmani merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
structex/misc-grok-hygiene-register

Conversation

@scarmani

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Source

grok's single in-scope [P2] finding from the PR #8516 model review (handoff 2026-06-21T16-44-55-832Z__p2-docs-active-plan-link-fix...json, discoveredIssues[0]), deferred from that link-only-scoped PR and tracked as mission feature misc-grok-hygiene-register-prose. (grok's other 3 findings were git-verified non-defects: misread / pre-existing / redundant-test.)

Change

The "Current Focus (March 2026)" bullet in docs/status/DOCUMENTATION_HYGIENE_AND_GAP_REGISTER.md summarized the active six-week plan with stale OLD-plan framing — "first receipt quickly, parity hard-close, reliability cleanup, surface simplification, and status consolidation" — none of which appears in the live plan (docs/status/EXECUTION_NEXT_6_WEEKS_2026-03-05.md).

Rewrote the bullet to the live plan's actual priority order: closing the default product loop on main, making proof surfaces truthful by default, finishing the bounded execution operator contract, running design-partner PMF loops on the real wedges, and expanding one truthful workbench slice before a PMF decision gate. The doc's link already points at the live plan (landed in #8516); only the framing prose was stale.

The docs-site mirror (docs-site/docs/contributing/documentation-hygiene-and-gap-register.md) was regenerated via node docs-site/scripts/sync-docs.js (not hand-edited). docs/archive/** untouched.

Validation (worktree)

  • python3 scripts/check_docs_consistency.py -> all checks PASS (rc=0)
  • python3 scripts/ci/check_docs_links.py -> OK all internal markdown links and anchors resolve (rc=0)
  • python3 -m pytest tests/scripts/test_docs_site_sync_links.py -q -> 5 passed
  • make lint -> All checks passed! ; make test-smoke -> Smoke tests passed!
  • scripts/automation_pr_preflight.sh origin/main HEAD -> ok (docs-only, 2 files)

Risk / Tier

Docs-only, no code or public-API surface; the mirror is deterministic sync-docs.js output. Because the diff regenerates a docs-site/docs/** mirror, the merge gate classifies this Tier-1 (tier_1_additive_internal), not Tier-0 — budgeted for a 2-family model quorum (grok + claude).

…26-03-05 plan

The "Current Focus (March 2026)" bullet in DOCUMENTATION_HYGIENE_AND_GAP_REGISTER.md
summarized the active six-week plan with stale OLD-plan framing ("first receipt
quickly, parity hard-close, reliability cleanup, surface simplification, and status
consolidation") that does not appear anywhere in the live plan
(docs/status/EXECUTION_NEXT_6_WEEKS_2026-03-05.md). This was grok's one in-scope [P2]
finding during the PR #8516 model review, deferred from that link-only-scoped PR.

Rewrite the bullet to reflect the live plan's actual priority order: closing the
default product loop on main, making proof surfaces truthful by default, finishing
the bounded execution operator contract, running design-partner PMF loops, and
expanding one truthful workbench slice before a PMF decision gate. The doc's link
already points at the live plan (#8516); only the framing prose was stale.

The docs-site mirror was regenerated via `node docs-site/scripts/sync-docs.js`
(not hand-edited). docs/archive/** untouched.

Validation (worktree):
- python3 scripts/check_docs_consistency.py -> all checks PASS (rc=0)
- python3 scripts/ci/check_docs_links.py -> OK (rc=0)
- python3 -m pytest tests/scripts/test_docs_site_sync_links.py -q -> 5 passed
- make lint -> All checks passed! ; make test-smoke -> Smoke tests passed!

Risk: docs-only, no code/public-API surface; mirror is deterministic sync output.

Co-authored-by: factory-droid[bot] <138933559+factory-droid[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
@scarmani scarmani marked this pull request as ready for review June 22, 2026 21:13
@scarmani scarmani requested a review from an0mium as a code owner June 22, 2026 21:13
@scarmani

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

Claude independent model review

Reviewer: claude (anthropic) — independent adversarial model review via the Aragora Claude reviewer, grounded on the exact PR head.
Head: 6586b95 (6586b95), committed 2026-06-22T21:10:11Z.
PR: #8551.
Model family: claude

Verdict: PASS

Verified the change against the cited live plan. The new prose in both files now faithfully mirrors the Priority Order in docs/status/EXECUTION_NEXT_6_WEEKS_2026-03-05.md (close default loop on main → truthful proof surfaces → bounded execution operator contract → design-partner PMF loops → one workbench slice → PMF decision gate). The old wording ("first receipt quickly, parity hard-close, reliability cleanup, surface simplification, status consolidation") did not match that plan, so this is a correct staleness fix.

  • Both edited files (docs/status/... source and docs-site/docs/contributing/... mirror) receive the identical edit, so the doc-site copy stays in sync — good.
  • All referenced files exist (EXECUTION_NEXT_6_WEEKS_2026-03-05.md, NEXT_STEPS_CANONICAL.md, ACTIVE_EXECUTION_ISSUES.md, STATUS.md); no broken links introduced.

Docs-only prose alignment; no correctness, security, or regression risk.

No findings.

dogfood: yes

@scarmani

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

Grok independent model review

Reviewer: grok (xai) — independent adversarial model review via the Aragora Grok reviewer, grounded on the exact PR head.
Head: 6586b95 (6586b95), committed 2026-06-22T21:10:11Z.
PR: #8551.
Model family: grok

Verdict: PASS
No findings.

dogfood: yes

@scarmani scarmani merged commit 68a9974 into main Jun 22, 2026
74 of 77 checks passed
@scarmani scarmani deleted the structex/misc-grok-hygiene-register branch June 22, 2026 21:18
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