mirror of
https://github.com/alirezarezvani/claude-skills.git
synced 2026-09-19 03:31:11 +08:00
8c9c4184da
Round-42 review: the "run the validator before editing" requirement lived in 10.1 and the PR body. Someone opening DESIGN.md six months from now reads neither -- and "a future editor who does not know the file exists" is the exact failure the doc names. Now a callout at the top with the command in it. Fourth time this review series has turned up a rule stated somewhere other than where the person who needs it is looking. Also sharpened what round 41 recorded about 9. The reviewer read "~700 lines of settled contract downstream of an unmeasured question" as a reason to trim 4-5 until the extraction spike reports. Worth being precise instead: a "no" on (2) does not make the promotion machinery wrong -- recurrence counting, the tier caps and the contradiction detector operate on atoms however they were produced, and none reference the extraction method. It makes them unused. Content that would need rework is worth deferring; content that would go unread is not, since deleting reviewed text to re-derive it later costs more than leaving it. Recorded as a sequencing lesson for the next spec this size rather than a call to cut. Verified: 69 checks, 0 failures; derive_counters.py --check passes. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01EM5xmJ7AmTMg31rq68BCym