Specify the coverage file shape and wire Workflow A into Workflow D (I4, I5)
- I4: added a fourth Required Page Template for wiki/script-coverage.md spelling out the exact positional shape parseCoverageTable requires (metadata line syntax, column order, station spelling, lowercase all/yes) — Workflow D described the fields but never the shape, so a compliant write could still fail every parse. Also spelled out the seven station names in Workflow D step 3 and resolved the step 4 (pinned rows are protected) vs step 5 (stale rows are removed) ambiguity for a pinned row whose concept page is gone. - I5: added Workflow A step 9, pointing any ingest that touches wiki/concepts/ at Workflow D before reporting — previously that trigger lived only inside Workflow D's own list, so an ingest run top to bottom never synced coverage and the right pane went stale silently. - log.md: added "sync" to the intent docstring's valid values (Workflow D already required it) and corrected the 2026-07-28 entry's attribution — the concept grouping lives in index.md, not in script-coverage.md itself.
This commit is contained in:
4
log.md
4
log.md
@@ -6,7 +6,7 @@ Entry format:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
## YYYY-MM-DD — <operation>
|
||||
- Intent: ingest | query | lint | maintenance
|
||||
- Intent: ingest | query | lint | maintenance | sync
|
||||
- Input: <source path / question / scope>
|
||||
- Pages changed: [[...]], [[...]]
|
||||
- Notes: <what changed, uncertainty, next steps>
|
||||
@@ -153,5 +153,5 @@ Entry format:
|
||||
- Input: first run of Workflow D, establishing `wiki/script-coverage.md`.
|
||||
- Pages created: [[script-coverage]] (coverage) — 19 rows, one per concept page.
|
||||
- Pages updated: `CLAUDE.md` (folder convention, `#coverage` tag row, Workflow D, new intent), `index.md` (new Coverage section; corrected the not-yet-ingested list — `Ideas for webinar.md` and `my theses.md` were listed under `raw/sources/` but live in `raw/notes/`, and `Agentic Engineering, explained by a 10x developer.md` was missing entirely).
|
||||
- Notes: Initial assessment is 5 covered, 4 partial, 10 absent. Eight of the ten absent are human-side or strategy-side per this file's own concept grouping; the other two — [[integration-dead-ends]] and [[leave-less-room-for-imagination]] — are machine-side, absent because the script demos the happy path and never reaches connector gating or spec ambiguity. The `ReAct` station carries no wiki concept. No concept pages were edited.
|
||||
- Notes: Initial assessment is 5 covered, 4 partial, 10 absent. Eight of the ten absent are human-side or strategy-side per the grouping in index.md; the other two — [[integration-dead-ends]] and [[leave-less-room-for-imagination]] — are machine-side, absent because the script demos the happy path and never reaches connector gating or spec ambiguity. The `ReAct` station carries no wiki concept. No concept pages were edited.
|
||||
- Next: decide whether the human-side cluster earns a station or is a deliberate cut; decide separately whether the two absent machine-side failure modes belong in the demo; pin the rows that are decided so future syncs leave them alone.
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user