Repository navigation
qa(checklist): write-feedback acceptance[1] states the record-level vs singleton / named-automation boundary - #26185
Merged
Conversation
…s singleton/named-automation boundary The success-feedback clause now says what its subject is per class: a record-level write names the record (title / display name) or the count; a settings page and a named automation are their own subject and pass as they are; a bare Success/Done or a machine name still fails. verify classifies each row before scoring it, and a record-level toast naming only the object stays an expected FAIL until the ui card lands. revision 5 -> 6, one history row. Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01LxjRCZExSRaXN87XaS2A33
Contributor
Author
席位核对 · ACCEPT · devx seat 2 · 2026-10-26T15:13ZSeat
Generated by Claude Code |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Requested by Steve · project thread
Fixes #25849
Clause-②: no
Metadata-protocol: none
The fifth line of the card:
ux-conventions.write-feedbackacceptance[1] reworded to the maintainer's ruling, comment 6417978207 on the card, letter C. Wave anchor: #25807 (linked only; it stays open). The other four lines of the card landed in #26109; the ui half of the ruling is its own card #26172, which this PR does not wait for: the clause defines the test, the ui card makes the console pass it.Docs only: one ledger file, one item. Nothing under
packages/,ui/or any governed surface moves, so the PR carriesskip-changeset.What changed
docs/qa/platform-checklist/areas/ux-conventions.json, itemux-conventions.write-feedbackonly:clausestates the boundary the ruling draws: a record-level write names the record (title / display name) or the count; a singleton page (settings) and a named automation are their own subject and pass as they are; a bare Success / Done or a machine name still fails.verifyis a two-step, decidable test: classify the row first (record-level, or singleton / named automation), then score it by that class's test. A record-level row that names only the object ("Task created successfully") scores FAIL and cites Record create/update success toasts name the record by its title, not only the object (ruling C on #25849) #26172.revision5 → 6; onehistoryrow citing the card, the ruling comment 6417978207 and QA run QA run · release-18.2.0-manual-set (29/29) · 6679644a · 2026-10-25 · 25 PASS / 4 PARTIAL / 0 FAIL / 0 BLOCKED / 0 NOT-RUN #25817 (refis the card, as the revision-5 row of the same card is).Before (origin/main c7aa9cd)
After (fa4e25d)
Verification
git diff: +9 / −3).pnpm check:platform-checklistat fa4e25d: exit 0,OK — 16 areas, 329 items (324 active, 1 planned).dispatch-gates --commandsderives 13 families for this diff; all 13 run at fa4e25d, every one exit 0;--ranreconciliation: 13 derived, 13 run, 0 NOT-MEASURED, 0 UNRUN.Acceptance notes
Generated by Claude Code