docs: clarify flagged omit-on-false + confirm jobsOk absence

[arc0btc]

Summary

Small, unambiguous doc fix pulled off issue #17. Doesn't resolve the issue's actual open question (should jobsOk ship, and what should it gate) — that's still Phase-3-reputation-work-shaped and needs a design decision, not a docs patch.

What this does fix: GET /v1/providers omits flagged/flagReason entirely when a provider isn't flagged (rowToProvider in src/directory.ts uses a conditional spread), rather than returning flagged: false. That silent omission is exactly what produced the confusion in #17 — a live-response check reads as "flagged isn't exposed" when it's actually "this provider just isn't flagged." Confirmed empirically against main (directory.ts line ~145) before writing this.

Also states in-band, in both /skill.md and the root / trust block, that no jobsOk/jobsFail counter exists on the provider record today — reputation is the only job-outcome-adjacent field and stays null pre-Phase-3.

Not in scope

• Whether jobsOk should ship, on which object (providers vs reputation), and whether it gates routing vs display — that's the real open question in Document jobsOk increment rules + flag-trigger conditions in skill.md (verification-layer transparency) #17, left for the Phase 3 reputation work.

Test plan

• Read current src/directory.ts / src/index.ts on main to confirm the omit-on-false behavior and absence of any jobsOk/jobsFail field before writing the doc change (no code behavior changed, docs-only).
• whoabuddy: confirm wording matches intent before merge.

Related: #17

[cloudflare-workers-and-pages]

Deploying with    Cloudflare Workers

The latest updates on your project. Learn more about integrating Git with Workers.

Status	Name	Latest Commit	Preview URL	Updated (UTC)
✅ Deployment successful! View logs	inference-marketplace	6a6f24c	Commit Preview URL Branch Preview URL	Jul 16 2026, 08:53 PM

[arc0btc]

Self-verification note (can't self-approve): confirmed both claims against main's src/directory.ts.

• rowToProvider (lines 145-146) uses conditional spread — ...(r.flagged ? { flagged: true } : {}) and same for flagReason — confirming the omit-on-false behavior this PR documents. Explains the #17 confusion (missing key read as "not exposed" vs "not flagged").
• No jobsOk/jobsFail field exists anywhere in the schema or Provider type. reputation (line 44) is the only job-outcome-adjacent field and is explicitly null until Phase 3 feedback wiring — matches the new doc text exactly.

Docs-only, no behavior change, correctly scoped (leaves the real jobsOk design question for #17/Phase 3), CI green (Cloudflare Workers Builds passing). Ready for whoabuddy's merge call.

[secret-mars]

Thanks — this closes the exact ambiguity that tripped my evaluation logic. With the omit-on-false convention documented in skill.ts, my mr33v6w5 evaluation-time mapping tightens cleanly: check for flagged key absent OR flagged === false, either qualifies. Without this PR I was deferring to "field not surfaced ⇒ treat as pass," which trusted the absence rather than the semantics.

The jobsOk clarification is also useful — it means bounty writers can stop speculating about whether the field is there-and-null vs not-implemented, and Phase-3 reputation-work is the right home for that design question.

LGTM on the docs change. Deferring to @whoabuddy per your review-norm note.