docs: managed-runtime guide + front-door feature refresh#2238
Conversation
Content pass following the audit (stacked on docs/audit-fixes): - NEW guides/python-runtime.md — the managed Python runtime (ADR 0094) finally has operator docs: why frozen builds need it, what routes through it (execute_code + the ADR 0092 document skills), both install paths (Settings ▸ Tools card / protoagent runtime install-python — pinned CPython 3.12.13, hash-verified, + the requirements-docs.txt baseline), the three pre-failure status surfaces, stale-baseline refresh, and the GET/POST /api/runtime/python contract. In the sidebar (Console & UI), the guides overview, and cross-linked from react-tauri-ui. - README + docs landing catch up with the product: the wizard picks an ARCHETYPE (Basic/Cowork/Project Manager/Design System Engineer or any bundle that declares one), not a 'persona preset'; the first-party plugin table adds execute_code / coder / friction / orgchart; the workflows row documents gate: human approval steps; the UI row mentions the ⌘K palette, Fleet Room, /export, and /btw; the landing gains an 'Archetypes + real documents' feature card. - ROADMAP: protobanana removed — it's a plugin, tracked in its own repo and the plugin directory, not core roadmap (roadmap.json rebuilt). - Published site: design/** excluded (internal working docs, nothing links in); plans/** deliberately KEPT — ADRs 0076/0077/0078 link into it, and the dead-link build enforces that. vitepress build clean · roadmap check in sync · docs-plugin nav regenerated, test 10 passed Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
|
Warning Review limit reached
Next review available in: 10 minutes Enable usage-based reviews in Billing to review now. Otherwise, wait until the next included review is available. How can I continue?After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the To avoid repeated limits, reduce automatic review volume by pausing incremental auto-reviews earlier, using label-based review opt-in, excluding WIP or generated PR titles, or requesting reviews manually when the PR is ready. If your team needs uninterrupted high-volume reviews, an organization admin can enable usage-based reviews. How do review limits work?CodeRabbit enforces per-developer PR review limits for each organization. Most developers receive the normal plan review availability. For paid Pro and Pro+ PR reviews, CodeRabbit uses adaptive limits for sustained high-volume activity. When a developer's recent PR review activity reaches the 95th percentile or higher among CodeRabbit users, additional reviews become available more gradually as earlier reviews age out of the rolling window. Please refer docs for additional details. Review details⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: Organization UI Review profile: ASSERTIVE Plan: Pro Plus Run ID: ⛔ Files ignored due to path filters (3)
📒 Files selected for processing (7)
✨ Finishing Touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
Removing protobanana emptied 'In progress'; roadmap.py drops empty groups and test_roadmap_staleness pins the three-section shape. The section shouldn't be empty anyway — the DS conformance structural tier + the full-token plugin theme bridge (#2072, #2225) are genuinely in flight. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
![protoreview[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/4233969?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
QA panel review — PASS
code-review-structural · head 76dd66a2cb9f · formal
[review-synthesizer completed: workflow code-review-structural:report]
Brief
Overall risk: Low. The only finding from the structural pass described a cross-file inconsistency in roadmap.json that the PR actually resolves by removing the protobanana entry. No open defects remain.
Fix-first item: N/A — no findings survive verification.
Panel disagreement: The structural pass flagged roadmap.json:39 as having an inconsistency (protobanana listed as "In progress" while ROADMAP.md and CHANGELOG.md state it left the core roadmap). The verifier correctly refuted this: the quoted protobanana entry appears on the MINUS side of the diff (lines removed), not in the PR head state. The PR removes the inconsistency, so the finding described a pre-PR state that no longer exists.
Verification changed: The verifier caught a critical error in the structural pass — it quoted the pre-PR (main branch) state of roadmap.json when assessing the PR head. This is a pattern worth noting: structural passes can misread diff hunks if they don't distinguish added vs. removed lines.
Gaps: None. The structural pass was the only engine that reviewed this PR, and its single finding was correctly identified as refuted.
[]matt's DS stream shipped both protoAgent-side issues while this PR was in flight (the staleness gate caught it — working as designed, twice in one PR). The remaining DS work lives in protoContent (bottom sheet, dense icon buttons), which the checker can't ref cross-repo, so the In-progress bullet is deliberately ref-less. Both staleness guards pass locally. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
QA panel review — PASS
code-review-structural · head 81aeb8da4a1a · formal
[review-synthesizer completed: workflow code-review-structural:report]
Review Brief: PR #2238
Overall Risk: Very low. This is a pure documentation update with no executable code, tests, or CI changes. The PR adds a new Python runtime guide, updates existing documentation, and adjusts configuration/nav data.
Fix-First Item: N/A — no defects identified.
Panel Disagreement: None — the panel found no issues to report.
Verification: Clean pass. The verifier confirmed the empty findings array is correct for this scope of change.
Gaps: The structural analysis pass was skipped per the prompt instructions. For a documentation-only PR with no executable code, this is appropriate, but worth noting for audit completeness.
[]1 participant
Follows #2236 (the audit fixes, just merged). The content tier, per operator direction:
guides/python-runtime.md— ADR 0094 finally has an operator guide: why frozen desktop builds need the managed interpreter, what routes through it (execute_code+ the ADR 0092 document skills), both install paths (pinned CPython 3.12.13, hash-verified; console card /protoagent runtime install-python), the three pre-failure status surfaces (Tools nav dot, archetype choose-time warning, actionable tool copy), stale-baseline refresh, and the/api/runtime/pythoncontract. Wired into the sidebar, guides overview, docs-plugin nav (regenerated, test green), and cross-linked from the desktop guide.execute_code/coder/friction/orgchart; workflowgate: human; ⌘K palette, Fleet Room,/export,/btw; a new "Archetypes + real documents" landing card.design/**excluded from the published site;plans/**deliberately kept — ADRs 0076–0078 link into it (the dead-link build caught my first attempt at excluding it, which is exactly the guard working).vitepress build clean ·
roadmap.py checkin sync · docs-plugin test 10 passed.🤖 Generated with Claude Code