A batch of twenty-eight issues in one adopting project could close in full —
every P1 included — with nothing new visible to anybody using the product.
Cost per project, hours with coverage bounds, model attribution and an
algorithm version on every stored figure: all of it verifiable through a JSON
flag, none of it required to appear on a screen.
Two of those issues exist specifically to correct what somebody believes when
they look at the admin — wall-clock is not summed effort, and figures computed
by different algorithm versions are not comparable. Satisfied in JSON, they
correct nobody.
So the rule, and the check that carries it:
README.md — a schema, a stored figure, a computed field or an API response
is not a deliverable by itself. Say which screen shows it, link the issue
that provides one, or record that it is deliberately not shown.
forgejo-issue.py — warns when the acceptance check's subject is the data
(retrievable, returned, reported, recorded) and nothing in it requires a
person to see the result.
Both tests read the `Verify:` line rather than the body. A first attempt read
the whole body and fired on 44 of 73 real open issues, because bodies say
"page" and "renders" incidentally; a warning at that rate is one nobody reads,
and it would have taken the `Verify:`-not-last warning down with it. Narrowed
to the acceptance line, it fires on 8 of the same 73 — all eight in the batch
that prompted this, none anywhere else.
A warning and not a refusal. API-only is a legitimate decision; it has to be a
decision rather than an omission.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
694b161bb1