bdeshiandClaude Opus 5
ec6e9838f0
docs/content-model.md opens with "Engine specification". It is also where the rule lives that a leading underscore makes a file unaddressable — and the human who owns this site did not know that rule, because nothing in this repository is addressed to an author. Twelve documents named docs/ while being exclusively about building the parser is a signpost pointing at the wrong room. Naming the directory for its audience makes the gap visible instead of hiding it. docs/ is now reserved and deliberately absent: an empty docs/ is an honest statement that end-user documentation does not exist, where docs/ full of parser specs was a claim that it did. HARNESS.md stays at the root. Root holds the three entry points — README.md for a human, CLAUDE.md for an agent, HARNESS.md for whoever maintains the machine — and harness/README.md is the map of the directory, so moving the guide inside would have collided with it for nothing. Mechanical and wide: 100 path references across 24 files. Every verify.sh gate that names a doc by path, the directory lists the dangling-path and ADR-number gates scan, surface.sh's output target, the Makefile, CLAUDE.md's read order, the skill, four commands, and two Go package comments. A first pass with a shell loop silently edited only four files and the rest still said docs/; the fix was to write the file list out and check the remaining count was zero rather than trust the loop's exit status. No rule, threshold, gate or obligation moved — this is a rename, and the gates demonstrated it twice: they stayed green on the new paths, and the ADR-number gate caught ADR-0082 before the entry existed. Deferred, both on the human's call: the end-user documentation site itself, which wants its own decision about where it lives and whether its claims are gated; and moving examples/ under docs/, since demo-site is a live site root that verify.sh, the coverage test and make demo all point at, and moving it would couple a rename to a design nobody has made. 31 files, +146/-106. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
27 lines
1.4 KiB
Markdown
27 lines
1.4 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
description: Hunt speculative complexity and propose deletions
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
Read the code and find what has not earned its place. Propose removals; change nothing yet.
|
|
|
|
Look for:
|
|
- Interfaces with one implementation. Type parameters with one instantiation.
|
|
- Function parameters, struct fields, config knobs, or frontmatter keys with no real caller
|
|
or no real author using them.
|
|
- Two implementations of the same idea (parsing, path joining, slugging, date handling).
|
|
- Abstractions built ahead of their counter: a pipeline at two transforms, a resolver at one
|
|
route, an extension registry before its counter is due.
|
|
- Files and functions over the advisory sizes in `scripts/budgets.env`; nesting past 4.
|
|
- Error handling that logs and returns, or wraps without adding information.
|
|
- Tests that assert on private helpers, or that need a mock to exist.
|
|
- Dead code, commented-out code, `TODO`s older than the feature that introduced them.
|
|
- Comments that narrate control flow.
|
|
- Anything in `harness/` describing code that no longer exists — excluding `ideas/` and
|
|
`reference/`, which are never audited against the code and must not be opened here.
|
|
|
|
Report as a table: item, location, why it has not earned its place, LOC recovered if deleted,
|
|
and risk of deleting. Order by LOC recovered, descending. Recommend a top three.
|
|
|
|
Then stop. Deletions happen as their own small changes, with a go-ahead each, and each one runs
|
|
`./scripts/verify.sh`.
|