Replace specifiers page breadcrumb/header with compact SpecifierToolHeader

[BigSimmo]

Motivation

• The specifier map and compare pages had large breadcrumb rows and top explanatory text that needed to be removed and replaced with a tighter, more compact header so the chrome is less noisy and easier to scan.
• The change aims to minimise or remove the small eyebrow copy at the top while keeping the page's selected/icon affordance and title accessible.

Description

• Added a compact header component SpecifierToolHeader in src/components/specifiers/specifier-ui.tsx that renders an icon + compact title row and replaces the prior multi-line breadcrumb/header block.
• Replaced the former breadcrumb + multi-line header in src/components/specifiers/specifier-map-page.tsx with SpecifierToolHeader icon={Waypoints} title="Specifier map" and removed the old small explanatory paragraph.
• Replaced the former breadcrumb + multi-line header in src/components/specifiers/specifier-compare-page.tsx with SpecifierToolHeader icon={GitCompareArrows} title="Compare specifiers" and removed the old small explanatory paragraph.
• Kept the surrounding page shell, content and safety note wiring intact; this is a focused visual/header redesign scoped to the three changed files: src/components/specifiers/specifier-ui.tsx, src/components/specifiers/specifier-map-page.tsx, and src/components/specifiers/specifier-compare-page.tsx.

Testing

• Ran the repository design/workflow sweeps with npm run workflow:flightplan -- --write-evidence and npm run workflow:design-sweep -- --write-evidence, which recorded local evidence files (succeeded).
• Started the local app with npm run ensure and validated the server came up (dev server observed and local identity returned, succeeded).
• Performed headless UI checks by visiting the pages and taking screenshots via Playwright: the script loaded http://127.0.0.1:3131/specifiers/map and http://127.0.0.1:3131/specifiers/compare?... and produced /tmp/specifier-map-mobile.png and /tmp/specifier-compare-mobile.png (succeeded).
• Ran git diff --check/local diff checks after the edits and no whitespace or check errors were reported (succeeded).

---

Codex Task

[supabase]

This pull request has been ignored for the connected project sjrfecxgysukkwxsowpy because there are no changes detected in supabase directory. You can change this behaviour in Project Integrations Settings ↗︎.

---

Preview Branches by Supabase.
Learn more about Supabase Branching ↗︎.

[coderabbitai]

Warning

Review limit reached

You’ve reached a temporary PR review limit under our Fair Usage Limits Policy.

Your recent review volume is higher than typical usage, so adaptive limits are currently applied.

Next review available in:28 minutes

Your organization has reached its usage spending cap. Adjust your spending cap in the billing tab.

How can I continue?

After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the @coderabbitai review command as a PR comment. Alternatively, push new commits to this PR.

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 configuration

Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 95aead61-b1f9-4b5c-ad16-652389b2da1a

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 75dda68 and 33f7938.

📒 Files selected for processing (5)

• docs/design-system/adoption-manifest.json
• src/components/specifiers/specifier-compare-page.tsx
• src/components/specifiers/specifier-map-page.tsx
• src/components/specifiers/specifier-ui.tsx
• tests/ui-route-coverage.spec.ts

---

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.}

[github-actions]

CI triage

CI failed on this PR. Automated classification of the 2 failed job(s):

• Static PR checks — needs investigation: inspect the failing step and uploaded diagnostics; rerun only after classifying the cause.
• PR required — needs investigation: inspect the failing step and uploaded diagnostics; rerun only after classifying the cause.

Compared with main CI run #9671 (failure).

Classification is evidence routing, not permission to ignore a failure. Exact quarantined Playwright identities remain governed by the flake ledger.

[BigSimmo]

Unblock snapshot (PR #1809)

• PR head:33f793805cc9cd4bc8a231f599a3b99f75bd3c76 on codex/remove-breadcrumbs-and-redesign-text
• Ahead/behind vs origin/main:0 ahead? after sync: local branch is 4 ahead, 0 behind.
• Remote mergeability:mergeable=MERGEABLE, mergeStateStatus=BLOCKED
• Merge-tree vs origin/main: clean (no content conflicts)

Blockers fixed/dispositioned

• Real blocker on this tip was a design-system legacy tap regression from src/components/specifiers/specifier-ui.tsx (legacyTapClasses increased to 1 in Static PR checks).
• Fixed by replacing remaining size-11 usage with size-12, plus min-h-tap -> min-h-12 updates already present in this PR’s change.
• Per unblock protocol, performed one sync merge main and resolved a generated-design manifest conflict by taking main’s queue path and keeping PR notes (no unresolved conflict remains).
• Ran focused gate: npm run check:design-system-contract (passes, including design-system adoption and design-sync contract checks).

Required checks

• PR required checks currently re-running after this head push:
  • Build, Safety and config checks, Static PR checks, PR required pending/in progress at snapshot
  • PR policy, Change scope, Gitleaks already passing

Blocking review threads

• No unresolved review threads/threads for merge or required CI were found at snapshot.

Residual risks

• Auto-merge is enabled but still blocked because required CI is running on the new head; merge should clear once checks pass.
• Continue monitoring required checks; if Static PR checks or PR required fail, address only the concrete blocker in smallest scope.