Record deployed latency evidence and remaining bottleneck

[BigSimmo]

Summary

• Supersede the pre-deployment Codify live retrieval RPCs, reclaim dead vector indexes, unify schema health #117 update with exact post-deployment live latency measurements from merged SHA f2abf5baf3f449a1803bedef9dc107f30b70db93.
• Record the remaining shared stylesheet and JavaScript/main-thread bottlenecks without overstating the CSS improvement or field INP status.

Verification

• npm run check:outstanding-issues — passed; 18 pending requests, canonical ledger integrity passed.
• npm run format -- --log-level silent — passed.
• git diff --check — passed.
• Not run: broad local suites; this is an immutable ledger-inbox-only change and GitHub CI is authoritative.

Risk and rollout

• Risk: documentation/tracking only; no runtime behavior changes.
• Rollback: revert the two inbox requests before reconciliation.
• Provider or production effects: None. The referenced production deployment and live measurements were completed before this tracking update.

Clinical Governance Preflight

Not applicable: no clinical output, retrieval, source, privacy, data, or deployment behavior changes.

Notes

• Field INP remains explicitly unverified.

[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:24 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: 22b9d977-52e4-46ee-af79-77f29516a190

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 1ca4778 and 600787d.

📒 Files selected for processing (5)

• docs/branch-review-records/5fce9ebe2003fc7a9fa9a853fe0edd4a9e06d2191271d4042ecb50429d0636ec.record.md
• docs/outstanding-issues-inbox/821d7e63-4bf3-4af7-abfb-071f916b847c.json
• docs/outstanding-issues-inbox/a51fd616-bb58-4a1b-9009-21686eea2a84.json
• docs/outstanding-issues-inbox/e7fe0e34-3ff3-48d0-878c-2d7a7fe792f1.json
• docs/outstanding-issues-inbox/ee6875e6-62ad-4f2e-8644-6f3b7a973d87.json

---

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

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit:5ae85df6c8

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

[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 #10727 (success).

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

[BigSimmo]

Codex final review summary

• Final head:729997123905e70a619f5db1cdd4cd5a63865cfc
• Latest base:984f42c07326d7561ebb3d992a8024173c02aaaa
• Sync and merge tree: no deliberate base sync was performed. The branch is 4 commits ahead and 1 behind the latest main, but GitHub’s test merge 5e01470a49689b393bd86c74f83ad24c2800978e cleanly combines that base and final head. Auto-merge remains externally armed in squash mode and was not changed.
• Issues fixed: preserved canonical #117 as the unresolved Therapy catalogue payload and per-field safety task; cancelled the immutable request that incorrectly repurposed it; queued the verified shared CSS/JavaScript mobile-LCP bottleneck as a separate P2 issue; and corrected #117’s stale physical public/.../therapies-index.json reference to the stable runtime alias /therapy-compass-data/therapies-index.json, clearing the projected-ledger documentation-link failure.
• Dispositioned and out of scope: the actual Therapy payload/per-field card and search safety decision remains open under #117. The cross-route CSS/JavaScript performance work remains open as the separate P2 item. Field INP remains unverified. No runtime behaviour was changed.
• Independent adversarial review: CodeRabbit could not complete an independent review because the repository had reached its review limit. A distinct manual adversarial pass reviewed correctness, compatibility, scope, immutable transaction ordering, generated alias contracts, CI behaviour, security, and the complete final delta. No additional PR-scoped defect was confirmed.
• Review threads: 1 actionable P2 thread was replied to and resolved. There are 0 unresolved actionable threads.
• Decisive verification: offline request-schema, cancellation-plan, duplicate-mutation, and path-projection checks passed; the content-addressed review-record path was verified; and the final remote delta contains only six immutable inbox/review-record files. A local checkout and local npm commands were unavailable because this execution environment could not resolve github.com; exact-head GitHub CI supplied the repository gates.
• Exact-head selected/aggregate CI at 729997123905e70a619f5db1cdd4cd5a63865cfc:PR required, Static PR checks, PR policy, PR mergeability, CI, SAST, Secret Scan, Semgrep, Semgrep ingestion gate, Gitleaks, and GitGuardian all passed. Production UI, Production UI critical, build, unit coverage, Lighthouse, migration replay, safety/config, release browser matrix, and container-image jobs were skipped by the docs-only change router and are not represented as green runs.
• Advisory checks: Advisory UI and visual baselines were skipped. Supabase Preview was skipped because the branch has no associated preview database.
• Permissions and infrastructure: branch-protection rule details were not readable by the installed GitHub integration, so exact requiredness was established from the repository’s aggregate PR required gate and exact-head check topology. Local Git transport was unavailable because of DNS resolution failure. No provider-backed, production, Lighthouse, live evaluation, deployment, or release action was run.
• Residual risk: later ledger reconciliation must preserve the immutable cancellation/update ordering. The intentionally unresolved Therapy payload decision and cross-route performance work remain tracked. No other PR-scoped residual defect was identified.
• Monitoring: active monitoring continued until the final exact head had a clean latest-base test merge, green selected checks, and no actionable review threads.

The PR was not merged. Final merge is left to the user.