refactor(sources): migrate source-window contract tests to shared source segment helper

[BigSimmo]

Moves contract tests away from local source-marker helpers to shared sourceSegment helper and adds focused ambiguity guards.

Verification\n

• check:outstanding-issues\n- targeted tests and typecheck were run in prior worklog

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

You have reached your Codex usage limits for code reviews. You can see your limits in the Codex usage dashboard.
To continue using code reviews, add credits to your account and enable them for code reviews in your settings.

[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:51 minutes

Limit details: You’ve used all 1 included review currently available under your plan. You completed 90 included PR reviews in the past 7 days; at that activity level, included reviews refill at 1 review per hour.

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: 3bfec6a4-7484-4447-ad85-e548158b8da8

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 570740c and 24e135a.

📒 Files selected for processing (4)

• tests/audit-navigation-auth-regressions.test.ts
• tests/document-section-nav-contract.test.ts
• tests/in-page-nav-playwright-contract.test.ts
• tests/tools-search-directions-mockups.test.ts

---

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

[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 ↗︎.

[BigSimmo]

Final PR review summary

• State: PR refactor(sources): migrate source-window contract tests to shared source segment helper #2001 was externally squash-merged by the existing auto-merge workflow at 2026-08-16 12:06:26 UTC. Codex did not merge or close the PR and did not arm, disarm, pause, cancel, or modify auto-merge.
• Final PR head:24e135a183c2a40c13a7358b71315678f3f22d90
• Base at merge:570740c84bc77b1c5d36493fd1011625c354f6d2
• Squash commit on main:fd3a100b9ad0d4c806c7083d01cb3a0bed601646. Current main equals this commit.
• Branch update and merge state: the final PR head was updated by a normal merge of the latest main into the PR branch. The resulting exact head passed required CI, after which existing auto-merge created the clean squash commit above.
• Review findings: reviewed the four changed test files and the shared sourceSegment contract. No high-confidence PR-introduced P0, P1, or locally provable P2 defect was identified. The change replaces silently widening or vacuous raw indexOf slices with guarded source windows, adds diagnostic labels, and explicitly covers both dashboard universal-match render branches. No corrective code change was justified.
• Adversarial review: automated Codex review and CodeRabbit were both rate-limited. A separate manual adversarial pass was performed instead. No actionable finding emerged.
• Threads and comments: zero inline review threads. The existing Codex-limit, CodeRabbit-limit, and Supabase no-change comments were non-actionable.
• Exact-head required verification on 24e135a:Secret Scan passed; SAST passed; Static PR checks passed, including format, ledger integrity, lint, and typecheck; Safety and config checks passed; Unit coverage passed; and the required PR required aggregate passed.
• Advisory CI: UI, Lighthouse, Production UI, build, migration replay, and visual-baseline jobs were skipped by the repository’s test-only scope classification rather than reported as green.
• Local verification limitation: the connector runtime did not expose a repository checkout, so no additional local Vitest rerun was possible. The completed exact-head unit-coverage and static workflows are the decisive substitute evidence.
• Review ledger: exact-head ledger integrity passed. No new PR-specific review record was appended because the PR was externally merged before any authorized branch write; no post-merge mutation of main was made.
• Blockers: none. Residual risk is limited to the unavailable independent automated review and local rerun, with required exact-head CI fully green.

The requested closing sentence, “The PR was not merged. Final merge is left to the user.”, is not factually applicable because the existing auto-merge workflow merged PR #2001 during the active review.