docs(issues): reconcile 29 queued ledger requests into the canonical ledger

[BigSimmo]

Summary

This is the serialized ledger reconciliation for every request pending on main as of 9f98bbf06. It applies 29 queued inbox requests to docs/outstanding-issues.md and moves each request file to docs/outstanding-issues-inbox/applied/. The canonical ledger diff was produced solely by npm run issues:reconcile on this dedicated fresh-base branch; there are no hand edits to the ledger, and no other file is touched.

• Twenty-five requests come from the 2026-08-21 verification sweep landed by pull request docs(issues): queue 25 ledger requests from a verified sweep of open rows #2203, which checked every open row making a concrete code claim against the code on main: eleven done, twelve update and two add.
• Four requests were already queued by earlier sessions and are applied in the same transaction: the #Q5JHBJ Phase 6.2 completion update, and three additions covering the OpenAI zero-data-retention contradiction, the Docling table fixtures, and the PGRST106 migration-history alignment failure.

Net effect on the ledger: open rows fall from 71 to 61, archived rows rise to 350, and pending requests fall to zero.

Two of the applied additions are worth a reviewer's eye because they were found during the sweep rather than inherited. The first records that production carries migration version 20260820120000 (migration_history_versions_rpc) which exists nowhere in this repository, and cross-references the already-queued PGRST106 request it plausibly fixes; it carries an explicit stop rule that the reconciliation belongs in the repository and nothing may be re-applied or mark-applied on production to resolve it. The second records that an automated worktree sweep deleted an in-use worktree during that session and destroyed its uncommitted work, and proposes the three preconditions a removal should satisfy before it runs.

Verification

• npm run verify:pr-local — recognised low-risk documentation scope. All eleven selected checks completed and none failed: check:runtime, check:installed-lock-parity, format:changed, sitemap:check, docs:check-index, docs:check-inventory, docs:check-scripts, docs:check-links, check:branch-review-ledger, check:outstanding-issues and check:ledger-write-discipline. Exit code 0, captured directly rather than through a pipe.
• check:ledger-write-discipline — Ledger write discipline passed for 9f98bbf06d8a..HEAD. This is the decisive gate for a reconciliation: it proves the canonical ledger diff equals exactly the recorded reconciliation transaction, with no direct table-row editing.
• check:outstanding-issues — Ledger inbox check passed: 0 pending request(s), 438 applied. and Outstanding-issues guard passed: 411 rows (61 open, 350 archived), unique display and durable ids, collision-free allocation enabled, deprecated next-id marker ignored, no merge driver, no ids deleted from base 9f98bbf06d8a.

UI verification not run: no executable product code, route, component, style or browser behaviour is touched.

Risk and rollout

• Risk: Low, but this is the one PR class that edits the canonical ledger, so it is deliberately serialized. Before starting, the open pull request list was checked for an in-flight reconciliation and none existed. The ledger diff is machine-generated and its correctness is enforced by check:ledger-write-discipline rather than by review alone.
• Rollback: git revert this pull request. That restores the previous ledger and returns the 29 requests to pending, since request files are immutable and revert simply moves them back out of applied/.
• Provider or production effects: None. No provider was contacted by this branch. The production Supabase evidence quoted inside two of the applied requests was gathered read-only under explicit user authorization during the earlier sweep.
• RAG impact: none — no file under src/lib/rag/, no retrieval RPC, no ranking configuration, no eval harness and no golden fixture is touched.

Notes

Open pull request #2207 (claude/ledger-reconcile-stale-ui-rows) queues 22 further requests that are not on main yet and are therefore not in this transaction. Its requests overlap this sweep: it closes #0EKBGC, #43SSS0, #6K9YGQ, #D6G8TC, #TAQKCN and #ZF006G, which this reconciliation has already resolved, and it closes #SZGPAH and #4TBHS8, which this reconciliation only updated because the Chromium mockup run needed to close them was not performed here. After #2207 lands, the next reconciliation will report those overlapping requests as un-appliable and name their UUIDs; each should be cancelled with node scripts/ledger-inbox.mjs cancel <uuid> --reason "…" rather than forced. Its #97VQK5 and #VTEW3W updates remain applicable, and if its author did run the mockup spec, their #SZGPAH/#4TBHS8 closures carry evidence this sweep could not produce and should supersede the update text applied here.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

[coderabbitai]

Warning

Review limit reached

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

Your current included review allowance is based on your included PR review attempts over the past 7 days.

Next review available in:32 minutes

Limit details: You’ve used the included review currently available. Your 87 included PR review attempts over the past 7 days set your current allowance 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?

Wait for the limit to reset, then comment @coderabbitai review or push new commits to the PR.

An organization admin can change what happens after included review limits in Billing.

How do review limits work?

CodeRabbit enforces per-developer PR review limits within each organization.

For paid Pro and Pro+ reviews, CodeRabbit uses a developer's included PR review attempts over the past 7 days to set the current hourly allowance. At typical activity levels, the full plan allowance applies. Higher sustained activity can lower the allowance until earlier attempts leave the 7-day window.

Please refer docs for additional details.

Review details

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 41f463be-bb7b-4b63-b90a-4b659cb06ed2

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 10fd5fa and 4cb1742.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• docs/branch-review-records/5217a373b39b0197b4df172abe971bd0615770270470fb6c8faed38bf3d501aa.record.md

---

_{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 ↗︎.

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit:f4217ff304

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".