docs(ci): /fr-pass advances staging → prod only (backend#1405 D6)

[LukasWodka]

The header comment on this repo's /fr-pass caller describes a transition that does not exist:

# from "FR on dev" → "Ready for staging" or "FR on staging" → "Ready for prod".

RFC-BACKEND-1405 D6 retired the dev-side review.On dev is now set automatically when the release train merges to develop, so there is no FR on dev column and nothing for /fr-pass to advance before staging. /fr-pass has exactly one gate: FR on staging → Ready for prod.

The reusable workflow this calls (tracebloc/.github, .github/workflows/fr-pass-comment.yml) has only ever implemented the staging hop, and documents it correctly at the top of the file:

# FR on staging → Ready for prod
# (D6: the dev-side review is gone — "On dev" is automatic — so /fr-pass only
# applies at staging, the single functional-review gate.)

Verified against the reusable's implementation: the only transition in its column table is "FR on staging") NEXT="Ready for prod", and its refusal message states that /fr-pass"only advances FR on staging → Ready for prod (the one functional-review gate)". So this was the comment drifting away from the code.

Comment-only. No logic, no triggers, no inputs changed.

Scope note

This stale comment is byte-identical across 14 repos, plus a differently-worded copy in the tracebloc/.github template it was copied from. A pull request cannot span repositories, so this is one of 15 PRs — the template in tracebloc/.github included, because leaving that one stale would reintroduce the drift on the next copy.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

---

Note

Low Risk
Documentation-only change to workflow header comments; no CI logic, triggers, or runtime behavior is modified.

Overview
Updates the header comments on the /fr-pass caller workflow template so they match how the shortcut actually works after RFC-BACKEND-1405 D6.

The docs now state that /fr-pass only advances FR on staging → Ready for prod (the single functional-review gate), and that On dev is automatic when the release train merges to develop—there is no FR on dev column or dev-side hop. It also notes this file is the source template copied into per-repo workflows, so outdated transition text would spread on the next copy.

No workflow triggers, jobs, reusable reference, or secrets behavior changed—comment-only.

^{Reviewed by Cursor Bugbot for commit 4606723. Bugbot is set up for automated code reviews on this repo. Configure here.}

[LukasWodka]

👋 Heads-up — Code review queue is at 36 / 30

Above the WIP limit. The team convention is to review existing PRs before opening new work.

Open PRs currently in Code review (oldest first):

• .github#121 — fix(fr-pass): exit non-zero on every refusal; stop the bot triggering itself (backend#1413) · author: @LukasWodka · no reviewer assigned
• .github#122 — fix(kanban): fail closed in the three mutators that exit 0 on failure (backend#1412) · author: @LukasWodka · no reviewer assigned
• averaging-service#263 — docs(changelog): add missing fragment for fix(kanban): an INVERTED anchor pair is unreadable, not "nothing deployed" (backend#1994) #259 · author: @divyasinghds · no reviewer assigned
• averaging-service#273 — docs(ci): /fr-pass advances staging → prod only (backend#1405 D6) · author: @LukasWodka · no reviewer assigned
• backend#1146 — docs(rfc): platform cost & autoscaling architecture · author: @saadqbal · reviewer: @LukasWodka, @saqlainsyed007
• backend#1201 — docs(rfc): Data spaces & federated dataset composition (draft) · author: @LukasWodka · reviewer: @saadqbal
• backend#1217 — docs(rfc): Dataset integrity & score reproducibility (draft) · author: @LukasWodka · reviewer: @saadqbal
• backend#1261 — RFC-BACKEND-0008: board & process reset (decision RFC — for markup) · author: @LukasWodka · reviewer: @saadqbal
• backend#1284 — docs(deploy): backend deploy runbook skeleton (#1263) · author: @LukasWodka · no reviewer assigned
• backend#1332 — feat(check-model): allow KNN/GaussianProcess on a single-edge owned dataset (#923 follow-up) · author: @divyasinghds · no reviewer assigned

Pull from review before opening new work. (This is a nudge from the kanban WIP check, not a block.)