[atlas-apex]

Summary

A short, product-first README: about 590 words of prose against 2,683 total words before. Nothing is deleted from the project; detail moves to docs/.

Changes

• New headline, 3 bullets, one Mermaid diagram, one quick start block, a contents list.
• Comparison table cut to 5 rows; the rest is in docs/whats-inside.md.
• Exact component counts removed.
• Tools table simplified; dated evidence stays in docs/harnesses/.
• New docs/badges.md and docs/status-band.md.
• Adds the AgDR and ORBIT line. Both contributor sections stay.
• Owner decision 2026-10-31: the README drops the "built for Claude Code" tagline. docs/harnesses/README.md and docs/conformance-ci.md record it. Other files change in a later pass.
• A marked spot is left for a real demo GIF; no image is faked.

Testing

Docs only. Links checked against real files. No dashes, no paid mention, no new security claim.

Refs #1932

Glossary

Term	Definition
Ops repo	The fork that holds the rules and the project registry.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

[atlas-apex]

CHANGES REQUESTED. Two blocking findings stay open. One is lost content. One is a false statement in two durable docs. Both fixes are small. Apply them, then ask for a delta re-review. The rest of the rewrite is good: links resolve, contributor credits are unchanged, and no paid or cloud text was added.

Code Review: PR #1933

Commit: ec6b41d0bd8c65045df7eabe385372662514ed75
Scope: Full

Summary

The PR replaces the 2,683-word README with a short product page. It moves detail to docs/whats-inside.md, new docs/badges.md, new docs/status-band.md, and docs/harnesses/README.md. Most removed sections have a home in docs/. Three statements from the install and adapter text have no home. The PR also removes the last two "for Claude Code" statements from the README, but the harness docs still say that the tagline stays.

Where each removed section went:

Removed README section	Home at this commit	Result
AI can build quickly	New README intro	Pitch lines partly dropped. See Suggestions.
What is inside	docs/whats-inside.md	Kept
Marketing site note	docs/whats-inside.md:10	Kept
AGENTS.md note	README Further reading	Kept, shorter
Quick Start: one command	docs/getting-started.md Step 1	Two install event statements lost. See Finding 1.
Alternative: fork and go, steps 1 to 6	docs/getting-started.md, docs/multi-project.md	Steps kept. Adapter note lost. See Finding 1.
Status band	docs/status-band.md	Kept
Using another AI coding tool	docs/harnesses/README.md:25-34,59, docs/getting-started.md:15	Kept
Roles, workflows and templates	docs/whats-inside.md:77-176	Kept
Badges	docs/badges.md	Kept
Customization	docs/getting-started.md:479	Kept

Acceptance Criteria

Issue	Criterion	Status	Evidence
#1932	The README has about 700 words, a contents list, one Mermaid diagram and one quick start block.	Met	645 words before ## Contributors, by wc -w. 541 words without the header, code and comment. Contents at README.md:45. Diagram at README.md:35. Quick start block at README.md:81.
#1932	Each removed section exists in docs/, and the README links to it.	Not met	Sections exist and the README links them. Three statements exist in no doc. See Finding 1.
#1932	Both contributor sections stay.	Met	Zero avatar lines changed in the README diff. Both sections are at README.md:136 and README.md:156.
#1932	No exact component counts, no paid tier mention, no new security claim, no invented number.	Met	The word scan found no paid, pricing, cloud, or hosted text. The README has no component count. "Shell hooks block unsafe actions" is base text.
#1932	Plain English. No em or en dashes.	Met	The byte scan found zero dashes in README.md, docs/badges.md, and docs/status-band.md. The added lines in the two edited docs have none.

Checklist Results

• Architecture & Design: N/A. The diff has no code.
• Code Quality: N/A. The diff has no code.
• Testing: N/A. The diff has no code or test. The PR body states that it is docs only.
• Security: N/A for code. No secret was added. Finding 1 covers a dropped privacy statement as lost content.
• Performance: N/A. The diff has no code.
• PR Description & Glossary: ✅ Summary, ticket link, and Glossary are present.
• Summary Bullet Narrative: ✅ The Summary is prose and it states the what and the why.
• Technical Decisions (AgDR): N/A. The PR makes no technical decision. Finding 2 covers the product decision on the headline.
• Adopter Handbooks: ✅ The public and private general handbooks are advisory and have no finding. Architecture and language handbooks do not apply to this diff.
• Fallow Static Analysis (JS/TS): N/A. The diff has no JS or TS file.

Issues Found

Finding 1 (blocking, kind 4 and acceptance criterion 2): three statements are lost. Basis: Observed.

The base README had these statements. They exist in no file under docs/ at this commit:

1. Base README.md:103-104: the install event "never holds a repo, organisation, user name, path or code." docs/getting-started.md:63-66 lists the four fields, but it does not give this limit. This is the privacy promise for the event.
2. Base README.md:105: "The CLI prints a notice on first run." docs/getting-started.md does not state this.
3. Base README.md:113-115: users of opencode, pi, or Codex install the adapter before the configuration steps, and each step has a manual file option. The setup guides give the manual steps, but they do not give this order.

Statements 1 and 2 are correct at this commit. bin/_lib-telemetry.sh:28 prints the same limit, and telemetry_notice_once shows it one time. Only the durable doc text is gone.

Fix: add statements 1 and 2 after docs/getting-started.md:66. Add statement 3 to the fork section of docs/getting-started.md.

Finding 2 (blocking, kind 3): the harness docs become false about the tagline. Basis: Observed.

The base README had two "for Claude Code" statements: the badge at base README.md:14 and the note at base README.md:69. The PR removes both. The README at this commit has zero matches for "for Claude Code". The new headline does not name a tool.

After this merge, these lines are false or have no support:

• docs/harnesses/README.md:15-17: "The primary tagline remains "for Claude Code."" and "The headline needs a separate product decision before it changes."
• docs/harnesses/README.md:72: "The headline stays "for Claude Code"".
• docs/harnesses/README.md:78: the flip "remains pending", and "the framework keeps the Claude-Code tagline".
• docs/conformance-ci.md:50: the tagline decision "stays a separate, deliberate, coordinated call."

Issue #1932 records no such decision, and it has no comments. The base hero line also did not name Claude Code, so the docs were already loose. This PR removes the two statements that gave them support. It also edits docs/harnesses/README.md two lines above the Positioning note.

Fix: the owner picks one option.

• Option A: keep the "built for Claude Code" badge and one "Built for Claude Code first" line in the README.
• Option B: record the product decision, and update the four places above in this PR. The site and channel steps in docs/harnesses/README.md:78 then need a follow-up.

Suggestions

• suggestion: Four base statements have no home in docs/: "There is no service to run and no hosted lock-in", "It requires no runtime or service", the stack history at base README.md:36-37, and the closing line "Built with real-world experience shipping software with Claude Code." The new intro covers part of the first two. These lines are pitch text, so I did not block. The PR body says that nothing is deleted. Either move the lines to docs/whats-inside.md, or state that the cut is deliberate.
• suggestion: The "no sudo" comment on the base install line is in no doc. Add it to docs/getting-started.md:38 if the statement is still correct.
• suggestion: "The miss becomes a rule" reads as automatic. The real path is /codify-rule, which needs operator approval on each rule. Consider a link to that skill or to docs/knowledge-base.md.
• nit: docs/whats-inside.md still states 55 hooks and 68 skills. The base README stated 60 and 69. This tree has 70 skill folders. The gap is pre-existing. The page is now the only place with counts, so a follow-up ticket is useful.
• nit: Issue #1932 says that the base README had about 2,400 words. The measured total is 2,683, which matches the PR body.

Validation

CI, one read of the check list for this PR head:

• Pass: hook test suite, markdownlint-cli2, check, records-lint, report, tier, Verify Ticket ID, CodeQL, Analyze (actions).
• Skipped: conformance, nightly-failure, hook tests matrix.

Checks in the PR worktree at the reviewed commit:

• I read the head README, the two new docs, the two edited docs, docs/getting-started.md, docs/harnesses/README.md, and bin/_lib-telemetry.sh in full. I read the base README to its contributor list, and the diff hunks after that point. I read docs/multi-project.md to line 793 and its later headings.
• Relative links: every README target exists, including the four adapter scripts. plugins/apexyard-status/README.md exists.
• Anchors: the contents list matches the headings. docs/whats-inside.md has #marketing-site, #more-ways-apexyard-differs, and #roles.
• Inbound links: a repo search found no link to a removed root README anchor. The README.md#rebrand-trigger links point to the harness page.
• External links: agdr.dev and orbitspec.dev returned HTTP 200. me2resh/apexyard-site is a public repo.
• docs/multi-project.md has the "Directory layout", "Daily workflow", and "FAQ" sections that the README names.
• /handover offers the badge: docs/multi-project.md:825, step 8.6.

Limits:

• Unverified: the Mermaid diagram was not rendered. The syntax reads as valid.
• I did not run the hook suite, because CI owns it and the diff has no code.
• The search for lost statements used targeted text searches in docs/. The search covers the statements listed above. It does not prove that each removed word has a copy.

Verdict

CHANGES REQUESTED

Acceptance criterion 2 is Not met, because three statements are lost from the project docs. The PR also makes durable docs false about the tagline. No approval marker was written. After both fixes, request a delta re-review.

---

🤖 Reviewed by Rex (Code Reviewer Agent)
📌 Reviewed commit: ec6b41d0bd8c65045df7eabe385372662514ed75

[atlas-apex]

CHANGES REQUESTED. One blocking finding stays open. It needs a one-sentence change in docs/conformance-ci.md:50. Finding 1 is resolved. Finding 2 is partly resolved. Apply the fix, then ask for a delta re-review. No approval marker was written.

Code Review: PR #1933

Commit: fe73ae9cc51f94cf727ee28c922edfb058611ba5
Scope: Delta re-review, ec6b41d0bd8c65045df7eabe385372662514ed75..fe73ae9cc51f94cf727ee28c922edfb058611ba5. Review round 2.

Summary

The prior review is review ID 5721496508, at ec6b41d0. I read its body from the forge by ID. The delta has two commits, and it changes docs/getting-started.md, docs/harnesses/README.md, and docs/conformance-ci.md. The README did not change. The PR has no merge commit and no rebase. ec6b41d0 is an ancestor of the head.

The delta restores all three lost statements. It records the tagline decision and updates the four stale lines. One updated line states a wider scope than the decision record.

Issue	Criterion	Status	Evidence
#1932	The README has about 700 words, a contents list, one Mermaid diagram and one quick start block.	Met	The delta does not touch the README. Prior evidence in review 5721496508 stands.
#1932	Each removed section exists in docs/, and the README links to it.	Met	The three lost statements are at docs/getting-started.md:65, :67 and :107. The four pitch lines stay advisory. See Suggestions.
#1932	Both contributor sections stay.	Met	The delta does not touch the README.
#1932	No exact component counts, no paid tier mention, no new security claim, no invented number.	Met	I read the delta. It adds none of these.
#1932	Plain English. No em or en dashes.	Met	I read each added line in the delta. None has a dash.

Checklist Results

• Architecture & Design, Code Quality, Testing, Performance: N/A. The delta has no code.
• Security: N/A for code. Finding 1 restored the privacy statement. No secret was added.
• PR Description & Glossary: ✅ Summary, ticket link and Glossary are present. See Suggestions for a stale body.
• Summary Bullet Narrative: ✅ Same result as review 5721496508. The delta does not change the Summary.
• Technical Decisions (AgDR): N/A. The tagline choice is a product decision. The delta makes no technical decision.
• Adopter Handbooks: ✅ Same result as review 5721496508. The delta is docs text only, so no new handbook applies.
• Fallow Static Analysis (JS/TS): N/A. The delta has no JS or TS file.

Issues Found

Finding 1 (prior, blocking): resolved. Basis: Observed.

1. docs/getting-started.md:65 has "It never holds a repo, organisation, user name, path or code." bin/_lib-telemetry.sh:28 prints the same limit.
2. docs/getting-started.md:67 has "The CLI prints a notice on first run." telemetry_notice_once at bin/_lib-telemetry.sh:22 supports it.
3. docs/getting-started.md:107 gives the adapter order in the fork section. The new step words fit the new page.

Finding 2 (prior, blocking): partly resolved. Open part is below. Basis: Observed.

The stale "tagline remains" and "remains pending" text is gone from all four places. Issue #1932 now has a decision record in comment 6539857783. docs/harnesses/README.md:82 matches that record: the README drops the tagline, and other files change in a later pass.

Finding 3 (blocking, kind 3, open part of Finding 2): docs/conformance-ci.md:50 states a wider decision than the record. Basis: Observed.

The record says: drop the tagline "from the README". "It" then states agent-agnostic positioning. docs/conformance-ci.md:50 says: "Owner decision 2026-10-31: the framework is agent agnostic and drops the "built for Claude Code" tagline". That line names the framework, not the README. The commit that scoped the decision to the README did not change this file.

Two durable docs now disagree on the scope of one decision. docs/harnesses/README.md:82 says that other files change later. docs/conformance-ci.md:50 has no such limit, and a reader can conclude that the framework-wide change is complete. It is not. At this head, CLAUDE.md:1 reads "A Multi-Project Forge for Claude Code", and 159 Part of [ApexYard] footer lines read "framework for Claude Code".

One fact limits this finding. The exact phrase "built for Claude Code" exists only in the decision notes at this head. The base harness page gave the tagline as "for Claude Code", and that form remains.

Fix: replace the sentence in docs/conformance-ci.md:50 with this text.

Owner decision 2026-10-31: the README drops the "built for Claude Code" tagline. It states agent-agnostic positioning, with Claude Code as the default driver (see docs/harnesses/README.md).

In the same commit, align docs/harnesses/README.md:15-16 and :73-74. These lines have the same wider wording, but line 82 of the same page gives the scope. Use this text: drop the "built for Claude Code" tagline from the README. The README states agent-agnostic positioning. This also removes the tension with the last sentence of line 82, which says not to make a blanket claim.

Item for the human approver (not blocking). Basis: Unverified.

I could not verify the owner decision from the forge. The account atlas-apex wrote comment 6539857783 at 2026-10-31T06:02:35Z. No comment from me2resh exists on the issue. Commit b3e61658 cited the decision at 05:51:48Z, before the comment existed. atlas-apex is the usual posting account for this repo, so this is not evidence of a false record. The docs state "Owner decision" in three places. Please confirm the decision and its README scope when you approve this PR.

Suggestions

• suggestion: The PR body does not state the tagline decision or the edits to docs/getting-started.md, docs/conformance-ci.md and docs/harnesses/README.md. The approver reads that body. Add one line for each. Link comment 6539857783.
• suggestion: docs/harnesses/README.md cites no source for the decision. Add me2resh/apexyard#1932 to line 82.
• suggestion: docs/getting-started.md:107 says "Install your tool's adapter", but it has no link. Link docs/harnesses/README.md.
• nit: docs/getting-started.md:107 keeps "Each step also gives a manual file option". On the base README, that sentence referred to /setup and /handover. On this page, Step 2 and Step 3 are already manual file steps, so "also" has no referent. Step 2 also omits the copy command, which is at docs/multi-project.md:98. Replacement: "Step 2 and Step 3 are file edits, so they need no skill. See docs/multi-project.md for the onboarding.yaml copy step."
• Follow-up: file a ticket for the later pass that docs/harnesses/README.md:82 names. It covers CLAUDE.md:1, the agent footers, the marketplace descriptions, the site, and the channels.

Prior suggestions, all untouched by the delta:

• The four pitch statements stay absent from docs/, and the PR body still says that nothing is deleted.
• The "no sudo" comment stays absent from docs/getting-started.md.
• "The miss becomes a rule" stays as written.
• The docs/whats-inside.md counts stay stale.
• The word count in issue #1932 stays at about 2,400.

Validation

Current checks at fe73ae9c:

• CI, one read of the check list for this PR. Pass: hook test suite, markdownlint-cli2, check, records-lint, report, tier, Verify Ticket ID, CodeQL, Analyze (actions). Skipped: conformance, nightly-failure, hook tests matrix.
• I read the full delta. I read docs/getting-started.md in full at the head.
• A text search of the head in *.md, *.yaml, *.yml, *.json and *.sh files for tagline terms found the lines cited above. It found no other stale "remains" text outside AgDR and changelog history. docs/agdr/AgDR-0095-conformance-ci-badge.md:59 says "still undecided", and it is a dated record.
• The Rebrand trigger heading stays, so the links from the Codex, opencode, pi and conformance pages resolve.
• I read base README.md:100-115 and :148-191 against the restored text.
• I fetched the issue body and comments, and the comment metadata by ID.

Limits:

• The owner decision is Unverified, as stated above.
• I ran no test, because the delta has no code and CI owns the suite.
• Prior evidence from review 5721496508 covers the README. I did not repeat those link, anchor and word count checks.
• The Mermaid diagram stays unrendered.

Verdict

CHANGES REQUESTED

docs/conformance-ci.md:50 attributes a framework-wide change to a decision that names the README. It also conflicts with docs/harnesses/README.md:82. That is a kind 3 fault in a durable doc's stated evidence. All acceptance criteria are Met. After the fix, request a delta re-review. The two-round cap does not stop a re-review of a blocking fix.

---

🤖 Reviewed by Rex (Code Reviewer Agent)
📌 Reviewed commit: fe73ae9cc51f94cf727ee28c922edfb058611ba5

[atlas-apex]

APPROVED. The open blocking finding is resolved. The next action is the human approval. The approver must also confirm the owner decision, as the item in Issues Found states.

Code Review: PR #1933

Commit: dea57dbcc0cfa55056f6dad059686b5249b6e033
Scope: Delta re-review, fe73ae9cc51f94cf727ee28c922edfb058611ba5..dea57dbcc0cfa55056f6dad059686b5249b6e033. Review round 3, for the fix of a blocking finding.

Summary

The prior review is review ID 5721581257, at fe73ae9c. The delta is one commit, and its only parent is fe73ae9c. It has no merge and no rebase. It changes three lines of text in docs/conformance-ci.md and docs/harnesses/README.md. This review checks the open finding only, as the orchestrator instructed.

All three places now scope the tagline decision to the README. The PR body records the decision.

Acceptance criteria of #1932: the delta does not touch README.md, so the prior results stand. All five criteria stay Met, with the evidence in review 5721581257. Issue #1932 has one comment, the decision record, and it does not change a criterion. The added lines have no em or en dash, no component count, no paid tier mention and no new security claim.

Checklist Results

• Architecture & Design, Code Quality, Testing, Performance: N/A. The delta has no code.
• Security: N/A. The delta is docs text. It adds no secret.
• PR Description & Glossary: ✅ The body states the decision, the two files that record it, and the later pass. The Glossary stays.
• Summary Bullet Narrative: ✅ Same result as review 5721581257 for the unchanged bullets.
• Technical Decisions (AgDR): N/A. The tagline choice is a product decision. The delta makes no technical decision.
• Adopter Handbooks: ✅ Same result as review 5721581257. The delta is docs text only, so no new handbook applies.
• Fallow Static Analysis (JS/TS): N/A. The delta has no JS or TS file.

Issues Found

Finding 3 (prior, blocking): resolved. Basis: Observed.

1. docs/conformance-ci.md:50 now reads "the README drops the "built for Claude Code" tagline".
2. docs/harnesses/README.md:15-16 has the same scope.
3. docs/harnesses/README.md:73-74 has the same scope.
4. docs/harnesses/README.md:82 already had this scope, so the two durable docs now agree.
5. The decision record, comment 6539857783, says "from the README". All three places match it.
6. A search of README.md at the head finds no "for Claude Code" text, so "drops" is true.

Item for the human approver (not blocking). Basis: Unverified.

The orchestrator reports that the owner confirmed the decision on 2026-10-31. I did not see that confirmation. The forge has no comment from me2resh on #1932. The record is comment 6539857783, by atlas-apex. Please confirm the decision and its README scope when you approve this PR.

New finding (advisory, follow-up). Basis: Observed.

nit: The new text says that the README "says the framework is agent agnostic". The README does not use those words. README.md says "Claude Code is the default driver. Other coding tools can use the same rules through a small adapter." That is a fair summary, so the text is not false, and this does not block. The wording also differs from the decision record and from docs/harnesses/README.md:82, which say that the README states agent-agnostic positioning. Replacement for the three places: "It states agent-agnostic positioning."

Suggestions

Prior suggestions from review 5721581257 stay open and do not block. The delta resolves one of them, because the PR body now states the tagline decision. Two things stay absent from the body: the edits to docs/getting-started.md, and a link to comment 6539857783.

Validation

Current checks at dea57dbc:

• CI, one read of the check list for this PR. Pass: hook test suite, markdownlint-cli2, check, records-lint, report, tier, Verify Ticket ID, CodeQL, Analyze (actions). Skipped: conformance, nightly-failure, hook tests matrix.
• I read the full delta, and the full docs/harnesses/README.md and README.md at the head.
• A text search of docs and README.md at the head for the tagline and positioning terms found only the lines cited above.
• I read the PR body and the head SHA from the forge. I read comment 6539857783 by ID, and the comments of #1932.

Limits:

• The owner decision is Unverified, as stated above.
• I ran no test, because the delta has no code and CI owns the suite.
• I did not repeat the §§ 1-5 pass or the README checks. Prior evidence is in reviews 5721496508 and 5721581257.

Verdict

APPROVED

The delta resolves the only open blocking finding. All acceptance criteria stay Met, CI is green at this head, and the remaining items are advisory. A human approval is still necessary before merge.

---

🤖 Reviewed by Rex (Code Reviewer Agent)
📌 Reviewed commit: dea57dbcc0cfa55056f6dad059686b5249b6e033