docs(modules): precision follow-up — event-transaction scope, payload sensitivity (HT-71)

[zaridan]

Closes the two CodeRabbit actionables posted in #81's final review round (which landed after merge): the blanket same-transaction claim now names the test.ping bypass, and the payload-privacy wording stops claiming "PII-free by construction" (tag strings are operator-authored; identifiers reveal existence). Docs-only.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Documentation
  • Clarified that eight domain event types are recorded transactionally with state changes, while test.ping bypasses the outbox.
  • Updated webhook guidance to explain that message content is excluded from payloads and must be retrieved through the read API.
  • Added reminders to treat webhook payloads as sensitive, including operator-authored text and identifiers that may reveal conversation activity.

[coderabbitai]

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

The module documentation now specifies transactional typed event emission, the test.ping outbox exception, webhook content boundaries, read API retrieval, and remaining payload sensitivity.

Changes

Module documentation

Layer / File(s)	Summary
Event and webhook semantics docs/modules/README.md, docs/modules/webhooks.md	Typed events are documented as transactionally emitted except for test.ping; webhook guidance excludes message content, directs retrieval through the read API, and notes sensitive text and revealing identifiers.

Estimated code review effort: 1 (Trivial) | ~3 minutes

Possibly related PRs

• Helpthread/helpthread#81: Introduced related module documentation covering typed events and webhook payload semantics.

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5

✅ Passed checks (5 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Description Check	✅ Passed	Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check	✅ Passed	The title accurately reflects the documentation follow-up about event-transaction scope and payload sensitivity.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.
Linked Issues check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Out of Scope Changes check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Commit unit tests in branch docs/ht-71-precision-followup

---

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

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 1

🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents

Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.

Inline comments:
In `@docs/modules/webhooks.md`:
- Around line 125-129: Update the webhook sensitivity guidance in the
surrounding documentation to state that identifiers reveal a conversation
exists, without implying it is active. Preserve the warning about sensitive
payloads and operator-authored free text, and account for conversations in
closed, pending, or spam states.

🪄 Autofix (Beta)

Fix all unresolved CodeRabbit comments on this PR:

• Push a commit to this branch (recommended)
• Create a new PR with the fixes

---

ℹ️ Review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: defaults

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro Plus

Run ID: 49f27288-f102-4750-971a-9118ff9a123e

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 0943eb3 and 7e2c756.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)

• docs/modules/README.md
• docs/modules/webhooks.md

[coderabbitai]

🎯 Functional Correctness | 🟡 Minor | ⚡ Quick win

Avoid implying every identified conversation is active.

A webhook can reference conversations in closed, pending, or spam states, so the identifier alone establishes existence, not that the conversation is active.

Proposed wording

- and identifiers still reveal that a
- given conversation exists and is active.
+ and identifiers still reveal that a given conversation exists; some event
+ types may also expose its current status.

📝 Committable suggestion

‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.

Suggested change

	own credentials once an event tells you something changed. Message content
	therefore never transits a webhook — but treat payloads as sensitive
	anyway: some fields are operator-authored free text (`conversation.tags_changed`
	carries the tag strings themselves), and identifiers still reveal that a
	given conversation exists and is active.
	own credentials once an event tells you something changed. Message content
	therefore never transits a webhook — but treat payloads as sensitive
	anyway: some fields are operator-authored free text (`conversation.tags_changed`
	carries the tag strings themselves), and identifiers still reveal that a given conversation exists; some event
	types may also expose its current status.

🤖 Prompt for AI Agents

Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.

In `@docs/modules/webhooks.md` around lines 125 - 129, Update the webhook
sensitivity guidance in the surrounding documentation to state that identifiers
reveal a conversation exists, without implying it is active. Preserve the
warning about sensitive payloads and operator-authored free text, and account
for conversations in closed, pending, or spam states.