CONTRIBUTING.md quotes patch coverage as ~97% in two places, while AGENTS.md and the PR template already correctly say 99% (the real codecov/patch threshold). The two docs disagree with each other.
Separately, several docs imply a linked issue is optional for a PR:
- CONTRIBUTING.md: "a PR with no linked issue is fine"
- CONTRIBUTING.md's "Required PR Contents" list: "A linked issue or a short explanation for why no issue is needed"
- .github/pull_request_template.md: "I linked an issue, or this is small enough that the summary explains why an issue is not needed"
- .claude/skills/contributing-to-gittensory/SKILL.md: "For a small, self-evident fix, a direct PR with a clear rationale is fine (this repo's linkedIssuePolicy is preferred, not required)"
- .claude/skills/contributing-to-gittensory/reference.md's PR-text rubric: allows "an explicit no-issue rationale" for traceability
The actual enforced rule has no such exemption: every contributor PR needs a linked, currently open issue. An AI agent (or a human) following the skill/CONTRIBUTING.md as written today would produce a PR that gets auto-closed.
The gate-disposition table in reference.md also only implies "closed issue" fails via the word "open" appearing once elsewhere, rather than listing it explicitly next to owner-assigned/maintainer-only.
Additionally, the 2-open-PR contributor cap isn't disclosed anywhere in CONTRIBUTING.md or AGENTS.md.
Fix: correct the coverage figure, remove the false no-issue exemption language (while keeping the legitimate anti-farming point about not using alt/sock-puppet accounts to manufacture an issue), make the gate-disposition table list "issue is closed" explicitly, and disclose the 2-open-PR cap.
CONTRIBUTING.md quotes patch coverage as ~97% in two places, while AGENTS.md and the PR template already correctly say 99% (the real codecov/patch threshold). The two docs disagree with each other.
Separately, several docs imply a linked issue is optional for a PR:
The actual enforced rule has no such exemption: every contributor PR needs a linked, currently open issue. An AI agent (or a human) following the skill/CONTRIBUTING.md as written today would produce a PR that gets auto-closed.
The gate-disposition table in reference.md also only implies "closed issue" fails via the word "open" appearing once elsewhere, rather than listing it explicitly next to owner-assigned/maintainer-only.
Additionally, the 2-open-PR contributor cap isn't disclosed anywhere in CONTRIBUTING.md or AGENTS.md.
Fix: correct the coverage figure, remove the false no-issue exemption language (while keeping the legitimate anti-farming point about not using alt/sock-puppet accounts to manufacture an issue), make the gate-disposition table list "issue is closed" explicitly, and disclose the 2-open-PR cap.