docs(AGENTS): document board membership + status workflow; drop closed V1.5 board

[cliffhall]

Closes #1554.

Why

AGENTS.md's Issue-driven Work Style section described board interaction only in prose ("move the item to In Progress / In Review") while giving concrete, copy-pasteable gh commands only for the version label. Result: agents reliably apply the v2 label but skip adding the issue/PR to board #28 and skip setting Status — because that step is undocumented and needs several non-obvious IDs (project/field/option).

What changed

• Explicit board recipes. Added gh project item-add + gh project item-edit recipes (single steps and a one-liner) with the V2 board's project node ID, Status field ID, and every Status option ID.
• Corrected Status names. Real board options are lowercase In progress / In review, plus Backlog, Building CLI / TUI / CORE, Building Web, Done — the doc previously said "In Progress" / "In Review".
• Membership ≠ label. Added a callout that a v2 item isn't "created" until it is both labeled v2 and on board Add tab and approval flow for server -> client sampling #28 with a Status set.
• Dropped the closed V1.5 board (Multiline string inputs to tools isn’t supported #39) and its base-branch / label-mapping references, since the v1.5/main → v2/main merge is complete.

Docs-only change. This PR was itself created using the new workflow (labeled v2, added to board #28, Status set).

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

[cliffhall]

@claude review

[claude]

Claude finished @cliffhall's task in 38s —— View job

---

Reviewing this PR

• Read the diff against origin/v2/main
• Analyze the documentation changes
• Post review

---

Review — docs(AGENTS): board membership + status workflow

This is a clean, well-motivated docs-only change. The core problem it solves is real: prose-only board instructions with copy-pasteable commands only for labeling meant the board-membership + Status steps were reliably skipped. Codifying the gh project recipes with the exact IDs fixes that. Overall LGTM — the additions are accurate, internally consistent, and the callout framing ("label ≠ board membership ≠ Status; three distinct steps") is exactly the mental model that was missing.

A few small, non-blocking observations:

1. The one-liner adds a Python dependency gh can avoid.

ITEM_ID=$(gh project item-add 28 --owner modelcontextprotocol --url <url> --format json | python3 -c "import sys,json;print(json.load(sys.stdin)['id'])")

gh supports a built-in --jq flag on --format json, so this can drop the python3 pipe entirely:

ITEM_ID=$(gh project item-add 28 --owner modelcontextprotocol --url <url> --format json --jq '.id')

Fewer moving parts and no assumption that python3 is on PATH. Fix this →

2. Stale IDs are a durability risk (already partly mitigated). Hard-coding the project node ID, Status field ID, and seven option IDs is the right call for copy-paste ergonomics, but they'll silently rot if the board is recreated or options are renamed. The doc already hedges this well with the "if a command rejects one, re-fetch with gh project field-list …" note — good. No change needed; just flagging that the option-ID table is now a maintenance surface (the recent commit d58e9985 regenerating option IDs confirms this).

3. Minor consistency nit. The Status option table lists Backlog, Building CLI / TUI / CORE, Building Web, MCP Apps Extension, In progress, In review, Done, but the prose bullets only reference In progress, In review, and Done (option id 1bbc5632). That's fine — the table is the authoritative reference — but a one-line pointer like "use the building statuses while actively coding" would tie the extra options back to the workflow. Optional.

4. Accurate cross-branch caveat. The Closes #N explanation — that closing keywords only auto-close for PRs targeting the default branch (main), so on v2/main it's a cross-reference only and issues must be closed manually on merge — is correct and a genuinely useful clarification.

Nothing here blocks merge. The python3 → --jq swap is the only one I'd actively recommend.
• docs/agents-board-workflow

[cliffhall]

Thanks for the review! Addressed the two actionable items in `36479214`:

1. `python3` → `gh --jq` ✅ — replaced the Python pipe in the board one-liner with `gh project item-add … --format json --jq '.id'`. Fewer moving parts, no `python3`-on-PATH assumption.
2. Consistency nit ✅ — added a one-line pointer under the Status option table mapping the Building / MCP Apps Extension statuses to the workflow (In progress → Building/MCP Apps while coding → In review on PR → Done on merge).

2 (stale-ID durability) and 4 (cross-branch `Closes #N` caveat) needed no change — the re-fetch note already hedges 2, and 4 was flagged as accurate.

@claude review

[claude]

Claude finished @cliffhall's task in 28s —— View job

---

Re-review — board membership + status workflow (follow-up to 36479214)

Verified both actionable fixes against origin/v2/main...HEAD. Both landed correctly.

• python3 → gh --jq — the one-liner is now:

  ITEM_ID=$(gh project item-add 28 --owner modelcontextprotocol --url <url> --format json --jq '.id')

  No more python3-on-PATH assumption; uses gh's built-in --jq. ✅
• Consistency pointer — the sentence under the Status option table now maps the extra statuses to the workflow: "Use In progress for general work, one of the Building statuses (or MCP Apps Extension) while actively coding that surface, In review once a PR is open, and Done on merge." Ties every table row back to a workflow moment. ✅

Items 2 (stale-ID durability) and 4 (Closes #N cross-branch caveat) correctly needed no change.

One tiny thing I noticed while re-reading — not a blocker, no action needed:

• Step-2 comment vs. one-liner status. The two-step recipe's comment says # 2. Set its Status (here: In progress) and uses option id d43284fe (In progress), while the one-liner uses that same id but is captioned "use the option id for the status you want." Consistent and correct — both default to In progress and both tell the reader to swap the id. No change needed; just confirming they agree.

LGTM. Docs-only change, both review items resolved, internally consistent. Ship it. 🚀
• docs/agents-board-workflow