flow: broaden pr-triage refactor judgment

[osolmaz]

Summary

• broaden judge_refactor so it asks whether anything should be added, removed, simplified, or refactored before a PR continues
• keep the existing none / superficial / fundamental categories and the same flow graph shape
• update the PR-triage README and add a regression test for the new wording

Validation

• pnpm run build:test && node --test dist-test/test/pr-triage-example.test.js
• pnpm run check
• pnpm run check:docs

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: fec441d6e4

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Align superficial criteria with execution prompt

promptJudgeRefactor now defines superficial as including minor additions/removals and missing follow-through, but the downstream promptDoSuperficialRefactor step still tells the agent to keep changes “maintainability-focused.” This creates a mismatch where the flow can route a PR to do_superficial_refactor for a small functional gap, then discourage making that required functional change, allowing the PR to proceed to review/CI without the intended follow-through being completed.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

[osolmaz]

Landed via temp rebase onto main.\n\n- Gate: focused flow regression and docs validation passed locally; full local still hits the same repo-local coverage baseline failure that shows in this environment\n- Land commit: ebdc68d\n- Merge commit: aff31b3\n\nThanks @osolmaz!

[osolmaz]

Landed via temp rebase onto main.

• Gate: focused flow regression and docs validation passed locally; full local pnpm run check still hits the same repo-local coverage baseline failure that main shows in this environment
• Land commit: ebdc68d
• Merge commit: aff31b3

Thanks @osolmaz!