Parent: #17
Goal
Make the project's quality expectations explicit so future changes preserve the V1 confidence bar.
Suggested Approach
Update the contributor/agent-facing docs with a short policy. Keep it practical and lightweight.
Recommended wording:
Before merging behavior changes, run ./scripts/check. Behavior changes should include a unit test, CLI/example coverage, or a documented reason no automated test fits.
Also mention that ./scripts/check is the local definition of done for code changes.
Scope
- Add or refine the quality policy in
AGENTS.md.
- If useful, mirror the testing philosophy in
docs/engineering-spec.md under Testing Strategy.
- Keep the policy concise.
Files Likely Touched
AGENTS.md
docs/engineering-spec.md only if the spec needs the testing policy too
Non-Goals
- Do not add new tests in this issue.
- Do not change CI in this issue.
- Do not create heavyweight contribution process or PR templates.
Verification
Run:
This is a docs-only issue, but the repo should remain green.
Acceptance Criteria
- The policy is written in the project docs/agent guidance.
- It is clear what contributors should run locally before calling work done.
- It is clear how behavior changes should be covered.
- The wording stays aligned with the existing engineering principles: small, testable, no over-engineering.
Parent: #17
Goal
Make the project's quality expectations explicit so future changes preserve the V1 confidence bar.
Suggested Approach
Update the contributor/agent-facing docs with a short policy. Keep it practical and lightweight.
Recommended wording:
Also mention that
./scripts/checkis the local definition of done for code changes.Scope
AGENTS.md.docs/engineering-spec.mdunder Testing Strategy.Files Likely Touched
AGENTS.mddocs/engineering-spec.mdonly if the spec needs the testing policy tooNon-Goals
Verification
Run:
This is a docs-only issue, but the repo should remain green.
Acceptance Criteria