Skip to content

Bring AGENTS.md's migration list up to date - #148

Open
toruiwasa wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
docs/agents-md-migration-list
Open

Bring AGENTS.md's migration list up to date#148
toruiwasa wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
docs/agents-md-migration-list

Conversation

@toruiwasa

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Summary

AGENTS.md opens its migration list with There are seven migrations. and then walks through seven. There are ten. I noticed it while working on #128 and said there that I would send it on its own rather than bury it in that branch. This is that.

The count is dropped rather than corrected to ten. A number plus a list of that many entries turns into a contradiction the next time somebody adds a migration; a list with no number just leaves a blank in the map. Three entries added, one clause added to the prose below the list, and no existing entry touched.

Related issue

None. Two of the three missing entries are from pull requests of mine (#139 and #147), so this is finishing my own work rather than proposing new work. Happy to open one if you would rather.

Two things worth your eye

  • The eighth entry describes your migration in your document. It is as close to the surrounding register as I could manage; please rewrite it freely.
  • The paragraph is now 924 words on one line, so the case for making it a list is stronger than it was. I have not done it here because that diff would swamp this one. Say the word and I will send it separately.

Checklist

  • Opened as a draft pull request
  • pnpm lint passed, where applicable (Markdown only, nothing lints it)
  • pnpm test:e2e passed, where applicable (Markdown only)
  • Commit messages have no Co-Authored-By, Generated with, or tool-attribution trailers
  • Linked the closing issue (see above)

`AGENTS.md` opened its migration list with `There are seven migrations.` and then walked through seven. It was true when #120 wrote it and has been false since #121; there are ten on `main`. A reader following that paragraph as the map it is meant to be gets handed an inventory that is short by three, and nothing in the paragraph says so.

The count goes rather than moving to ten. A sentence naming a number plus a list of that many entries is a closed claim, and the next migration makes it a contradiction — falsified by anyone adding a file, without a line of `AGENTS.md` changing. A list with no count is a map: the next migration leaves a blank in it rather than a lie. The entries themselves were never wrong, and none of them is touched here.

What replaces it says whose job it is to keep the list whole, because nothing said so before and that is the likeliest reason two migrations fell out of it. The three that add neither a table nor a column are `20260822050002_profile_own_reads.sql`, `20260827124213_account_emails.sql` and `20260830092253_apply_profile_children.sql` — the first two are exactly the two that went missing, which is two out of two and so an observation rather than a cause, but it is the axis the sentence names.

The eighth entry is `my_profile()` and `my_credentials()` (#14), the ninth is `account_emails(uuid[])` (#123), the tenth is `apply_profile_children()` (#128). Each is written in the shape the seven above it use: what the migration establishes, and the one decision in it that a later change could undo without noticing. The eighth is somebody else's migration described in somebody else's document, so it is as close to the surrounding register as I could manage and should be rewritten freely.

The prose below the list gains one clause. It already named `my_profile()` and `my_credentials()` as how the editor reads, and stopped at "saves them with a Server Action" — which reads as though the writes go straight out of the Server Action, and that is the shape #128 replaced. It now says the child tables are written through `apply_profile_children()` in one transaction.

The paragraph is not restructured, and it grows from 462 words on one line to 924. Turning it into a list would make every future entry a one-line diff and would make this diff unreadable, so it is a separate question and not a contributor's to answer.

Nothing in the repository lints or tests Markdown, and `ci.yml` detects a documentation-only branch and skips the build, so there is no run to point at here.
@toruiwasa
toruiwasa marked this pull request as ready for review September 2, 2026 23:31
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant