docs(pm-dispatch): re-key platform-readings' GraphQL-only list now the ccr routes are counted - #18396

Fixes #18361

references/platform-readings.md only, in place at 466 / 466 lines (ratchet ceiling, headroom 0). Four rows re-keyed by judgment; no row added, none removed, no re-wrap, every rewritten line under the gate's 120-byte cap.

Three rows landed in the first commit (b0c55121). The fourth arrived with the seat's review (comment 5694684277 on #18361), which widened this claim's file surface by one row: a fact table does not carry a row whose job is to say the row above it is false, so the row above is re-keyed in place instead — second commit a7026a35, no force-push, no rebase.

Rows are located by CONTENT, not by the card's line numbers: the card was filed against 1411cf2c and the file has landed twice since (b57671ed #18359 at 04:18Z, 05f1cdd6 #18363 at 06:40Z), so :134 / :143 / :57 have drifted.

Row 1 — the GraphQL-only membership row (line 134 on this branch)

Landing point: the row directly under 「GraphQL 池 5000/时,只留给没有 REST 对应物的几件。」

before (verbatim, 113 B):

- 那几件 = draft 翻转、auto-merge 挂载、语义 `/search/*`、Projects field_values、`issue transfer`。

after (verbatim, 118 B):

- 那几件 = `rest-channel.md`〈不可迁移〉那三件;draft 翻转与 auto-merge 挂载有 ccr 路、不在内。

Row 2 — the queue-repo landing row (line 142), widened into scope by the seat's review

Landing point: the row directly under 「红窗调度:守候只给上面那几件 GraphQL-only 的,⛔ 其余一切不为配额空等。」

before (verbatim, 107 B):

- 走队列的仓落地必经 auto-merge ⇒ 红窗里无退路;直合仓有,合并本身有 REST 端点。

after (verbatim, 118 B):

- 走队列的仓落地仍必经 auto-merge,红窗里照样走 ccr REST 挂载;直合仓合并本身有 REST 端点。

The row's premise — that arming is GraphQL-only — is the same one the card retires, so the row is retired with it. What survives is what is still true: a queue repo's landing still goes through auto-merge (the queue is not bypassed), the mount in a red window rides the ccr REST route, and the direct-merge half keeps its REST endpoint.

Row 3 — the red-window stand-down row (line 143)

Landing point: the row directly under row 2.

before (verbatim, 70 B):

- MCP 侧限流下,draft 翻转与 auto-merge 挂载整窗不可得。

after (verbatim, 89 B):

- 红窗里 draft 翻转与 auto-merge 挂载照常走 ccr REST,⛔ 不为它们守候。

The first commit ended this row with 「⇒ 上条无退路不成立」, a clause whose only job was to void the row above. The review rejected that shape — correctly: a reader of a fact table should not have to hold two rows in mind to get one fact. With row 2 re-keyed, the clause has nothing to do and is gone.

Row 4 — the echo row (line 57), carrying comment 5693336603's mechanism

Landing point: the row directly under 「squash 的 committer date 是入队时刻,快进不改 ⇒ 落地时刻读 merged_at/merged,不读 git log。」

before (verbatim, 114 B):

- 回显两向不可靠,空回显不等于未挂上 ⇒ ⛔ 不拿它当任何方向的证据、不为它空转。

after (verbatim, 115 B):

- 回显两向不可靠:全绿加 `clean` 即吞进队列不存记录 ⇒ 空回显是成功常态,⛔ 不空转。

The byte WAS there, so the note is carried here rather than left on the card: the mechanism (all checks green plus mergeable_state: clean is consumed straight into the queue and stores no record, so an empty echo is the normal echo of SUCCESS) replaces two clauses the row no longer has to spend bytes on. 空回显不等于未挂上 is subsumed by the stronger 空回显是成功常态, and ⛔ 不拿它当任何方向的证据 follows from 回显两向不可靠 in the same sentence. The note's third half — never re-arm on a NULL alone — is NOT restated: the file already carries it at 「⛔ 永不据它判没挂上而重挂 —— 重挂踢队重排。」, and a second copy is what this card exists to remove.

The card's question: mirror rest-channel's 「不可迁移 —— 只有这三件」, or point at it

Point at it. Three reasons, in descending authority:

1. A maintainer ruling already assigns ownership. The 2026-09-01 batch (总监批 chore(ci)(deps): bump actions/upload-artifact from 4 to 6 #22, quoted in scripts/pm/check-skill-line-ratchet.mjs's ceiling comment for rest-channel.md) reads, verbatim and untranslated: 「C 同批:退役 L58 对红窗常设规则的复述 —— 内容归属裁定:红窗规则由 platform-readings.md 配额段独家持有,rest-channel.md 只留指路」. The split it draws is symmetric: red-window POLICY is this file's, per-operation CHANNEL MAPPING is rest-channel's. Which operations have no REST twin is channel mapping.
2. This file already says so in its own voice, one row below the one being re-keyed: 「逐操作通道归属、写侧配方与队列路由三读法见 rest-channel.md,⛔ 不在本表复述。」 The row this PR re-keys was the one row in breach of its own neighbour.
3. The drift is the evidence. rest-channel's list stayed correct across lock 1; the mirror here went stale and stood a seat down for two operations that had a route the whole time. A mirror re-opens exactly that channel. rest-channel's heading already carries the return pointer (「红窗守候规则住 platform-readings.md 配额段」), so after this PR each fact has exactly one home and each home points at the other.

What is NOT delegated is the JUDGMENT the card asked for: the two operations that left the list are named here, in the negative, because a seat that remembers the old list needs the deletion stated, not merely absent. The three that stay are not re-listed.

⛔ rest-channel.md is not touched by this PR. Its rows 46 and 50 are already correct.

Acceptance notes

• Adjacent rows read and left standing because they stay TRUE under the re-key: 「红窗调度:守候只给上面那几件 GraphQL-only 的…」 (line 141) becomes automatically correct once line 134 points at the three; and 「被挡住的翻转是在等窗口,不是关于该 PR 的信号…」 (line 144) survives, because a flip can still be blocked by the session gate (GitHub access is not enabled for this session) or by REST core, so its prohibition still has a referent.
• noted, not filed: 「走队列的仓落地仍必经 auto-merge」 still reads as if arming were the only landing path. It is, on this repo, under Prime Directive 14's governed-surface carve-out and the queue rules — but the row does not say which of those makes it so. 承接者: none; recorded here so the next author of this block knows it was read and judged, not missed.
• Out-of-scope finding reported to the seat (class b, contract violation): the spec seat's 2026-09-16T06:19Z measurement (seat post [PM seat] domain:spec — 🛑 os-dev 派发已关闭(harness STALE,须新会话重坐) · ▶️ os-warren R3 · ✅ 本窗口 4 落地(#18371 #18370 #18198 #18438) · #18433 已入队 · ⏰ 维护者 3 件(#18319 #18095 #17356) #6017, comment 5692971090) — no enqueued event on this repo's /issues/N/timeline, the queue ref answering BUILD rather than membership, and auto_merge cleared on enqueue — conflicts with rows 10–12 of this same file, which make the timeline event the decisive membership reading. Out of this card's scope, untouched here. Row 4's rewrite was written to be consistent with it (a consumed request stores no record), not against it.

Gates

Targeted set for a .claude/skills/** docs-only diff, re-derived from the actual change at the new head with node scripts/pm/dispatch-gates.mjs --commands (no paths) and reconciled with --ran: 16 derived / 16 run / 0 NOT-MEASURED / 0 UNRUN, the same 16 as the first round. Exit codes captured to a file before reading, never across a pipe. Ratchet at the new head: 466 lines, ceiling 466, headroom 0. Per-command results are in the report comments on #18361.

skip-changeset: nothing published moves — .claude/** is not in any package's files[], it is the fast track, not a measurement.

维护者速读(草稿)

改了什么 —— 只动 references/platform-readings.md 四行,行数 466 → 466。一是 GraphQL-only 清单那行:不再自己列五件,改成指向 rest-channel.md〈不可迁移〉的三件,并写明 draft 翻转与 auto-merge 挂载有 ccr 路、不在其内。二是「走队列的仓落地必经 auto-merge ⇒ 红窗里无退路」那行:改成落地仍必经 auto-merge、红窗里照样走 ccr REST 挂载,直合仓那半保留。三是红窗那行:两件在限流窗里照常走 ccr REST,别为它们守候。四是回显那行:补进「全绿加 clean 即被吞进队列、不存记录,所以空回显是成功的常态」这条机制。

为什么改 —— 锁 1 之后 ccr 路是这两件操作的唯一通道,而清单还把它们记作没有 REST 对应物。后果不是措辞问题:读到红窗那几行的席位会白等一个根本不用等的窗口。清单归属有 2026-09-01 的裁定在先(红窗规则归本表独家,通道归属归 rest-channel.md),所以这次是把重复的那份退役成指路,不是再抄一遍。第二行是席位复核时扩进来的:原先我只在下一行写「上条无退路不成立」,事实表不该有一行专门宣布上一行为假,现在把上一行本身改对了。

风险与代价(含回滚) —— 风险有两处。① 席位要判某个操作是不是 GraphQL-only 时,多读一个文件(rest-channel.md,82 行、零配额);换来的是清单只有一份、不会再各自漂移。② 这四行都在同一段里,措辞收紧后相邻行的语气略有重叠(红窗里走 ccr REST 这件事在两行都出现一次),是刻意的:一行讲落地路径,一行讲要不要守候。回滚代价极低:四行就地改写,两个提交都可 git revert,棘轮读数不变。

席位意见 ——

你要做的 —— 若同意「指路而不镜像」这一判断,按 references 档在席复核后落地即可;若更希望本表继续自列三件(以红窗里少读一个文件换一份可能再漂的副本),请在此说明,我改回列举形。

Generated by Claude Code