Files
deepseek-harness/docs/rfc/implemented/AGENTS.md
Tianyi Cui c3424e5487 fix(docs): address Codex review round 1 on the AGENTS.md rewrite
- Restore the universal JSDoc rule the rewrite dropped (module doc
  comment + semantic JSDoc on every export), in root AGENTS.md § Type
  safety and documentation — the generated-catalog RFC cites it as the
  rule the generator enforces at the source.
- Repoint the six remaining citations of moved content that the
  section-name grep missed (rule-title quotes and prose references):
  agent-loop agent.ts, acp index.ts, acp turns.spec.ts, the Exa e2e
  header, the real-api-e2e RFC, the doc-sync-enforcement RFC amendment,
  and rfc/implemented/AGENTS.md's section-name casing.
- Fix two docs/testing.md overstatements: the unit tier also runs
  examples/*/tests specs, and keyless-by-nature examples have no
  with-key smoke.
- Displacement trims keep root AGENTS.md at 1,498/1,500.
2026-07-04 15:11:49 +08:00

16 lines
2.3 KiB
Markdown

# AGENTS.md — Implemented RFCs
These are RFCs whose decision has **shipped**. The repo-wide and docs-wide rules still apply ([root AGENTS.md](../../../AGENTS.md) § "Type safety and documentation", [docs/AGENTS.md](../../AGENTS.md)); this file adds one rule specific to this folder.
## Keep an implemented RFC current with what actually shipped
An RFC in `implemented/` describes a decision that is now **live code**. Keep its description of the shipped reality accurate: when the implementation later moves a file, renames a package or symbol, changes a config key/default/error code, or relocates a plugin, update the RFC in the **same change** that touches the code — exactly as you would a package README. A stale implemented RFC (pointing at a path that no longer exists, naming a package that was renamed, describing a structure that was refactored) is worse than no RFC: a future reader trusts it and is misled.
Update it **in place** to state the current truth. Do **not** leave the outdated text in and bolt on a "superseded / now actually…" note — that makes the document a changelog of its own drift and forces the reader to reconstruct the present from a pile of corrections. Write what is true now.
### This is not a license to rewrite the *decision*
Keeping the shipped-state description current is about **facts** (paths, names, structure, defaults) — not about silently flipping the **decision and its rationale** into a different one. The "new RFC" escape hatch is for **macro** changes — a genuine reversal of *what was decided* or its rationale — NOT for renames, moves, or structural relocations. A rename is always a fact to fix **in place**: leaving a package/symbol/path at its old name (even with a "was renamed to…" aside) only confuses a reader who greps the current tree for a name that no longer exists. So: the package was renamed, a symbol changed, a plugin moved, the decision is now realized through a different mechanism → edit this RFC to state the current names and structure. Only a reversal of *what was decided* → a new RFC and cross-link, per [rfc/README.md](../README.md) ("An RFC is never edited into a different decision").
When in doubt, ask whether a reader following this RFC to the code would land on something real. If not, it needs updating.