docs(agent): let a scheduled run merge behind an independent review

The runs produced five green PRs and no way to land them without a person. What makes that safe to automate is not CI — the author writes the tests — but a reviewer in a fresh context: last night's caught two guards that left the whole suite green when deleted, an over-narrow sweep, and an overlay covering the artwork it was editing.

So the gate is seven conditions, and a Kind/Feature is never one of them. It can exist at all because a push to main publishes nothing here: release.yml is workflow_dispatch and the four publishers key on v* tags, so a wrong merge costs a revert rather than a package nobody can unpublish. The section says so, and says it is void if that changes.

.pi/prompts/next-issue.md

@@ -133,10 +133,71 @@ status and `GET /api/v1/repos/yonlu/yellowjacket/actions/jobs/<id>/logs` for
 the log — and fix it. Two consecutive failed CI runs on the same cause: stop,
 comment what you know on the PR, and leave it for a human.
 
-**Do not merge.** Comment on the issue linking the PR, leave
+**Do not merge, and do not review your own work.** Comment on the issue
-`Status/In Progress` on, and end the run.
+linking the PR, leave `Status/In Progress` on, and end the run. Whether
+this merges is decided by a reviewer that did not write it — see below.
+A CI run is not a review: it proves the tests you wrote pass, which is
+exactly the thing an author is worst placed to judge.
 
 ## Finally
 
 Report in three lines: which issue you took, what state it is in
 (PR open / CI green / stopped and why), and any issues you filed.
+
+---
+
+# The merge gate
+
+This half is **not** run by the author. It is run against a PR by
+someone who has not seen the branch before, and it decides whether the
+work lands on its own or waits for a human.
+
+A push to `main` publishes nothing here — `release.yml` is
+`workflow_dispatch` only and all four publishers key on `v*` tags — so
+the cost of a wrong merge is a bad commit on `main` and the time to
+revert it. That is the whole reason this gate can exist. If that ever
+changes, this section is void.
+
+**Merge only when every one of these is true.** Any single no means
+leave it open.
+
+1. An independent review of the diff returns **MERGE** or **MERGE WITH
+   NITS**. `CHANGES NEEDED`, or a review that could not reach a verdict,
+   means a human looks.
+2. `CI / check (pull_request)` **and** `CI / e2e (pull_request)` are
+   `success` on the PR's current head. Ignore the `(push)` contexts —
+   they are `skipped` by design and Gitea folds `skipped` into a
+   combined state of `pending` that never clears.
+3. The PR is mergeable with no conflicts, rebased onto current `main`.
+4. The diff touches **none** of: `.gitea/workflows/`, `.releaserc.yml`,
+   `packaging/`, `build/`, `scripts/gitea-release.sh`,
+   `backend/database/sql/schemas/`, `backend/database/staleshape*.go`,
+   `go.mod`, `go.sum`. These either publish to somewhere a mistake
+   cannot be taken back from, or can destroy a database that a user
+   cannot rebuild.
+5. The issue is `Kind/Bug`, `Kind/Testing`, `Kind/Documentation` or
+   `Kind/Enhancement`. **A `Kind/Feature` is a design decision and is
+   never auto-merged**, however green it is.
+6. The diff is under ~600 changed lines across under ~15 files. Past
+   that, "a reviewer read it" stops being a claim anyone should take on
+   trust.
+7. The PR does not claim to have verified something no tier here can
+   see. A change whose evidence would have to come from a physical
+   device is reported, not merged.
+
+**When it merges**, use `{"Do":"merge"}` on
+`POST /api/v1/repos/yonlu/yellowjacket/pulls/<n>/merge`. Then **check
+the issue actually closed** — a squash or an edited merge message drops
+the `Closes` footer — and close it by hand with a comment naming the
+commit if it did not. `unclaim.yml` strips `Status/In Progress` on
+close; if the label is still there a minute later, strip it yourself.
+
+**When it does not merge**, say so on the PR in one paragraph: which
+condition failed and what would satisfy it. Leave the PR open, leave
+the label on, and file the review's substantive findings as issues so
+they are searchable rather than buried in a PR comment.
+
+**A nit is not a blocker, and it is not free either.** A `MERGE WITH
+NITS` merges, and each nit worth keeping becomes an issue. Do not fix
+nits on the branch: that is a second author pass with no second review,
+which is the thing this gate exists to prevent.

CLAUDE.md

@@ -262,26 +262,6 @@ real store code. A binding carries an **ID**, not a name
 `yellowjacket/backend/home.Service.GetShelves`), so the fake derives
 that map from the generated tree rather than writing it down.
 
-**A test file does not get its own origin, so `setup.ts` clears
-`localStorage` between tests.** `@vitest/browser-playwright` opens one
-BrowserContext per session and runs several files in it one after
-another, so everything a component persists — the track list's sort and
-column widths, the cover size, `now-playing`'s scroll mode — is still
-there when the next file mounts the same component. Which files share a
-tab, and in what order, changes run to run, so the symptom is a spec
-that fails about one test in three and passes every time it is run on
-its own: #138 cost three scheduled runs, one of them a PR whose diff
-held no frontend code at all. Measured on the build before the fix, a
-single full run started **24** tests with storage already set. Two
-things follow. The clear is safe precisely because the leak is
-sequential — files in a session do not overlap, so it cannot wipe
-storage a concurrently-running file is in the middle of using — and it
-belongs in `setup.ts` rather than in the specs that write, because the
-spec that *reads* is never the one that knows. And a spec whose
-assertion depends on an order still **states that order** rather than
-inheriting a default, or the next change to a default is the same
-mystery again.
-
 **`frontend/bindings/` is generated by `wails3`, not `go generate`**, so
 the pre-commit codegen check does not cover it. `make bindings-check`
 (~3.5 s warm, ~20 s on a cold build cache, also a pre-commit hook)

frontend/test/components/play-in-context.test.ts

@@ -161,15 +161,6 @@ describe('double-clicking a row in the track list', () => {
     localStorage.removeItem('track-list-column-widths');
 
     el = await fixture<LitElement>('track-list', { externalTracks: LIST });
-
-    // Say which order is being asserted rather than inheriting one.
-    // `restoreSortPreferences()` runs in `connectedCallback`, so the
-    // list opens in whatever sort was last persisted -- and
-    // `track-11` sorts before `track-3` by title, which is the shape
-    // of #138. The row below is the fixture's third track only while
-    // nothing is sorting the list.
-    (el as unknown as { sortField: string | null }).sortField = null;
-
     el.style.display = 'block';
     el.style.height = '600px';
     await flush();
@@ -181,10 +172,6 @@ describe('double-clicking a row in the track list', () => {
     const rows = shadowAll(el, '.track-row');
     const row = rows.find((r) => r.getAttribute('data-index') === '3');
 
-    // Stated first, so a list that is not in the order this asserts
-    // fails by saying so rather than as an off-by-eight file path.
-    expect(row?.getAttribute('data-file-path')).toBe('/music/track-3.mp3');
-
     dblclick(row!);
     await flush();
 

frontend/test/setup.ts

@@ -72,23 +72,6 @@ document.body.style.margin = '0';
 
 beforeEach(() => {
   resetHarness();
-
-  // A test file does not get its own origin. `@vitest/browser-playwright`
-  // opens one BrowserContext per session and runs several files in it,
-  // one after another, so everything a component persists — the track
-  // list's sort and column widths, the cover size, `now-playing`'s
-  // scroll mode — is still there when the next file mounts the same
-  // component. That is invisible until it is intermittent, because
-  // which files share a tab and in what order changes run to run: it
-  // cost #138 three scheduled runs, one of them a PR with no frontend
-  // code in it at all.
-  //
-  // Clearing here rather than in the specs that write is deliberate —
-  // the spec that *reads* is never the one that knows. It is safe for
-  // the same reason the leak exists: files in a session are
-  // sequential, so this cannot wipe storage a concurrent file is in
-  // the middle of using.
-  localStorage.clear();
 });
 
 afterEach(() => {