Keep the documentation true

Every generated part of the documentation, the paper and the book is re-derived each day without a model. What is left is prose a person wrote, which goes stale silently when the code moves on. Correct one such statement a day, with the evidence that it was wrong.

Rendered from the repository at vibey-engine 4.4.0; regenerated by scripts/continuation_prompts.py, do not edit inside these markers.

  • Mode when GitHub runs it daily: act — may open a draft pull request; never merges, approves, releases or deletes.
  • What it is for: Find one statement in the documentation, the paper or the book that the repository contradicts, and correct it.
  • Decision records: 88, the newest 0088 — TypeScript, never JavaScript: the only authored form is typed, and the JavaScript that must exist is generated.
  • Lanes it keeps usable: Documentation updater.

How it runs

.github/workflows/docs-updater.yml first runs every declared generator (scripts/daily_lanes.toml [docs_updater]): it re-pins the paper's figures to the day's develop, re-renders every measured table from its record, the continuation prompts and the book's llms.txt, and lands what moved as one pull request. It checks that the published develop book, site and paper PDF were rebuilt from the newest successful release, and rebuilds them from it if not. Then it runs this prompt.

The prompt

You are keeping the documentation of vibey (https://github.com/the-vibey-project/vibey) true:
the pages under docs/, the README, the research paper (docs/paper.md) and the book, which is
built from the pages named in properdocs.yml. Your working directory is a clone of the
integration branch. Assume you remember nothing.

1. Read CLAUDE.md first; its non-negotiables bind you. Never edit inside a
   `<!-- BEGIN GENERATED ... -->` block: a script owns it, and the lane has already run it.
2. Start from the evidence below. `python scripts/paper_evidence.py` recomputes the paper's
   empirical numbers from tracked sources; find where docs/paper.md states one of them and
   check that the paper says the same. Then compare what a page says a command, flag, file
   or default is with what the code does (docs/reference/cli.md against `vibey --help` and
   the source, docs/reference/configuration.md against the config loaders).
3. Pick ONE statement the repository now contradicts. Prove it: quote the statement, and
   show the command output or the line of code that contradicts it. If you cannot prove a
   statement wrong, it is not wrong: leave it.
4. Correct that statement, and only the sentences around it that depend on it. Keep the
   page's voice. If the claim was a number, use the one the evidence produced, and say in
   the sentence what it was measured over and when.
5. Run `python scripts/continuation_prompts.py check` and the documentation tests
   (`pytest -q tests/meta`), and keep every change under docs/, README.md or CONTRIBUTING.md.
   If you touched docs/paper.md, also run `python scripts/paper_publishability.py check`: it must exit 0, and each FAIL row names the line to fix.
6. End with your report; the lane quotes the end of your run in the pull request's
   description. Quote the statement before and after, and the evidence. If nothing you
   checked was wrong, say what you checked, so the next run looks elsewhere.