Update README.md#9
Conversation
polish
|
=) |
|
Thanks for the contribution. This PR has been inactive for a while and still is not in a landable state. Close as abandoned: this external README PR is over five months old, has no head commit or check activity after 2026-02-05, is currently waiting on author, has no maintainer engagement, and its only edit worsens the existing wording. So I’m closing this as inactive for now. If you pick the work back up, push a rebased branch with green checks and reopen (or open a fresh PR) and it will be reviewed again. Review detailsBest possible solution: Keep the current README wording; invite a fresh narrow docs PR if there is a concrete improvement to make. Do we have a high-confidence way to reproduce the issue? Yes for the patch defect: the README regression is visible directly in the PR head, and Is this the best way to solve the issue? No: the proposed branch is not the best solution because its only change makes the README wording worse. The maintainable path is to keep current main or submit a fresh narrow docs improvement. Security review: Security review cleared: The README-only diff does not touch secrets, workflows, dependencies, generated artifacts, or code execution paths. AGENTS.md: found and applied where relevant. What I checked:
Likely related people:
Codex review notes: model internal, reasoning high; reviewed against 524669f222d8. |
|
ClawSweeper PR egg 🔥 Warming up: real-behavior proof passed; findings, security review, or rank-up moves are still in progress. Hatch commandComment Hatchability rules:
What is this egg doing here?
|
:)