Skip to content

Docs-Sync #402: two README activity-count claims sit outside DocumentationCountsTests #404

Description

@Sev7eNup

Source PR: #402 (Fix typos and tighten wording in the root Markdown files)

Affected surface: tests/NodePilot.Mcp.Tests/DocumentationCountsTests.cs (guard coverage for README.md)

#402 was a copy-editing pass whose commit message states "the phrases and counts the documentation
guards read are left intact". That held for every guarded phrase — all 18 rows still match the code —
but the pass silently rewrote two unguarded claims from 27 activities to 29:

  • README.md reference table: [All 29 activities]
  • README.md solution tree: NodePilot.Engine/ WorkflowEngine, 29 activities

while the guarded highlights bullet (with 27 activity types) stayed at 27, leaving the README
contradicting itself. The wrong numbers are corrected in #403; this issue is about the gap that let
them drift
, which is test code rather than documentation and so was deliberately not auto-applied.

DocumentationCountsTests pins exactly one of the README's three activity-count claims:

yield return Row("README.md", @"with (\d+) activity types", activities, "activity types (README highlights)");

The file's own comment records that the "Beyond the N executable Activity types…" row was retired
because "the count is still guarded twice — in the highlights row above, and in both language
versions of the doc site's concepts/workflows page". That reasoning covers the doc site, but it
leaves the README's other two mentions unguarded, and #402 is the first case of them actually
drifting.

Un-applied findings

  • DocumentationCountsTests has no row for the README reference-table claim
    ([All (\d+) activities]). Adding one is a test change, not a doc fix, and whether to guard a
    link label is a maintainer decision — needs a human decision.
  • DocumentationCountsTests has no row for the README solution-tree claim
    (WorkflowEngine, (\d+) activities). Same reasoning; it also sits inside a fenced block, so a
    guard row would need a pattern that tolerates that context — needs a human decision.
  • Worth deciding at the same time whether the retired-row rationale quoted above should be
    revised, since it is the reason these two mentions were left uncovered — ambiguous, and it is
    a comment about test policy rather than a factual drift.

This is an automated docs-drift finding and needs triage. The counts themselves are already correct
on the #403 branch; nothing here blocks that PR.

Activity

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions