"misread" is the past tense; the hyphen was wrong

[rbuergi]

Addresses the Copilot review finding on #1217, which landed after the merge: the What's New description used "mis-read" where "misread" is the standard form.

Documentation copy only — no code, no behavior change. No separate What's New entry (this edits one).

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

Updates the 2026-08-11 “What’s New” entry copy to use the standard past tense “misread” (instead of the incorrect hyphenated “mis-read”), aligning with the review finding noted in PR #1217.

Changes:

• Corrected wording in the What’s New entry description: “mis-read” → “misread”.

---

💡 Add a code-review agent skill or configure MCP servers for context-aware, tailored reviews. Learn more in the docs.

[github-actions]

Test Results (shard 0)

707 tests  ±0   707 ✅ ±0   14m 9s ⏱️ +34s
 10 suites ±0     0 💤 ±0 
 10 files   ±0     0 ❌ ±0 

Results for commit b9c6a4f. ± Comparison against base commit d8da659.

♻️ This comment has been updated with latest results.

[github-actions]

Test Results (shard 5)

1 803 tests  ±0   1 611 ✅ ±0   8m 9s ⏱️ -32s
   11 suites ±0     192 💤 ±0 
   11 files   ±0       0 ❌ ±0 

Results for commit b9c6a4f. ± Comparison against base commit d8da659.

♻️ This comment has been updated with latest results.

[github-actions]

Test Results (shard 3)

   11 files  ±0     11 suites  ±0   7m 5s ⏱️ -59s
2 137 tests ±0  2 034 ✅ ±0  103 💤 ±0  0 ❌ ±0 
2 379 runs  ±0  2 276 ✅ ±0  103 💤 ±0  0 ❌ ±0 

Results for commit b9c6a4f. ± Comparison against base commit d8da659.

♻️ This comment has been updated with latest results.

[github-actions]

Test Results (shard 1)

1 358 tests  ±0   1 358 ✅ ±0   7m 16s ⏱️ -11s
   11 suites ±0       0 💤 ±0 
   11 files   ±0       0 ❌ ±0 

Results for commit b9c6a4f. ± Comparison against base commit d8da659.

♻️ This comment has been updated with latest results.

[github-actions]

Test Results (shard 2)

2 107 tests  ±0   2 106 ✅ ±0   7m 25s ⏱️ -27s
   11 suites ±0       1 💤 ±0 
   11 files   ±0       0 ❌ ±0 

Results for commit b9c6a4f. ± Comparison against base commit d8da659.

♻️ This comment has been updated with latest results.

[github-actions]

Test Results (shard 4)

1 313 tests  ±0   1 303 ✅ ±0   12m 54s ⏱️ -17s
   11 suites ±0      10 💤 ±0 
   11 files   ±0       0 ❌ ±0 

Results for commit b9c6a4f. ± Comparison against base commit d8da659.

♻️ This comment has been updated with latest results.

[github-actions]

Test Results

   65 files  ±0     65 suites  ±0   56m 59s ⏱️ - 1m 52s
9 425 tests ±0  9 119 ✅ ±0  306 💤 ±0  0 ❌ ±0 
9 667 runs  ±0  9 361 ✅ ±0  306 💤 ±0  0 ❌ ±0 

Results for commit b9c6a4f. ± Comparison against base commit d8da659.

♻️ This comment has been updated with latest results.

[rbuergi]

CI red on MeshWeaver.AI.Test.MeshPluginTest.FullCrudWorkflow_CreateGetUpdateDelete (shard 3). This PR changes ONE word in a markdown file — it cannot affect that test. main is green at 8c4d21b (the commit this branch is cut from) and this branch is not behind, so it is a flake in that test, i.e. a real race worth pinning rather than re-running away. Not re-running per the repo's no-rerun-to-green rule; leaving this cosmetic PR open until the flake is understood or someone re-runs it deliberately.

[rbuergi]

Second CI failure on this PR, and it is not this diff — which changes one word in one markdown file.

run	failing tests	shard
before main sync	MeshWeaver.AI.Test.MeshPluginTest.FullCrudWorkflow_CreateGetUpdateDelete	3
after main sync	MeshWeaver.AI.Test.ScriptExecutionInUserHomeTest.Run_StreamsProgressTimely_NotBuffered · MeshWeaver.PathResolution.Test.HierarchicalBrowsingTests.Query_WithSkipAndLimit_ReturnsPaginatedResults	3, 4

Different tests each time, and main is green on the last five runs (9398713, dad8615, eb283c4, 56421a5, 9be51fc) with the same code. The shard messages are a test host exited non-zero (failure, crash, or timeout kill) — the signature of a killed/starved test host rather than a specific assertion, so the tests named are whichever ones happened to be running when the host died.

I checked the one that looked suspicious: Query_WithSkipAndLimit_ReturnsPaginatedResults ran right after #1232 changed QueryParser, but main carries #1232 and is green, so it is not a regression from it.

Not re-running (the repo's no-rerun-to-green rule: a flake is a real race, and re-running hides it). Leaving this cosmetic PR open — it is worth nothing next to the signal it is carrying, and whoever picks up the shard-host instability can use the table above.