The plan's phase 6 becomes a record rather than a proposal, in the shape the earlier phases took: what was built, what was decided and why, what a person still has to look at. Two decisions in it were the product owner's rather than the code's -- promoting search and profile to navigation destinations, and doing chat alone rather than all three list-detail families -- and both are named as such with the date. **The audit learns two things.** It counted `NavigationBar(`, `NavigationRail(` and friends, and reported **zero** for an app that had just grown a navigation bar: `NavigationSuiteScaffold` is what chooses between them per breakpoint, and the concrete component never appears in the source. It now counts the scaffold and its items. And it grew a `floor()` beside `report()`. Every other budget in the file is a ceiling that ratchets down as a phase lands, which is the right shape for literals, hardcoded colours and untriaged nulls -- things a careless edit *adds*. The adaptive work is the opposite: a screen that stops reading the breakpoint still compiles and still renders, and the count goes down. So `--check` now also fails when the adaptive API count drops below 12 or the navigation component count below 2. **Two `contentDescription = null` that the audit caught in this phase's own work** -- the navigation item's icon and the new-chat button's -- now say `Decorative`. Same null, and the same convention phase 3 established: recording that somebody looked is the whole point, and a budget of zero only holds if new code obeys it too. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
13 KiB
Executable File
13 KiB
Executable File