From 59aaec4ed693fe3d0307dcebbec088da32ae57be Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Defame1297 Date: Sun, 30 Aug 2026 19:31:15 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] fix(gitea-branches): repoint dangling overview.md citation MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit references/commits.md cited overview.md as the authority for a scope-gating claim, but no such file exists in this skill's package — the only overview.md is an external research doc not shipped with the skill. Repoint to branches.md's own Token scope section, which states and confirms the same principle, and drop the unverifiable write:repository enumeration detail no file in this skill actually makes. Found by an independent post-closure audit of #99 (agent-audit + skill-audit re-run against every changed skill/agent). --- .../.apm/skills/gitea-branches/references/commits.md | 8 ++++---- plugins/gitea/skills/gitea-branches/references/commits.md | 8 ++++---- 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) diff --git a/plugins/gitea/.apm/skills/gitea-branches/references/commits.md b/plugins/gitea/.apm/skills/gitea-branches/references/commits.md index 19f8b3c..12c1d68 100644 --- a/plugins/gitea/.apm/skills/gitea-branches/references/commits.md +++ b/plugins/gitea/.apm/skills/gitea-branches/references/commits.md @@ -64,10 +64,10 @@ edge cases, `get_commit` will not. ## Token scope Both tools are believed to require `write:repository`, even though they're read-only — inferred by -analogy with the scope-gating principle in `overview.md` (Gitea gates reads behind write scope for -repo-scoped operations), not a claim `overview.md` makes for commits by name: its explicit -`write:repository` enumeration lists PR, branch, file, release, and tag operations, but doesn't -mention commits. An earlier version of this doc claimed `write:issue` alone worked, based on +analogy with the scope-gating principle confirmed for branch operations in `branches.md`'s Token +scope section (Gitea gates reads behind write scope for repo-scoped operations), not a claim any +doc in this skill makes for commits by name: nothing here enumerates commits under +`write:repository` explicitly. An earlier version of this doc claimed `write:issue` alone worked, based on empirical testing under a token that held both `write:issue` and `write:repository` simultaneously — that test didn't isolate the variable either. Treat this as unverified until tested under a token scoped to `write:issue` only (no `write:repository`). diff --git a/plugins/gitea/skills/gitea-branches/references/commits.md b/plugins/gitea/skills/gitea-branches/references/commits.md index 19f8b3c..12c1d68 100644 --- a/plugins/gitea/skills/gitea-branches/references/commits.md +++ b/plugins/gitea/skills/gitea-branches/references/commits.md @@ -64,10 +64,10 @@ edge cases, `get_commit` will not. ## Token scope Both tools are believed to require `write:repository`, even though they're read-only — inferred by -analogy with the scope-gating principle in `overview.md` (Gitea gates reads behind write scope for -repo-scoped operations), not a claim `overview.md` makes for commits by name: its explicit -`write:repository` enumeration lists PR, branch, file, release, and tag operations, but doesn't -mention commits. An earlier version of this doc claimed `write:issue` alone worked, based on +analogy with the scope-gating principle confirmed for branch operations in `branches.md`'s Token +scope section (Gitea gates reads behind write scope for repo-scoped operations), not a claim any +doc in this skill makes for commits by name: nothing here enumerates commits under +`write:repository` explicitly. An earlier version of this doc claimed `write:issue` alone worked, based on empirical testing under a token that held both `write:issue` and `write:repository` simultaneously — that test didn't isolate the variable either. Treat this as unverified until tested under a token scoped to `write:issue` only (no `write:repository`).