docs(roadmap): update execution order and clarify dependencies for Ph…

[cemililik]

…ase 2.5.5 and 2.6; enhance input normalization in authoring wizards

Summary by Sourcery

Update roadmap documentation to reflect current execution order, dependency constraints, and review outcomes for Phases 2.5.5 and 2.6.

Documentation:

• Clarify intra-phase file overlaps and required landing order for Phase 2.5.5 sub-streams, including new overlaps involving Home, chat, and TUI files.
• Revise the unified Phase 2.5.5 + 2.6 execution plan to mark baseline work as completed, describe branch protection and CI/tag rules now in place, and adjust wave sequencing rationale.
• Refine Phase 2.6 authoring documentation to expand catalog pre-flight coverage to all authoring entrypoints and to tighten input normalization behavior for authoring wizards.
• Update deferred-tasks review summary to reflect the finalized count and distribution of triaged findings.

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Documentation
  • Updated roadmap sequencing facts, milestone status, gate ownership, and maintenance obligations (including updated CI required-check status).
  • Clarified deferred-task wording for the revised count of unscheduled items.
  • Refined Phase 2.5.5 guidance: overlap/landing order, parallelization rules, contested severity and governing classification, and revised sequencing carve-outs.
  • Updated Phase 2.6 authoring acceptance criteria, direct unit testing scope, and /create wizard TTY whitespace-handling for model, name, and systemPrompt.

[gemini-code-assist]

Caution

The consumer version of Gemini Code Assist on GitHub has been sunset. All code review activity has officially ceased.

[sourcery-ai]

🧙 Sourcery is reviewing your pull request!

---

Tips and commands

Interacting with Sourcery

• Trigger a new review: Comment @sourcery-ai review on the pull request.
• Continue discussions: Reply directly to Sourcery's review comments.
• Generate a GitHub issue from a review comment: Ask Sourcery to create an
  issue from a review comment by replying to it. You can also reply to a
  review comment with @sourcery-ai issue to create an issue from it.
• Generate a pull request title: Write @sourcery-ai anywhere in the pull
  request title to generate a title at any time. You can also comment
  @sourcery-ai title on the pull request to (re-)generate the title at any time.
• Generate a pull request summary: Write @sourcery-ai summary anywhere in
  the pull request body to generate a PR summary at any time exactly where you
  want it. You can also comment @sourcery-ai summary on the pull request to
  (re-)generate the summary at any time.
• Generate reviewer's guide: Comment @sourcery-ai guide on the pull
  request to (re-)generate the reviewer's guide at any time.
• Resolve all Sourcery comments: Comment @sourcery-ai resolve on the
  pull request to resolve all Sourcery comments. Useful if you've already
  addressed all the comments and don't want to see them anymore.
• Dismiss all Sourcery reviews: Comment @sourcery-ai dismiss on the pull
  request to dismiss all existing Sourcery reviews. Especially useful if you
  want to start fresh with a new review - don't forget to comment
  @sourcery-ai review to trigger a new review!

Customizing Your Experience

Access your dashboard to:

• Enable or disable review features such as the Sourcery-generated pull request
  summary, the reviewer's guide, and others.
• Change the review language.
• Add, remove or edit custom review instructions.
• Adjust other review settings.

Getting Help

• Contact our support team for questions or feedback.
• Visit our documentation for detailed guides and information.
• Keep in touch with the Sourcery team by following us on X/Twitter, LinkedIn or GitHub.

[coderabbitai]

Caution

Review failed

The pull request is closed.

ℹ️ Recent review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: defaults

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 995c29da-96cc-4d26-a818-cc2e11715ab4

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 34a3f5f and 27d5541.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• docs/roadmap/phases/phase-2.5.5-hardening-and-remediation.md

---

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

This documentation-only update revises roadmap execution status, Phase 2.5.5 sequencing, Phase 2.6 authoring acceptance criteria, and the count of deferred work items.

Changes

Roadmap maintenance

Layer / File(s)	Summary
Current execution status docs/roadmap/current.md, docs/roadmap/deferred-tasks.md	Updates merged-baseline details, Wave 0 CI/build-tooling sequencing, Wave 6 certification ownership, CI required-check status, and deferred-work accounting.
Hardening sequencing docs/roadmap/phases/phase-2.5.5-hardening-and-remediation.md	Documents five overlaps, revised landing order, #56 classification context, and updated parallelization guidance.
Authoring acceptance criteria docs/roadmap/phases/phase-2.6-conversational-authoring.md	Clarifies testing scope and field-specific whitespace requirements for the /create wizard.

Estimated code review effort: 2 (Simple) | ~10 minutes

Possibly related PRs

• HodeTech/Relavium#77: Directly introduced roadmap content further revised here.
• HodeTech/Relavium#59: Introduced Phase 2.6 roadmap planning refined by this update.
• HodeTech/Relavium#70: Previously re-scoped the Phase 2.6 plan edited here.

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5

✅ Passed checks (5 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.
Linked Issues check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Out of Scope Changes check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Description Check	✅ Passed	Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check	✅ Passed	The title matches the roadmap docs focus and accurately reflects the execution-order and dependency clarifications in the phases.

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Commit unit tests in branch development

---

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.}

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 1

🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents

Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.

Inline comments:
In `@docs/roadmap/phases/phase-2.5.5-hardening-and-remediation.md`:
- Around line 60-63: Correct the overlap-count sentence in the phase overview to
reflect that home-controller.ts is owned by 2.5.5.E, 2.5.5.F, and 2.5.5.I,
rather than claiming each of three god-files maps to two sub-streams. Leave the
detailed sub-stream bullets unchanged as the source of truth for landing order.

🪄 Autofix (Beta)

Fix all unresolved CodeRabbit comments on this PR:

• Push a commit to this branch (recommended)
• Create a new PR with the fixes

---

ℹ️ Review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: defaults

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 3be4ae03-64ce-424a-ac20-cd77831e979a

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between b6c9d70 and 34a3f5f.

📒 Files selected for processing (4)

• docs/roadmap/current.md
• docs/roadmap/deferred-tasks.md
• docs/roadmap/phases/phase-2.5.5-hardening-and-remediation.md
• docs/roadmap/phases/phase-2.6-conversational-authoring.md

[sonarqubecloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
0.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud