[m4ttheweric]

Moves the board design mock update that sat on the local main of the shared checkout onto its own branch, so main can follow origin again.

What changed

Design

• Updates docs/apps/design/board/board.pen

Verification

Design file only; no code or tests. Waits for the release freeze to lift before merging.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Design
  • Added a design board comparing three placements for the “Ask Renee to re-review” option: a separate card, a verdict-style choice, and a selectable row tied to the submit button.
  • Each direction includes selected and unselected states alongside the reply options and submit shortcut. In the third direction, selecting the option adds “ask Renee” to the button label.

[coderabbitai]

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review.

Walkthrough

The design board compares three placements for an “Ask Renee to re-review” option. Each direction shows checked and unchecked states alongside reply rows and a submit button.

Changes: Re-review option placement

Layer / File(s)	Summary
Separate-card direction docs/apps/design/board/board.pen	Direction A places the option in a separate card below the reply rows. It shows checked and unchecked states.
Verdict-style choice docs/apps/design/board/board.pen	Direction B presents the option as a selectable choice styled like the verdict selection. It shows checked and unchecked states.
Reply-row direction docs/apps/design/board/board.pen	Direction C places the option in a row beneath the replies. The checked state adds “ask Renee” to the submit button label.

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

Change: Other

Possibly related PRs

• m4ttstack/mattstack#947: Moves re-review controls into the submit dock and renders reviewer checkbox rows.
• m4ttstack/mattstack#935: Adds the board re-review option for eligible reviewer latch discussions and sends selected discussion IDs in the gate answer.
• m4ttstack/mattstack#958: Implements queued, running, error, and completion states for follow-up review latches.

Merge Risk: Minimal · up to af7b3

The change adds board design alternatives; no actionable merge-blocking risk is identified.

Architecture risk: Low · up to af7b3

The change affects 1 system.

Changed systems: docs

Architecture concerns
No architecture-level concerns identified.

Review details

Systems and components

• observed — docs (service) was modified; 1 changed file maps to changed impact.

Before / after behavior

• observed — Modified behavior in docs/apps/design/board/board.pen: Adds direction A, showing the re-review option as a separate card below the reply rows, with checked and unchecked states, distinct hints, and a submit button labeled “post 3, resolve 1.”
• observed — Modified behavior in docs/apps/design/board/board.pen: Adds direction B, presenting the option as a verdict-style selectable choice with checked and unchecked states, plus the same reply rows and submit button.
• observed — Modified behavior in docs/apps/design/board/board.pen: Adds direction C, presenting the option as a row beneath the replies. Its checked state changes the submit label to include “ask Renee”; its unchecked state leaves the label at “post 3, resolve 1.”

Pre-merge checks: 5

Check name	Status	Explanation
Description Check		Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check		The title accurately describes the main change: an update to the design mocks in docs/apps/design/board/board.pen. It is concise and relevant, although it does not identify the specific “Ask Renee to …
Docstring Coverage		No eligible functions found in the changed files. Skipping docstring coverage check. Docstring coverage is scoped to functions touched by this diff with cyclomatic complexity of at least 2. Documentat…
Linked Issues check		Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Out of Scope Changes check		Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.

Full details: Title check

Explanation

The title accurately describes the main change: an update to the design mocks in docs/apps/design/board/board.pen. It is concise and relevant, although it does not identify the specific “Ask Renee to re-review” design board.

Full details: Docstring Coverage

Explanation

No eligible functions found in the changed files. Skipping docstring coverage check. Docstring coverage is scoped to functions touched by this diff with cyclomatic complexity of at least 2. Documentation-only edits and deletions within surviving functions are included; unchanged diff context and fully deleted functions are excluded. Analyzed 0 functions across 0 files. (1 skipped: 1 unsupported.)

Finishing Touches

Generate unit tests (beta)

• Commit to this branch
• Create a new PR

• Autofix · Keep fixing CodeRabbit findings and required CI, and resolving merge conflicts

Usage-based review receipt

• Mode: Continue automatically
• Reviewed files: 1
• Charged: $0.25
• View usage details

Note

This review was completed with usage-based billing: files reviewed beyond your plan's included limits are billed at $0.25/file. View usage-based billing.

CodeRabbit Verify

• Run CodeRabbit Verify to test the changes in this pull request.

Recent review info

Run configuration

• Source mode: Auto
• Repository: Unavailable
• Branch: Unavailable
• File: No configuration file from this repository applied
• Commit: Unavailable
• Layers: defaults
• Review profile: CHILL
• Plan: Advanced
• Run ID: bd3a31f9-3511-4ce7-ac92-8991528d8437

Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between d33ea17 and af7b3aa.

Files selected for processing: 1

• docs/apps/design/board/board.pen

Limit details: You’ve used all 2 included reviews currently available. Your 70 included PR review attempts over the past 7 days set your current allowance at 2 reviews per hour.