didericis
822cff48ad
The note still described the pre-gateway state as "today" — raw provider tokens env-injected into the agent, readable via printenv — which is no longer true and was actively misleading. Add a dated Status banner and flag the stale "today's wiring" / "recommended path forward" passages: the agent now holds only a placeholder (e.g. CLAUDE_CODE_OAUTH_TOKEN=egress-placeholder) and the real token is injected as the upstream Authorization header by the existing pipelock/mitmproxy egress sidecar (EgressRoute auth_scheme + token_ref, one MITM not two), generalized across Claude/Codex/Pi and git-host tokens. Reasoning preserved per the research-note convention. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01LhiafsABCr46bu3oHUm7wa
Docs
How this project records what it builds and why — and a guide to picking the right document for what you're capturing.
When to write which document
| Artifact | For |
|---|---|
PRD (docs/prds/) |
A feature: what to build, scope, success criteria. |
Research note (docs/research/) |
A landscape/tradeoff investigation. |
Decision record (docs/decisions/) |
A decision that isn't itself a feature — a policy, a convention, a "we will / won't do this," or a load-bearing choice made inside a larger PRD that deserves to be discoverable on its own. |
A decision that's fully specified by a PRD doesn't need duplicating in a decision record. Write one when the decision would otherwise be buried in prose, lost in an issue thread, or have no in-repo home at all (small requests that don't merit a PRD; non-feature choices like merge strategy or a trust posture).