[schickling-assistant]

Problem

The placeholder fix in #16 rejects every req: target whose accepted prefix is followed by <. That correctly drops incomplete templates such as APP-<ID>, but also drops complete requirement IDs followed by ordinary inline HTML, for example req: APP-R02<br> or req: APP-R02<!-- note -->.

Goal

Reject angle-bracket templates only when the text before < is not already a complete local or qualified requirement target.

Decisions

Reuse the graph's existing local/qualified ID grammar to decide whether the scanned prefix is complete, after applying the same ASCII case normalization as reference resolution. This distinguishes APP-<ID> and requirements.md#<ID> from APP-R02<br> without guessing HTML tag names or enumerating placeholder spellings.

Verification

$ CARGO_TARGET_DIR=<existing-target> LIBRARY_PATH=<installed-libiconv>/lib cargo test --test intent_check graph_json_recognizes_all_supported_requirement_definition_forms -- --exact
cargo test: 1 passed (1 suite, 14 filtered, 0.01s)

The fixture retains the two prefixed placeholders from #16 and adds <br>, <!-- note -->, and lowercase app-r02<br> after complete targets. It asserts that all four real traces remain and that the lowercase written target resolves under the normalized APP-R02 ID.

Complexity

One small completeness predicate over the existing ID parser; no dependency or new parsing grammar.

Concerns

None.

Friction & bottlenecks

Reused an existing Cargo target directory during the disk-pressure incident; no Nix or devenv command was invoked and no new target tree was created.

Follow-ups

None.

References

Follow-up to #16 review: #16 (comment)

Posted on behalf of @schickling

field	value
agent_identity	mbp2025.direct.omp.mjwjfku9
session	unknown
agent_persona	generalist
agent_supervisor	unavailable
agent_tool	OMP
agent_tool_version	18.2.11
agent_runtime	OMP 18.2.11
agent_model	openai-codex/gpt-5.6-sol
worktree	intent/2026-09-27-req-trace-placeholder-html
tooling_profile	dotfiles@2df08b9-dirty

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Codex Review Summary

This comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.

Review	Status	Commit	Review trigger
📝 Code Review	✅ Completed 2026-09-27T10:34:01.812456Z	756abdb	New commits

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review" or "@codex security review".

Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings.

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: d789613587

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".