[dilux-bot]

📝 What changes

Add a short section ## The battery to kinds/README.md, right after the pack.yml table in "What a pack holds" (its heading gives the stable anchor #the-battery), holding one paragraph that says: a kind's battery is the reusable workflows in .github/workflows/ that check, test, release and publish a repository of that kind, as listed under the pack's workflows key; for wordpress-plugin, plugin-checks-wp.yml, plugin-tests-wp.yml, plugin-release-wp.yml and plugin-publish-wp.yml; it differs from the workflows every repository gets whatever its kind (repos.yml every-repository: issues.yml, pull-request-comments.yml, and org-pull-request.yml that the organisation's ruleset requires) because only a repository of that kind gets it; and a repository runs it through its callers, the files from workflow-templates/ that sync-repos.py callers writes into its .github/workflows/ and that name the battery's workflows (GitHub cannot pick a reusable workflow from data). The earlier mentions in kinds/README.md (intro, the workflows row) link to that section.

In docs/adopting.md and docs/maintaining.md, the first "battery" on each page becomes a link to ../kinds/README.md#the-battery. docs/configuration.md is generated by scripts/settings.py docs from policy/settings-schema.yml (test_configuration_doc.py fails a hand edit), so the link goes into the says: of the workflows setting there and the page is regenerated with python3 scripts/settings.py docs > docs/configuration.md. That is a change of words in a data file under policy/, not of a workflow, script or pack; docs/model.md has no glossary and no "battery", so it is left alone. Nothing widens any permission, secret, lane or limit.

💡 Why

Closes #688. The autopilot works it here in the open: one commit per criterion, each box ticked once its commit is pushed.

🎯 Acceptance criteria

• C1 Given kinds/README.md, when a reader looks for what a battery is, then one paragraph defines it, names the pack key it comes from (workflows), gives the wordpress-plugin example, and says how it differs from the workflows every repository gets and how a repository runs it (its callers).
  Test: tests/workflows/test_battery_doc.py
• C2 Given docs/configuration.md, docs/adopting.md and docs/maintaining.md, when they say "battery", then the first mention on each page links to that definition.
  Test: tests/workflows/test_battery_doc.py

🧭 Decisions

• 2026-11-07: The battery section goes after the pack.yml table's settings note and its example (before 'How the pieces find the pack'), not between the table and that note, so the note about settings stays under 'What a pack holds'.
• 2026-11-07: Credits left empty: the issue's author, @​soydiloreto, is the repository's only code owner, the maintainer who accepts and merges, whom the rule leaves out; the only commenter is dilux-bot. A maintainer corrects it with /coauthor.

🙌 Credits

🧪 How I tested it

• tests/workflows/test_battery_doc.py (new, 8 tests) checks that kinds/README.md has one paragraph under ## The battery. That paragraph names the workflows key, lists every workflow in the wordpress-plugin pack, names the callers in repos.yml every-repository and org-pull-request.yml, and says how a repository runs the battery through its callers. The tests also check that the first "battery" on docs/configuration.md, docs/adopting.md and docs/maintaining.md is the link to ../kinds/README.md#the-battery, and that the configuration page's link comes from policy/settings-schema.yml.
• I regenerated docs/configuration.md with python3 scripts/settings.py docs. tests/workflows/test_configuration_doc.py and settings.py check pass.
• The whole tests/ suite passes with pytest 9.1.1 (270 passed, 1 skipped).
• I ran every --test in the scripts job. Four fail on this runner and fail the same way at the base commit: plugin-i18n.sh (no gettext), design-lint.py (no stylelint), review-brief.sh and runner-vm/dx-runner-slot.sh (environment). The repository has no make pre-pr.
• local-review.sh --no-claude reports the conventions as OK.

🤖 AI-generated · Claude Opus 5.5 (Anthropic)

[dilux-bot]

The pull request's board

	State
Waits on	the autopilot: fix the failed check (link)

🤖 AI-generated · Claude Opus 5.5 (Anthropic)

[soydiloreto]

Hint: the conventions check fails because the title says docs while the pull request also changes policy/settings-schema.yml and tests/workflows/test_battery_doc.py. Either keep only documentation here (drop the schema change and the test, if C1-C2 do not need them), or retitle it chore(kinds): say what a kind's battery is, in one place, which closes the Docs issue #688 as well.

🤖 AI-assisted · Claude Opus 5.5 (Anthropic)

[dilux-bot]

Claude review · risk high · complexity low · type docs

Nothing to fix.

First review. The change adds a ## The battery paragraph to kinds/README.md and links the first "battery" on each of three pages to it. I checked the paragraph's facts against the repository: the four workflows match kinds/wordpress-plugin/pack.yml, every-repository in repos.yml lists issues.yml and pull-request-comments.yml, and org-pull-request.yml and the two plugin callers exist. In each page the link is the first "battery". The says: edit in policy/settings-schema.yml and the regenerated docs/configuration.md agree. The policy rates the pull request high only because of the paths it touches; the diff changes words, not behaviour, permissions or lanes. Minor: the title says chore, but the diff is documentation (docs). I did not run the new tests; the author reports them passing. The tests check strings in the docs, which is acceptable for a docs-only change.

No findings.

_{Policy floor: high (touches high-risk paths: kinds/README.md, policy/settings-schema.yml, tests/workflows/test_battery_doc.py). Reviewed b4db77d (whole pull request; review 1 of 5 automatic). Author trusted for auto-merge: false.}

_{🤖 AI review · claude-sonnet-5-5 (Anthropic) · $0.20, 7 turns}