Skip to content

check: does this README describe the SDK npm actually serves? - #18

Merged
DealAppSeo merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
claude/mvo-priority-zkrepid-5j8lrs
Sep 9, 2026
Merged

check: does this README describe the SDK npm actually serves?#18
DealAppSeo merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
claude/mvo-priority-zkrepid-5j8lrs

Conversation

@DealAppSeo

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

The gap

This README advertises @hyperdag/trustshell and shows call sites for it — "Drop-in npm client: shell.evaluate(...) for HAL". Nothing tied that prose to the package. shell.evaluate did not exist on the client at all, so a reader following this README got TypeError: shell.evaluate is not a function — and the README stayed green forever, because nothing could disagree with it.

Why it compares against the published package, not source

The method was added in DealAppSeo/trustshell#101, which is merged. The claim is still false.

npm serves 1.3.0, and 1.3.0 has no evaluate. A fix merged to the SDK's main does not make this README true: the README says "npm install", so what npm serves is what a reader gets. A method can be real in git and absent for every user, and that gap is invisible from either repo alone.

Running it right now:

check:sdk-claims — FAILED
  README.md advertises 1 method(s) that @hyperdag/trustshell@1.3.0 does not expose:
    ✗ shell.evaluate(...)

  A reader following this README with `npm install @hyperdag/trustshell` gets a TypeError.
  If the method exists on the SDK's main branch, it is NOT published yet —
  merging is not shipping, and this README points at npm.

Three outcomes

0 VERIFIED · 2 NOT_CHECKED · 1 FAILED.

A registry it could not reach is NOT_CHECKED — never a pass, and never a failure either. This check's whole job is to know what npm serves, so not knowing is not a verdict. Verified by pointing npm at a dead registry: exit 2, with the reason.

It also refuses to report a pass off a parse that clearly didn't work — fewer than five methods recovered from the .d.ts means the shape moved, not that the README is clean.

Deliberately not wired into CI

It would go red on main immediately, and that red would be true — the README is wrong for anyone installing today.

Turning this repo's CI red is a decision for its owner, not a side effect of adding a check. Wiring it is one step in .github/workflows/ci.yml whenever the fix is published; publishing is an irreversible, human-only action.

Exposed as npm run check:sdk-claims so it's runnable and discoverable rather than a script nobody knows exists.

Risk

One new script, one new npm entry. No CI change, no behaviour change, no dependency.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

https://claude.ai/code/session_01BV8K8JderLwSzxqf9PbJak


Generated by Claude Code

The README advertises `@hyperdag/trustshell` and shows call sites for it —
"Drop-in npm client: `shell.evaluate(...)` for HAL". Nothing tied that prose to
the package. `shell.evaluate` did not exist on the client at all, so a reader
following this README got `TypeError: shell.evaluate is not a function`, and the
README stayed green forever because nothing could disagree with it.

The method was added in DealAppSeo/trustshell#101, which is MERGED — and the
claim is still false, which is the whole reason this check compares against the
PUBLISHED PACKAGE rather than against source. npm serves 1.3.0, and 1.3.0 has no
`evaluate`. A fix merged to the SDK's main does not make this README true: the
README says "npm install", so what npm serves is what a reader gets. A method can
be real in git and absent for every user, and that gap is invisible from either
repo alone.

Running it right now reports exactly that:

  check:sdk-claims — FAILED
    README.md advertises 1 method(s) that @hyperdag/trustshell@1.3.0 does not expose:
      ✗ shell.evaluate(...)

THREE OUTCOMES. 0 VERIFIED, 2 NOT_CHECKED, 1 FAILED. A registry it could not
reach is NOT_CHECKED — never a pass, and never a failure either. This check's
whole job is to know what npm serves, so not knowing is not a verdict. Verified
by pointing npm at a dead registry: exit 2, with the reason. It also refuses to
report a pass off a parse that clearly did not work (fewer than five methods
recovered from the .d.ts means the shape moved, not that the README is clean).

DELIBERATELY NOT WIRED INTO CI. It would go red on main immediately, and that red
would be TRUE — the README is wrong for anyone installing today. Turning this
repo's CI red is a decision for its owner, not a side effect of adding a check.
Wiring it is one step in `.github/workflows/ci.yml` whenever the fix is
published; publishing is an irreversible, human-only action.

Exposed as `npm run check:sdk-claims` so it is runnable and discoverable rather
than a script nobody knows exists.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01BV8K8JderLwSzxqf9PbJak
@DealAppSeo
DealAppSeo marked this pull request as ready for review September 6, 2026 06:51
@strix-security

strix-security Bot commented Sep 6, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Strix Security Review

No security issues found.

Updated for bb76b68.


Reviewed by Strix
Re-run review · Configure security review settings

@DealAppSeo
DealAppSeo merged commit 01e2c7b into main Sep 9, 2026
4 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant