docs: clarify backport assertion policy exceptions

[thepastaclaw]

Issue being fixed or feature implemented

Follow-up to #7615. Its condensed agent guidance correctly protects user-facing binaries, but reviewers can apply it too broadly to Bitcoin Core backports and test-only code. For example, the review comment in #7646 proposed replacing upstream assert calls in src/wallet/test/util.cpp solely to satisfy the production assertion policy, even though that source is linked into the unit-test binary rather than dashd or dash-qt.

What was done?

Updated the byte-identical AGENTS.md and CLAUDE.md guides to clarify two boundaries:

• For Bitcoin Core backports, absent a clear bug, prefer remaining aligned with upstream rather than requesting Dash-only policy or style changes. Dash-specific correctness, security, and consensus issues remain valid reasons to adapt upstream code.
• In C++ regression and unit-test sources under src/test/ and src/wallet/test/, assert, Assert, Assume, and related fatal test checks are all acceptable. Their selection should not be flagged as a production-crash risk because these sources compile into test binaries, not user-facing applications.

The exception is intentionally limited to the two requested test directories. The production-binary safety and untrusted-input guidance from #7615 remains unchanged. doc/developer-notes.md is also unchanged because this follow-up scopes agent/reviewer behavior rather than weakening the developer-facing production guidance.

How Has This Been Tested?

Documentation-only change. Validation performed:

• cmp -s AGENTS.md CLAUDE.md
• test/lint/lint-whitespace.py
• codespell --check-filenames --disable-colors --quiet-level=7 --ignore-words=test/lint/spelling.ignore-words.txt AGENTS.md CLAUDE.md
• git diff --check upstream/develop..HEAD
• Exact-head pre-PR review gate: ship with zero findings

Breaking Changes

None.

Checklist:

• I have performed a self-review of my own code
• I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
• I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e tests
• I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
• I have assigned this pull request to a milestone (for repository code-owners and collaborators only)

[thepastaclaw]

✅ Final review complete — no blockers (commit 9f8eea2)

[knst]

LGTM 9f8eea2

[coderabbitai]

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉

ℹ️ Recent review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Repository UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro Plus

Run ID: ee93a3ae-ff07-49ed-8e87-299655e95d04

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 01ec448 and 9f8eea2.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)

• AGENTS.md
• CLAUDE.md

Included review availability: Your plan provides up to 4 included reviews per hour; 2 remain after this review.

---

Walkthrough

Updated AGENTS.md and CLAUDE.md with two guidance changes. Fatal assertions are permitted in C++ regression and unit-test sources under src/test/ and src/wallet/test/. Bitcoin Core backport reviews should favor upstream alignment unless Dash-specific correctness, security, or consensus concerns justify an adaptation.

Estimated code review effort: 1 (Trivial) | ~2 minutes

Merge Risk: ⚪ Minimal · up to 9f8ee

This documentation-only change clarifies backport and test-source assertion guidance without changing product behavior, so no actionable merge-blocking risk remains after normal checks and review.

Suggested reviewers: pastapastapasta

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5

✅ Passed checks (5 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Title check	✅ Passed	The title clearly and concisely describes the main documentation change: clarifying assertion-policy exceptions for backports.
Description check	✅ Passed	The description directly explains the assertion-policy exceptions, backport guidance, affected files, validation, and scope of the changes.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check. Docstring coverage is scoped to functions touched by this diff. Analyzed 0 functions across 0…
Linked Issues check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Out of Scope Changes check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.

Full details: Docstring Coverage

Explanation

No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check. Docstring coverage is scoped to functions touched by this diff. Analyzed 0 functions across 0 files. (2 skipped: 2 unsupported.)

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.}

[thepastaclaw]

Final validation — Codex/Sol only (Phase 2 disabled)

The exact-head documentation diff is narrow, internally consistent, and preserves the untrusted-input guidance while clarifying the intended exceptions for test-only sources and upstream-aligned backports. AGENTS.md and CLAUDE.md remain byte-identical; whitespace lint, codespell, and diff checks pass, and no actionable findings were identified.
Source: reviewers gpt-5.6-sol (general), gpt-5.6-sol (dash-core-commit-history), and gpt-5.6-sol (backport-reviewer); final verifier gpt-5.6-sol. openclaw-agent/cliproxy/gpt-5.6-sol was orchestration-only and is not reviewer evidence.

Validated zero-blocker Codex/Sol precheck evidence was promoted to final because Phase 2 (Sonnet/Opus) is temporarily disabled. This is Codex/Sol-only final validation, not Codex + Sonnet/Opus coverage.

Review provenance

• Codex reviewers: gpt-5.6-sol — general (completed), gpt-5.6-sol — dash-core-commit-history (completed), gpt-5.6-sol — backport-reviewer (completed)
• Verifier: gpt-5.6-sol — verifier
• Sonnet/Opus: not run (Phase 2 disabled — temporary Codex/Sol-only final)
• Secondary pass: disabled (temporary_phase2_sonnet_disable)

Canonical verifier result: APPROVE. GitHub does not allow authors to approve or request changes on their own pull requests, so this review was submitted using COMMENT transport. The findings and blocker status above are unchanged.