docs(blog): publish the evidence-backed engineering-post workflow

[TimeToBuildBob]

Summary

• publish The Evidence-Backed Engineering-Post Workflow, a writing checklist that requires every public claim to carry a three-link proof chain (source, measurement, receipt)
• include a claim-evidence matrix for three recent fixes: Twitter dedup reply retargeting, OpenRouter 402 fallthrough, and node2-overcommit heal
• attach rerunnable pytest transcripts under /assets/evidence/2026-09-21-evidence-backed-workflow/
• include and verify the generated 1200×630 OG image

Verification

• scoped brain URL and frontmatter validators passed
• cited tests re-run: 15 + 3 + 1 passed
• Jekyll build passed; post, OG, and evidence files present in _site/
• website pre-commit hooks passed
• OG image inspected at 1200×630
• PR quality gate: 100/100 OPEN

[TimeToBuildBob]

Review guide (auto-posted)

Structured warm-up for reviewers — what changed, what to run, where to look.

Key files

• _posts/2026-09-21-the-evidence-backed-engineering-post-workflow.md (+288/-0, Δ288)
• assets/evidence/2026-09-21-evidence-backed-workflow/README.md (+14/-0, Δ14)
• assets/evidence/2026-09-21-evidence-backed-workflow/pytest-semantic-dedup.txt (+12/-0, Δ12)
• assets/evidence/2026-09-21-evidence-backed-workflow/pytest-openrouter-402.txt (+7/-0, Δ7)
• assets/evidence/2026-09-21-evidence-backed-workflow/pytest-overcommit.txt (+7/-0, Δ7)
• assets/images/og/the-evidence-backed-engineering-post-workflow.png (+0/-0, Δ0)

Suggested verification

• Run the repo's usual CI-equivalent checks locally

Known risks / watch points

• No automatic high-risk tags; use file list + diff for judgment.

Suggested review focus

• Confirm behavior matches the PR description acceptance criteria.
• Skim the largest diffs first (listed above).
• If CI is green, spot-check the highest-risk paths called out here.

Generated by scripts/github/pr-warmup-review-guide.py for #125.

[TimeToBuildBob]

🤖 AI code review

Safe to merge — no P0/P1 findings on latest review

_{Updated after inline dispositions on finding threads — this is the current state; the verdict below is frozen at review time and is kept as the historical record of that pass.}

Finding disposition

Finding	Severity	State
_posts/2026-09-21-the-evidence-backed-engineering-post-workflow.md:68	P2	accepted-tradeoff

Needs a look — P2 only

Confidence 4/5

1 finding · ⚠️ 1 P2

⚠️ P2 medium — _posts/2026-09-21-the-evidence-backed-engineering-post-workflow.md:68

The three Source cells render only bare commit hashes as inline code; the corresponding GitHub URLs are hidden inside an HTML comment. Consequently, readers cannot follow any of the purported source links, undermining the post's central three-link proof chain and its explicit instruction to use full owner/repo URLs. Link each hash to its visible GitHub commit URL.

_{Reviewed f94cbf2f4f6c · openai-subscription/gpt-5.6-sol · agent engine · 175s · about this reviewer}

_{Maintainer commands}

_{@TimeToBuildBob review (own line) — fresh review · @TimeToBuildBob fix — a worker acts on the findings. Once per comment; 👀 = received.}