Fold the August fleet findings into the policies, or drop them (closes #62)

Of the cross-repository findings recorded on 2026-08-09, two were rules a repository must follow that `prompts/REPO_POLICIES.md` did not yet state, and each now sits in the paragraph a reader would be in. A new or changed check is proven by planting a defect it must catch and watching the run fail, since a green run alone does not show the check ran. A separate workflow limited to `main` by a `branches` list is first run from the feature branch by adding that branch to the list and removing it before merging, with any publishing job kept behind `if: github.ref_name == 'main'`.

The other findings are dropped, each with its reason on the issue; the `config verify` warning goes by sneak's ruling on #40 that there is no config check step.

Model: opus-5-5

.gitattributes

@@ -1,3 +1,4 @@
-# Git never reports a conflict in TODO.md: read the merged entries after every
-# merge or rebase, because an entry can land in the middle of another.
+# Every PR adds an entry at the top of TODO.md's Completed Steps; union keeps
+# both sides instead of conflicting. Git never reports a conflict here: read
+# the merged entries after every merge or rebase.
 TODO.md merge=union

TODO.md

@@ -21,6 +21,24 @@ fmt-check, and commit.
 
 # Completed Steps
 
+- 2026-10-04: Went through the fleet findings recorded on 2026-08-09 (issue 62)
+  and added the two rules `REPO_POLICIES.md` did not yet state: a new or changed
+  check is proven by planting a defect it must catch; and a change to a separate
+  workflow limited to `main` is first run from the feature branch, added to that
+  workflow's `branches` list and removed again before merging. The other
+  findings were already stated, replaced by `--no-cache`, about git worktrees,
+  or about how agents work together. The warning against
+  `golangci-lint config verify` is dropped because sneak ruled on
+  https://git.eeqj.de/sneak/prompts/issues/40 (2026-08-10) that there is no
+  config check step and the config is assumed valid; a vendored `.golangci.yml`
+  stays byte-identical to the canonical copy. The issue gives each reason.
+- 2026-10-04: `REPO_POLICIES.md` now says which `Dockerfile` stages run
+  `script/bootstrap` (issue 90). The gate phases and the build stage start from
+  their pinned base images and install what those images lack either inline, as
+  the canonical Go `Dockerfile` does for `git`, or by running
+  `script/bootstrap`, as this repo's own `Dockerfile` does for its yarn
+  packages. The development environment stage, the final stage of a non-server
+  repo, runs `script/bootstrap`. The new repo checklist says the same.
 - 2026-10-04: Added a root `.gitattributes` that merges `TODO.md` with git's
   union merge (issue 98), so two branches that each add an entry at the top of
   Completed Steps merge without a conflict. Git now never reports a conflict in

prompts/NEW_REPO_CHECKLIST.md

@@ -124,8 +124,10 @@ are thin shims calling them. Model scripts:
 - [ ] `script/bootstrap` / `make bootstrap` — installs all dependencies,
       idempotently, assuming nothing (pkg manager detection nix/apt/brew/apk;
       node used if present, else pinned version via nvm from a hash-verified
-      archive; pinned yarn via corepack); Dockerfile runs it instead of inline
-      installs
+      archive; pinned yarn via corepack); a non-server repo's development
+      environment stage runs it instead of inline installs; a gate phase or the
+      build stage installs what its base image lacks either inline or by running
+      it
 - [ ] `script/setup` / `make setup` — readies a fresh clone: runs `bootstrap`,
       then `install-precommit`, plus repo-specific init
 - [ ] `script/test` / `make test` — `docker build --no-cache --target test .`,

prompts/REPO_POLICIES.md

@@ -104,10 +104,14 @@ style conventions are in separate documents:
   `lint` phase and a `test` phase, with the final stage depending on both so the
   image cannot be built unless they pass. For non-server repos the final stage
   brings up a development environment; for server repos it is the runtime image.
-  Dockerfiles install development prerequisites by running `script/bootstrap`
-  rather than duplicating installs inline; COPY `script/` and the dependency
-  manifests (`package.json` + `yarn.lock`, `go.mod` + `go.sum`, etc.) before
-  running it.
+  The gate phases and the build stage start from their pinned base images and
+  install what those images lack either inline, as the canonical Go `Dockerfile`
+  below does for `git`, or by running `script/bootstrap`, as the `prompts`
+  repo's own `Dockerfile` does for its yarn packages. The development
+  environment stage installs development prerequisites by running
+  `script/bootstrap` rather than duplicating its installs inline. A stage that
+  runs `script/bootstrap` COPYs `script/` and the dependency manifests
+  (`package.json` + `yarn.lock`, `go.mod` + `go.sum`, etc.) before running it.
 
 - **Linting and testing run in Docker, as phases of the `Dockerfile`.** There is
   no separate lint file. `script/lint` and `script/test` each build one phase
@@ -156,6 +160,9 @@ style conventions are in separate documents:
   not evidence that anything ran: a sub-second build reporting success is a
   cache hit, not a result. Never invalidate by pruning — `docker builder prune`
   and friends destroy a build cache shared with every other build on the host.
+  When a check is added or changed, prove it works by planting a defect it must
+  catch and watching the run fail on it, then revert the defect. A green run
+  alone shows neither that the check ran nor that it covers what it should.
 
 - **The gate phases are separate stages, and the build stage depends on both.**
   The lint phase is based on the `golangci/golangci-lint` image (pinned by
@@ -279,7 +286,12 @@ style conventions are in separate documents:
   carry the same guarantee, because its gate phases may come from the cache. The
   image build is uncached and so runs the gate phases a second time. That is the
   price of the rule above, and it is worth paying: the image that ships is built
-  from a run of its own gates rather than from a cache entry.
+  from a run of its own gates rather than from a cache entry. A separate
+  workflow limited to `main` by a `branches` list under `on: push` cannot be
+  checked by review: to try a change to it, add the feature branch to that list
+  and push, then remove the branch from the list again before merging. Keep any
+  job in it that publishes behind `if: github.ref_name == 'main'`, so the run
+  from the feature branch publishes nothing.
 
 - Use platform-standard formatters: `black` for Python, `prettier` for
   JS/CSS/Markdown/HTML, `go fmt` for Go. Always use default configuration with