Repository navigation
Conversation
The README opened as if this repo were the live product. It now says what DocsFlow is (the open reference architecture), points each claim at the file that backs it, and says what stays with the production system. Also removes two claims this code doesn't support: 5-tier access levels (only admin/user/viewer roles exist) and "no hallucinated claims" (the citation verifier lives in production, not here). BENCHMARKS.md now says its numbers measure production SureCiteAI, and no longer calls FinanceBench peer-reviewed.
![chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1144995?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: ae66117b45
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This presents RLS as an enforcement layer for tenant isolation, but application-facing document queries use a Supabase service-role client, which explicitly bypasses RLS (app/api/documents/route.ts:21-27); their isolation instead depends on adding .eq('tenant_id', tenantId) after validateTenantContext. Consequently, a route modeled on this description can read across tenants if it omits that predicate, so the README should not represent Postgres RLS as a fourth effective layer for those paths.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
This branch has not been deployed
1 participant
The README opened as if this repo were the live product. This rewrites the opening so a visitor knows what they're looking at:
Docs only. Doesn't overlap with #14.