create-known-issues

Documenting known issues after a code audit requires consolidating validation, cleanup, and repository evidence into a structured file. This process merges findings into a single source of truth, preserving issue status and historical context for future reference.

The best way to track known limitations is using a structured document that supports compact and full tracking modes. This maintains clear statuses like open, accepted, or resolved for each issue, ensuring visibility and preventing loss of critical project context.

Generating a known-issues document for a specific scope requires defining the target path, tracking mode, and providing validation findings. The output is a Document Generation Artifact detailing sources inspected, confidence notes, and open questions for comprehensive issue tracking.

Yes, you can consolidate validation and cleanup findings into a single issue tracking document. This merges manual reviews and automated findings into one source of truth, maintaining clear statuses and preventing the loss of critical context across the project.

Documenting accepted technical trade-offs requires a defined project scope, validation and cleanup findings, and repository evidence. This generates a document preserving issue status, historical context, and categorizing limitations by severity for clear visibility.

The difference between compact and full tracking modes lies in the depth of issue documentation. Both modes generate a structured artifact with target paths, sources inspected, confidence notes, and open questions, but allow scaling the tracking detail to fit project needs.