github · pelikhan · Apr 4, 2026 · Apr 4, 2026 · Copilot · Apr 4, 2026
diff --git a/.github/aw/create-agentic-workflow.md b/.github/aw/create-agentic-workflow.md
@@ -961,7 +961,7 @@ Include in the PR description:
   - Use GitHub-flavored markdown (GFM) for all output
   - **Headers**: Start at h3 (###) to maintain proper document hierarchy
   - **Checkboxes**: Use `- [ ]` for unchecked and `- [x]` for checked task items
-  - **Progressive Disclosure**: Use `<details><summary><b>Bold Summary Text</b></summary>` to collapse long content
+  - **Progressive Disclosure**: Use `<details><summary>Bold Summary Text</summary>` to collapse long content
-  - **Progressive Disclosure**: Use `<details><summary>Bold Summary Text</summary>` to collapse long content
+  - **Progressive Disclosure**: Use `<details><summary>Section Name</summary>` to collapse long content
-  - **Progressive Disclosure**: Use `<details><summary>Bold Summary Text</summary>` to collapse long content
+  - **Progressive Disclosure**: Use `<details><summary>Section Name</summary>` to collapse long content
   - **Workflow Run Links**: Format as `[§12345](https://github.com/owner/repo/actions/runs/12345)`. Do NOT add footer attribution (system adds automatically)
 - **Produce a single workflow file**: Always output exactly **one** workflow `.md` file as the primary deliverable. Do not create separate architecture documents, runbooks, usage guides, or any other documentation files alongside the workflow.
   - If documentation is needed, add a brief inline `## Usage` section within the same `.md` file.

diff --git a/...agentics/d3422bf940923ef1d43db5559652b8e1e71869f3/workflows_shared_reporting.md b/...agentics/d3422bf940923ef1d43db5559652b8e1e71869f3/workflows_shared_reporting.md
diff --git a/.github/aw/report.md b/.github/aw/report.md
@@ -49,7 +49,7 @@ When creating GitHub issues or discussions:
 
 ### Progressive Disclosure
 
-**Wrap detailed content in `<details><summary><b>Section Name</b></summary>` tags to improve readability and reduce scrolling.**
+**Wrap detailed content in `<details><summary>Section Name</summary>` tags to improve readability and reduce scrolling.**
 
 Use collapsible sections for:
 - Verbose details (full logs, raw data)
@@ -62,7 +62,7 @@ Always keep critical information visible (summary, critical issues, key metrics)
 
 1. **Overview**: 1–2 paragraphs summarizing key findings
 2. **Critical Information**: Show immediately (summary stats, critical issues)
-3. **Details**: Use `<details><summary><b>Section Name</b></summary>` for expanded content
+3. **Details**: Use `<details><summary>Section Name</summary>` for expanded content
 4. **Context**: Add helpful metadata (workflow run, date, trigger)
 
 ### Design Principles
@@ -85,14 +85,14 @@ Reports should:
 [Always visible - these are important]
 
 <details>
-<summary><b>View Detailed Results</b></summary>
+<summary>View Detailed Results</summary>
 
 [Comprehensive details, logs, traces]
 
 </details>
 
 <details>
-<summary><b>View All Warnings</b></summary>
+<summary>View All Warnings</summary>
 
 [Minor issues and potential problems]
 

diff --git a/.github/workflows/agent-persona-explorer.md b/.github/workflows/agent-persona-explorer.md
@@ -136,12 +136,12 @@ Follow these formatting guidelines when creating your persona analysis report:
 **Use h3 (###) or lower for all headers in persona analysis reports to maintain proper document hierarchy.**
 
 ### 2. Progressive Disclosure
-**Wrap detailed examples and data tables in `<details><summary><b>Section Name</b></summary>` tags to improve readability.**
+**Wrap detailed examples and data tables in `<details><summary>Section Name</summary>` tags to improve readability.**
 
 Example:
 ```markdown
 <details>
-<summary><b>View Communication Examples</b></summary>
+<summary>View Communication Examples</summary>
 
 [Detailed examples of agent outputs, writing style samples, tone analysis]
 
@@ -165,14 +165,14 @@ Example:
 3. [Security practices observed]
 
 <details>
-<summary><b>View High Quality Responses (Top 2-3)</b></summary>
+<summary>View High Quality Responses (Top 2-3)</summary>
 
 - [Scenario that worked well and why - keep brief]
 
 </details>
 
 <details>
-<summary><b>View Areas for Improvement (Top 2-3)</b></summary>
+<summary>View Areas for Improvement (Top 2-3)</summary>
 
 - [Specific issues found - be direct]
 - [Suggestions for enhancement - actionable]

diff --git a/.github/workflows/archie.md b/.github/workflows/archie.md
@@ -151,7 +151,7 @@ Create a well-formatted comment containing your diagrams:
 
 **Comment Formatting**: Use h3 (`###`) or lower for all headers in your comment to maintain proper document hierarchy. The comment has no implicit title, so start section headers at h3.
 
-If generating multiple diagrams, wrap diagrams 2 and 3 in `<details><summary><b>View Additional Diagrams</b></summary>` tags to reduce scrolling.
+If generating multiple diagrams, wrap diagrams 2 and 3 in `<details><summary>View Additional Diagrams</summary>` tags to reduce scrolling.
 
 ### Comment Structure
 
@@ -169,7 +169,7 @@ If generating multiple diagrams, wrap diagrams 2 and 3 in `<details><summary><b>
 \```
 
 <details>
-<summary><b>View Additional Diagrams</b></summary>
+<summary>View Additional Diagrams</summary>
 
 #### [Diagram 2 Title] (if applicable)
 

diff --git a/.github/workflows/auto-triage-issues.md b/.github/workflows/auto-triage-issues.md
@@ -182,7 +182,7 @@ For the triggering issue (on issue events), you can omit `item_number`:
 
 When running on schedule, create a discussion report following these formatting guidelines:
 
-**Report Formatting**: Use h3 (###) or lower for all headers in the report. Wrap long sections (>10 items) in `<details><summary><b>Section Name</b></summary>` tags to improve readability.
+**Report Formatting**: Use h3 (###) or lower for all headers in the report. Wrap long sections (>10 items) in `<details><summary>Section Name</summary>` tags to improve readability.
 
 ```markdown
 ### 🏷️ Auto-Triage Report Summary
@@ -206,7 +206,7 @@ When running on schedule, create a discussion report following these formatting
 | #125 | needs-triage | Low | Ambiguous description requiring human review |
 
 <details>
-<summary><b>View Detailed Classification Analysis</b></summary>
+<summary>View Detailed Classification Analysis</summary>
 
 #### Detailed Breakdown
 
@@ -233,7 +233,7 @@ When running on schedule, create a discussion report following these formatting
 ### Label Distribution
 
 <details>
-<summary><b>View Label Statistics</b></summary>
+<summary>View Label Statistics</summary>
 
 - **bug**: X issues (Y% of processed)
 - **enhancement**: X issues (Y% of processed)

diff --git a/.github/workflows/bot-detection.md b/.github/workflows/bot-detection.md
@@ -866,7 +866,7 @@ Maintain a **single** open triage issue with the exact title:
 
 ## Report Format (Issue Body)
 
-**Report Formatting**: Use h3 (###) or lower for all headers in the report. Wrap long sections (>10 items) in `<details><summary><b>Section Name</b></summary>` tags to improve readability.
+**Report Formatting**: Use h3 (###) or lower for all headers in the report. Wrap long sections (>10 items) in `<details><summary>Section Name</summary>` tags to improve readability.
 
 Produce a concise, evidence-driven report:
 

diff --git a/.github/workflows/breaking-change-checker.md b/.github/workflows/breaking-change-checker.md
@@ -174,7 +174,7 @@ Create an issue with the following structure:
 | [sha] | [file path] | [category] | [description] | [user impact] |
 
 <details>
-<summary><b>Full Code Diff Analysis</b></summary>
+<summary>Full Code Diff Analysis</summary>
 
 #### Detailed Commit Analysis
 
@@ -187,7 +187,7 @@ Create an issue with the following structure:
 </details>
 
 <details>
-<summary><b>All Commits Analyzed</b></summary>
+<summary>All Commits Analyzed</summary>
 
 [Complete list of commits that were analyzed with their details]
 

diff --git a/.github/workflows/ci-coach.md b/.github/workflows/ci-coach.md
@@ -181,7 +181,7 @@ If no improvements are found or changes are too risky:
 **Rationale**: Current integration tests wait unnecessarily for unit tests to complete. Integration tests don't use unit test outputs, so they can run in parallel. Splitting unit tests by package and rebalancing integration matrix reduces the critical path by 52%.
 
 <details>
-<summary><b>View Detailed Test Structure Comparison</b></summary>
+<summary>View Detailed Test Structure Comparison</summary>
 
 **Current Test Structure:**
 ```yaml

diff --git a/.github/workflows/ci-doctor.md b/.github/workflows/ci-doctor.md
@@ -258,7 +258,7 @@ Check run data was fetched before this session:
 <!-- one row per failing check -->
 
 <details>
-<summary><b>Detailed Analysis</b></summary>
+<summary>Detailed Analysis</summary>
 
 <!-- Per-check deep-dive with log excerpts and root cause explanation -->
 
@@ -271,7 +271,7 @@ Check run data was fetched before this session:
 <!-- How to avoid similar failures in future PRs -->
 
 <details>
-<summary><b>Analysis Steps</b></summary>
+<summary>Analysis Steps</summary>
 
 <!-- Summary of the steps taken to analyze the failing checks (tools called, logs read, patterns found) -->
 
@@ -280,7 +280,7 @@ Check run data was fetched before this session:
 
 **IMPORTANT**: You **MUST** always end by calling `add_comment` (to post your diagnosis on the PR) or `noop` (if all checks are passing). Never finish without calling one of these.
 
-**IMPORTANT**: Your comment **MUST** always include an **Analysis Steps** section (using `<details><summary><b>Analysis Steps</b></summary>`) that summarizes what you did to reach your conclusions — which tools you called, which logs you read, and what patterns you found. This gives readers progressive disclosure: a quick summary up front, with the full investigation trail available on demand.
+**IMPORTANT**: Your comment **MUST** always include an **Analysis Steps** section (using `<details><summary>Analysis Steps</summary>`) that summarizes what you did to reach your conclusions — which tools you called, which logs you read, and what patterns you found. This gives readers progressive disclosure: a quick summary up front, with the full investigation trail available on demand.
 
 {{/if}}
 {{#if github.event.workflow_run.id}}
@@ -406,7 +406,7 @@ Logs and artifacts have been pre-downloaded before this session started:
    - **Prevention Strategies**: How to avoid similar failures
    - **AI Team Self-Improvement**: Give a short set of additional prompting instructions to copy-and-paste into instructions.md for AI coding agents to help prevent this type of failure in future
    - **Historical Context**: Similar past failures and their resolutions
-   - **Analysis Steps**: A summary of every step you took to reach your conclusions (phases completed, tools called, files read, patterns matched) — wrapped in a `<details><summary><b>Analysis Steps</b></summary>` block for progressive disclosure
+   - **Analysis Steps**: A summary of every step you took to reach your conclusions (phases completed, tools called, files read, patterns matched) — wrapped in a `<details><summary>Analysis Steps</summary>` block for progressive disclosure
 
 2. **Actionable Deliverables**:
    - Create an issue with investigation results (if warranted)
@@ -418,7 +418,7 @@ Logs and artifacts have been pre-downloaded before this session started:
 
 ### Investigation Issue Template
 
-**Report Formatting**: Use h3 (###) or lower for all headers in the report. Wrap long sections (>10 items) in `<details><summary><b>Section Name</b></summary>` tags to improve readability.
+**Report Formatting**: Use h3 (###) or lower for all headers in the report. Wrap long sections (>10 items) in `<details><summary>Section Name</summary>` tags to improve readability.
 
 When creating an investigation issue, use this structure:
 
@@ -440,7 +440,7 @@ When creating an investigation issue, use this structure:
 [List of failed jobs with key error messages]
 
 <details>
-<summary><b>Investigation Findings</b></summary>
+<summary>Investigation Findings</summary>
 
 [Deep analysis results]
 
@@ -456,14 +456,14 @@ When creating an investigation issue, use this structure:
 [Short set of additional prompting instructions to copy-and-paste into instructions.md for a AI coding agents to help prevent this type of failure in future]
 
 <details>
-<summary><b>Historical Context</b></summary>
+<summary>Historical Context</summary>
 
 [Similar past failures and patterns]
 
 </details>
 
 <details>
-<summary><b>Analysis Steps</b></summary>
+<summary>Analysis Steps</summary>
 
 [Summary of the steps taken to investigate this failure: phases completed, tools called, files read, patterns matched]
 
@@ -479,7 +479,7 @@ When creating an investigation issue, use this structure:
 - **Pattern Building**: Contribute to the knowledge base for future investigations
 - **Resource Efficient**: Use caching to avoid re-downloading large logs
 - **Security Conscious**: Never execute untrusted code from logs or external sources
-- **Always Show Your Work**: Every report **must** include a collapsible `<details><summary><b>Analysis Steps</b></summary>` section summarising the steps taken to reach your conclusions. This delights readers with progressive disclosure — a quick overview first, full investigation trail on demand.
+- **Always Show Your Work**: Every report **must** include a collapsible `<details><summary>Analysis Steps</summary>` section summarising the steps taken to reach your conclusions. This delights readers with progressive disclosure — a quick overview first, full investigation trail on demand.
 
 ## ⚠️ Mandatory Output Requirement
 

diff --git a/.github/workflows/claude-code-user-docs-review.md b/.github/workflows/claude-code-user-docs-review.md
@@ -283,7 +283,7 @@ I reviewed this documentation as a developer who:
 ### 🚫 Critical Blockers (Score: X/10)
 
 <details>
-<summary><b>Blocker 1: [Title]</b></summary>
+<summary>Blocker 1: [Title]</summary>
 
 **Impact:** Cannot proceed with adoption
 
@@ -302,7 +302,7 @@ I reviewed this documentation as a developer who:
 ### ⚠️ Major Obstacles (Score: X/10)
 
 <details>
-<summary><b>Obstacle 1: [Title]</b></summary>
+<summary>Obstacle 1: [Title]</summary>
 
 **Impact:** Significant friction in getting started
 
@@ -469,7 +469,7 @@ Engine: custom - [X] workflows found
 ## Appendix: Files Reviewed
 
 <details>
-<summary><b>Complete List of Documentation Files Analyzed</b></summary>
+<summary>Complete List of Documentation Files Analyzed</summary>
 
 - `README.md`
 - `docs/src/content/docs/setup/quick-start.md`

diff --git a/.github/workflows/cli-consistency-checker.md b/.github/workflows/cli-consistency-checker.md
@@ -160,7 +160,7 @@ When issues are found, create a **single consolidated issue** that includes:
     - Suggested fix if applicable
     - Priority level: `high` (breaks functionality), `medium` (confusing/misleading), `low` (minor inconsistency)
 
-**Report Formatting**: Use h3 (###) or lower for all headers in the report. Wrap long sections (>5 findings) in `<details><summary><b>Section Name</b></summary>` tags to improve readability. The issue title serves as h1, so start section headers at h3.
+**Report Formatting**: Use h3 (###) or lower for all headers in the report. Wrap long sections (>5 findings) in `<details><summary>Section Name</summary>` tags to improve readability. The issue title serves as h1, so start section headers at h3.
 
 ### Issue Format
 
@@ -197,7 +197,7 @@ Automated CLI consistency inspection found **X inconsistencies** in command help
 - [List areas with issues]
 
 <details>
-<summary><b>Detailed Findings</b></summary>
+<summary>Detailed Findings</summary>
 
 #### 1. [Issue Title]
 

diff --git a/.github/workflows/cli-version-checker.md b/.github/workflows/cli-version-checker.md
@@ -206,7 +206,7 @@ Legacy template reference (adapt to use Report Structure Pattern above):
 - [New feature 2]
 
 <details>
-<summary><b>View Full Changelog</b></summary>
+<summary>View Full Changelog</summary>
 
 ### Release Highlights (from GitHub)
 [Include key highlights from GitHub release notes if available]
@@ -232,7 +232,7 @@ Legacy template reference (adapt to use Report Structure Pattern above):
 </details>
 
 <details>
-<summary><b>View Migration Guide</b></summary>
+<summary>View Migration Guide</summary>
 
 [Step-by-step update instructions, code changes needed if any]
 

diff --git a/.github/workflows/constraint-solving-potd.md b/.github/workflows/constraint-solving-potd.md
@@ -74,7 +74,7 @@ Compare **at least two** ways to model this problem. For each approach:
 - Note trade-offs (expressiveness, propagation strength, scalability)
 
 <details>
-<summary><b>Example Model (Pseudo-code)</b></summary>
+<summary>Example Model (Pseudo-code)</summary>
 
 Provide a short, readable pseudo-code or MiniZinc/OPL/OR-Tools snippet showing one model. Keep it under 30 lines.
 

diff --git a/.github/workflows/contribution-check.md b/.github/workflows/contribution-check.md
@@ -102,7 +102,7 @@ Follow the **report layout rules** below — they apply to every report this wor
 
 Apply these principles to make the report scannable, warm, and actionable:
 
-**Report Formatting**: Use h3 (###) or lower for all headers in the report. Wrap long sections (>10 items) in `<details><summary><b>Section Name</b></summary>` tags to improve readability.
+**Report Formatting**: Use h3 (###) or lower for all headers in the report. Wrap long sections (>10 items) in `<details><summary>Section Name</summary>` tags to improve readability.
 
 1. **Lead with the takeaway.** Open with a single-sentence human-readable summary that tells the maintainer what happened and what needs attention. No jargon, no counts-only headers. Example: *"We looked at 10 new PRs — 6 look great, 3 need a closer look, and 1 doesn't fit the project guidelines."*
 
@@ -150,7 +150,7 @@ We looked at 4 new PRs — 1 looks great, 2 need a closer look, and 1 doesn't fi
 ### Off-guidelines 🔴
 
 <details>
-<summary><b>Per-PR Details</b></summary>
+<summary>Per-PR Details</summary>
 
 | PR | Title | Author | Lines | Quality |
 |----|-------|--------|------:|---------|