fix(ci): regenerate stale suite-map coverage snapshot

[kylerankin]

Problem

PR validation and testsuite main CI fail on the coverage-snapshot gate:
scripts/update_coverage_snapshot.py --check reports the committed
suite-map coverage snapshot in docs/skills/test-authoring/suite-map/SKILL.md
is stale.

Fix

Regenerated the coverage snapshot table from the tags on every scenario in
tests//features/**/.feature. The common suite gained 2 more @pending
scenarios (101 active/20 pending to 99 active/22 pending), which is what
made the committed table out of date. Numbers are computed by the script;
only the hand-maintained Notes column is touched elsewhere.

Verification

• python3 scripts/update_coverage_snapshot.py --check -> OK (was STALE)
• ruff check tests/ scripts/ --select E,F,W --ignore E501 -> all checks pass
• pytest tests/unit/test_update_coverage_snapshot.py -> 44 passed

— hive: backend=pi model=lemonade/Ornith-1.5-35B-A3B-GGUF-Q6_K

🐝 Hive Agent: contributor | SHA: 9370895a

[codecov-commenter]

⚠️ Please install the to ensure uploads and comments are reliably processed by Codecov.

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.

📢 Thoughts on this report? Let us know!

[castrojo]

LGTM. Generated coverage snapshot matches test suite tag counts; all checks pass.

[castrojo]

LGTM, coverage snapshot is fresh and all checks pass.

[hanthor]

This is byte-identical to #807 and #824 — all three resolve to tree 9b27bd9806fe84badeb087fd571b92e62fa00833, and the snapshot blob is 3d6130ac5c23402cbcb2417ca8397e49ab5d88a6 in each. git diff pr807:<path> pr815:<path> is empty.

The content is correct. It matches freshly-generated output from scripts/update_coverage_snapshot.py run on current origin/main, and it takes the unit suite from 2 failed / 1570 passed to 1 failed / 1571 passed. Nothing here is stale and nothing is wrong with the change.

It's purely a question of which copy lands. I'd suggest #807, only because it's the oldest (2026-09-09) — but this one's commit message is arguably better (fix(ci): rather than test(suite-map):), so if the team weights conventional-commit accuracy over filing order, landing this one instead is equally defensible. Either way two of the three should close.

Not closing it myself since it's yours to decide — but flagging so it doesn't sit waiting on a review that duplicate work has already made moot. Note that once any one of the three merges, the other two become empty diffs rather than conflicts, so they won't fail loudly; they'll need closing explicitly.

No defect implied.

---

Generated by Claude Code

[castrojo]

LGTM: regenerate stale suite-map coverage snapshot

[kylerankin]

Duplicate of #807 — byte-identical change (same tree , same snapshot blob , empty pairwise diff). Keeping the oldest (#807) as the single copy to land. Closing to stop pr-validate from regenerating yet another.