skills/webcmd-browser/references/git-lifecycle.md

# Checkpoint lifecycle

Never use git against site memory. Webcmd owns the repository. If `SITE_MEMORY_CONFLICT` is returned, retry once: `Retry webcmd site memory context, then checkpoint once.` After refreshing context, compare new active `siteMarkdown` with the preserved draft and re-apply the intended edit on top of the refreshed content before retrying checkpoint. That is exactly one retry. Stop after the second conflict.

```bash
webcmd site memory checkpoint <product> \
  --task-id <id> \
  --expected-revision <revision-or-null> \
  --reason candidate_ingestion|direct_correction|major_rewrite \
  --paths sitemap/SITE.md \
  --dispositions '<json>' \
  -f json
```

`--expected-revision` is the `revision` from context (`null` when context returned none). `--paths` are explicit draft Markdown paths to publish. Checkpoint does not take a hostname; it publishes this task's product draft. After classify, rerun context, then checkpoint.

After the final candidate capture or search decision and before editing the draft, rerun context with the same task id:

```bash
webcmd site memory context <url> --task-id <id> -f json
```

Use that refreshed `revision`. This rerun happens before any draft edit, so it does not destroy edits. Then edit the draft and checkpoint.

| reason | when |
| --- | --- |
| `candidate_ingestion` | Promoting candidates. Requires `--dispositions` and a memory change when any row is `ingested`. |
| `direct_correction` | Editing memory without promoting candidates. No dispositions. |
| `major_rewrite` | Replacing a SITE.md that outgrew its bound. No dispositions. |

Any active-memory update that finds `SITE.md` over 500 physical lines must rewrite it to at most 200 lines with contextual reference pointers in that same task, even if only a reference path was requested.

Dispositions are `[{ "id", "status": "ingested"|"rejected", "evidenceRole"?, "rejectionReason"?, "conflictsWithMemory"? }]`. Ingested rows need `evidenceRole` `supporting` or `dissenting`. Rejected rows need `rejectionReason`.

On conflict, run context again with the same task id. Context does not overwrite the existing draft. Compare the new active `siteMarkdown` with that preserved draft, reconcile the intended edit onto the refreshed content, then checkpoint once with the new revision. A `committed` result with no memory change did not publish new content. Do not loop.