Correct the onboarding tour and the site-wide metadata - #261
alastairong1 wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
Correction of inaccuracies identified in the 7 August 2026 public estate review. 2.3 — The onboarding tour, shipped in the production bundle and reached from the homepage "New? Take the tour" button, opened with "U.S. equities on-chain. Fully decentralised. Fully backed by real equities." "Fully backed" is the collateral claim class again, and "U.S. equities on-chain" describes the tokens as being the equities rather than instruments referencing them. The order-panel step framed the interface as the operator's own facility in the operator's product voice; it now describes submitting orders to the on-chain contracts. "On-chain orderbook" drops the definite article that implies an operated facility, and equities-only language across the remaining steps is corrected since the book includes ETFs, commodity trusts and a closed-end fund. 3.3 — The site-wide title and description promised earning and yield in every search result and every shared link, with no yield product, no terms and no risk framing, to an ungated audience. The Organization JSON-LD description derives from the same constant and is corrected with it. The homepage subhead and the "Launch Trading Terminal" button carried the same problems. VaultTutorial is left alone: its copy is mechanical and carries no claim class. The review's objection to onboarding users into vault deposits at all is a structural question under section 10.2, not a copy fix. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
|
You have reached your Codex usage limits for code reviews. You can see your limits in the Codex usage dashboard. |
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.
|
|
Warning Review limit reached
Next review available in: 38 minutes You've used all free OSS reviews for now. Wait for the free limit to reset to keep reviewing this public repository. How can I continue?After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the To avoid repeated limits, reduce automatic review volume by pausing incremental auto-reviews earlier, using label-based review opt-in, excluding WIP or generated PR titles, or requesting reviews manually when the PR is ready. If your team needs uninterrupted high-volume reviews, an organization admin can enable usage-based reviews. How do review limits work?CodeRabbit enforces per-developer PR review limits for each organization. Most developers receive the normal plan review availability. For paid Pro and Pro+ PR reviews, CodeRabbit uses adaptive limits for sustained high-volume activity. When a developer's recent PR review activity reaches the 95th percentile or higher among CodeRabbit users, additional reviews become available more gradually as earlier reviews age out of the rolling window. Please refer docs for additional details. Review details⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: defaults Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro Plus Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (4)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
1 participant
Correction of inaccuracies identified in the 7 August 2026 public estate review. Two surfaces the register reached by reading shipped bundles rather than server HTML.
Findings addressed
2.3 — the onboarding tour
Found by the reviewer in production chunk
Tutorial.8GvMErbD.js, triggered by the homepage "New? Take the tour" button. The register counts four breaches in one component.Welcome step. Was: "U.S. equities on-chain. Fully decentralised. Fully backed by real equities. 24/7 trading." — "Fully backed" is the collateral class from 2.1, and "U.S. equities on-chain" describes the tokens as being the equities rather than instruments referencing them. Replaced with the register's wording.
Order panel step. Was: "Click Buy or Sell to open the order panel. Choose between market orders, limit orders, and DCAs." The register's concern is precise — this is the operator walking a first-time user through order types in its own product voice, which is exactly what a supervisor reads when deciding whether the interface operator exercises discretion over access. Reframed per the register to present the interface as one client of open contracts:
Definite article. "On-chain orderbook and transaction data" → "On-chain order and transaction data", removing the article that implies an operated facility.
Equities-only language. "Tradeable Equities" → "Tradeable assets", and the underlying-equity references in the TradingView and fundamentals steps become "instrument", consistent with #260.
VaultTutorial deliberately untouched
The register also flags the "Understanding Vaults" and "Vault Deposits" steps. Those live in
VaultTutorial.svelte, and reading them, the copy is purely mechanical — how a spending budget lands in a vault and how to withdraw it. No collateral, backing, custody or venue-ownership claim. The register's objection is structural (onboarding users into vault deposits at all, as evidence going to the 10.2 discretion trigger), which is a product decision and not something a copy edit resolves. Flagging rather than silently rewording it.3.3 — metadata
Metadata travels on every shared link and every search result. The register's point is that combined with the preview APY strip (2.4) and the referral-campaign capture on urlscan (1.10), the picture an opponent assembles is retail yield marketing — promised to an ungated audience with no product, no terms and no risk framing behind it.
The description takes the register's replacement. The Organization JSON-LD description derives from the same constant, so it is corrected automatically — the register calls out that block specifically, and this is why it stays in sync.
Also in scope, same finding: the homepage subhead "Tokenised equities & yield, done properly" (which carried both the yield claim and the 2.14 equities-umbrella problem), and the "Launch Trading Terminal" button → "Open the trading interface".
Verified no residual
Trade & Earn,earn yieldorTrading Terminalanywhere insrc/.A note on reach
Correcting the metadata here does not clear the superseded wording from search surfaces on its own. Per finding 1.1, a Search Console recrawl should be requested once these deploy, and per 1.10 the Wayback captures of 21 May and 6 June predate the Abmahnung and are unaffected by any edit.
Verification
Branched from
259f0ead.prettierandeslintclean on all four touched files.🤖 Generated with Claude Code