TudorandClaude Opus 5
9cc87c41bb
PR Checks / Frontend Typecheck + Tests (pull_request) Successful in 1m2s
PR Checks / Backend Smoke (pull_request) Successful in 8s
PR Checks / Build Backend (no push) (pull_request) Successful in 16s
PR Checks / Build Frontend (no push) (pull_request) Successful in 44s
PR Checks / Build Pipeline (no push) (pull_request) Successful in 10s
PR Checks / AI Code Review (Claude) (pull_request) Successful in 2m4s
Asked where schools with no results should sit in an alphabetical list, and found that some pages were almost entirely made of them. The per-phase threshold counted schools that were publishable — a result OR an Ofsted grade — while a phase page exists for its results column. /schools/kent/primary published with none of its five rows carrying a result; Minehead had one of seven, Buntingford one of five. Forty-four phase pages were majority-blank. It is the same rule as "no page without a local average", which was written into the spec as a thin-page control and never extended per phase. The threshold now counts schools with a result for that phase. It gates whether the page exists; it does not filter rows — a page that publishes still lists every school of the phase, because someone looking up a school by name has to find it whether or not it published results. 126 of 1,012 variant pages stop publishing: 62 primary, 64 secondary. Every one of them was a table with too little in it to be worth a page. The ordering itself is unchanged: pure A-Z, blanks interleaved. A school sits where its name says it does, and at roughly a tenth of rows that reads fine. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_015mWQnpye9F299NVRCCSRvj