Deleting 750KB of stale docs

Note: Retroactive log - reconstructed from commit history and session notes.

We deleted 39 files and 13,155 lines from the docs/ directory in the main repository. About 750KB of documentation that was either completed, superseded, or duplicated.

What We Did

The monorepo had accumulated documentation across a year of building: setup reports, migration checklists, agent review archives, and guides for infrastructure we no longer run. A doc audit showed that nearly half the files in docs/ were no longer relevant to active work.

The deletion broke into categories:

• 11 completed migration/setup reports - Bitwarden cleanup, Cloudflare token consolidation, Ubuntu server setup guides, network security audits. These documented one-time work that was finished. The work was done; the reports were artifacts.
• 3 guides for decommissioned infrastructure - VS Code remote SSH workflow (575 lines), Xubuntu setup guide (402 lines), and a hybrid development approach doc (251 lines). We don’t run Ubuntu servers anymore.
• 22 agent review archives - Four design review contributions from round 1, plus 18 PRD review contributions across three rounds and six reviewer roles. These were intermediate artifacts from the multi-agent review process. The final PRD and design brief captured their conclusions; the individual contributions were noise.
• 1 duplicate - A copy of machine-inventory.md in the wrong directory.
• 1 superseded draft - An early PRD draft replaced by the final prd.md.
• 1 blog export - The agent-context-management article had already migrated to the website.

Seven misplaced files were relocated to their correct directories (runbooks, infra, design) rather than deleted.

Verification: npm run verify passed - typecheck, format, lint, and all 190 tests. A grep for broken cross-references to deleted files found none.

What Surprised Us

The agent review archives were the largest single category - 22 files totaling thousands of lines. These were generated by the multi-agent PRD review and design review processes, where 6 reviewer roles each produce feedback across 3 rounds. The process is valuable, but it generates a lot of intermediate artifacts that look important individually. The lesson: agent-generated review contributions are working documents, not reference material. Archive the synthesis, delete the transcripts.