Fix incorrect claim about how GitHub builds squash commit messages

[jnasbyupgrade]

GitHub doesn't auto-build a squash commit message from a PR description — the maintainer manually copies the opening into it, which is what the hard-wrap rule actually depends on. ai/PR.md's own general no-hard-wrap rule has the same fix.

[coderabbitai]

Important

Review skipped

Auto reviews are disabled on this repository. Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the .coderabbit.yaml file in this repository. To trigger a single review, invoke the @coderabbitai review command.

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: ASSERTIVE

Plan: Pro Plus

Run ID: 96b5f1e5-f5df-4703-a3b5-372f1a3cb635

You can disable this status message by setting the reviews.review_status to false in the CodeRabbit configuration file.

Use the checkbox below for a quick retry:

• 🔍 Trigger review

---

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.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.}

[github-actions]

Claude finished @jnasbyupgrade's task in 1m 44s —— View job

---

Reviewing PR #84

• Gather context (PR diff, CLAUDE.md conventions)
• Understand the request (fix an inaccurate claim about squash commit generation)
• Review the change for correctness and adherence to CLAUDE.md
• Post review feedback

Review

This is a small, correct doc fix. The old text implied GitHub mechanically builds the squash commit message from the PR description in a way that depends on line-wrapping — that's not how it works. The new text correctly attributes it to the maintainer manually copying the opening in, which is the real reason hard-wrapped line breaks would leak into the resulting commit message.

• The corrected wording in CLAUDE.md:85-87 is consistent with the existing explanation at CLAUDE.md:74-75 ("The maintainer builds the squash commit message from the PR description..."), so there's no new internal contradiction.
• The PR description itself follows the very rule it's fixing (single-line paragraph, no hard-wrap, no leading header) — good self-consistency.
• Minor, non-blocking: the PR description references ai/PR.md as having "the same fix," but that file doesn't exist in this repo (cat_tools) — it's presumably a file in another project the author maintains. Worth knowing this is just context and not something to look for here, but it doesn't affect the correctness of the change itself.

No functional/build/test surface is touched (docs-only change to CLAUDE.md), and CI on this commit has already passed.

No changes requested — this looks good to merge.

[jnasbyupgrade]

Closing — cat_tools#83 (the CLAUDE.md consolidation PR) hasn't actually merged yet, so this fix belongs there instead of as a follow-up on master.