FE-1507: Move the repertoire into core behind a guarded prompts subpath

[lunelson]

🌟 What is the purpose of this PR?

ADR-0008 (accepted 2026-08-26) moves the harness's default teaching out of its own workspace and into core behind a guarded @hashintel/brunch-agent/prompts subpath that bindings may import and plugins may not. This branch is that mechanical move; it changes no plugin key and no repertoire text.

Draft: opened so the stack is visible end to end. The description is completed when the branch is tied off.

🔗 Related links

• FE-1507 (internal; owning issue)

🚫 Blocked by

• Stacks on ln/fe-1431-plugins; lands after it.

🔍 What does this change?

Removes packages/repertoire and its dependency edges; adds the ./prompts core export; the architecture suite requires the export and rejects a plugin import of it.

Pre-Merge Checklist 🚀

🚢 Has this modified a publishable library?

This PR:

• does not modify any publishable blocks or libraries, or modifications do not need publishing

📜 Does this require a change to the docs?

The changes in this PR:

• are internal and do not require a docs change

[vercel]

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.

Project	Deployment	Actions	Updated (UTC)
hash	Ready	Preview	Aug 26, 2026 6:32pm
petrinaut	Ready	Preview	Aug 26, 2026 6:32pm
petrinaut-docs	Ready	Preview	Aug 26, 2026 6:32pm

1 Skipped Deployment

Project	Deployment	Actions	Updated (UTC)
hashdotdesign-tokens	Ignored	Preview	Aug 26, 2026 6:32pm

[lunelson]

Warning

This pull request is not mergeable via GitHub because a downstack PR is open. Once all requirements are satisfied, merge this PR as a stack on Graphite.
Learn more

• FE-1507: Move the repertoire into core behind a guarded prompts subpath #9349 👈 (View in Graphite)
• FE-1431: Build the plugin authoring surface (cycle two) #9348
• FE-1505: Time each interviewer turn by purpose #9347
• FE-1506: Show captures and completion while a panel elicitation runs #9346 : 1 other dependent PR (#9355 )
• FE-1504: Run the process-model elicitor from the Petrinaut panel on one owned document #9345
• FE-1431: Build the plugin authoring surface #9337
• FE-1406: Audit the harness-teaching lineage and propose the fixed-key plugin contract (ADR-0007) #9327
• FE-1497: Build the controller read path and the SDCPN plugin package #9325
• FE-1404: Run condition 3 as the walking skeleton #9322
• FE-1403: Assemble and test the CPS interview guidance #9321
• FE-1402: Define and rehearse the elicitation completion contract #9320
• FE-1407: Catalogue elicitor failures that published measures miss #9319
• FE-1480: Project and realize a CPS model as a Petrinaut SDCPN #9313
• FE-1495: Prevent Brunch TypeScript contracts from drifting #9312
• FE-1494: Keep Brunch strategy and control records coherent #9311
• FE-1437: Move brunch-agent into hashintel/hash with its history #9274
• main

This stack of pull requests is managed by Graphite. Learn more about stacking.

[cursor]

PR Summary

Low Risk
Package-boundary refactor with enforced import rules; no runtime behavior or repertoire text changes beyond import paths.

Overview
Implements ADR-0008 by deleting the @hashintel/brunch-agent-repertoire workspace and colocating the default harness teaching in @hashintel/brunch-agent behind a guarded ./prompts export. Bindings and the baseline evaluation now import repertoire from @hashintel/brunch-agent/prompts; the Flue binding drops its repertoire workspace dependency and oxlint exception.

Core adds src/prompts.ts (module-load validation via existing readRepertoire), wires ./prompts through package.json exports and the Vite lib build, and keeps the default off the root SDK entry. Architecture tests no longer allow a repertoire package, require the ./prompts export, assert binding-only importers, and check the root index does not re-export prompts.

Docs and steering/spec/topology text describe the new topology; plugin key and repertoire YAML content are unchanged (mechanical move only).

^{Reviewed by Cursor Bugbot for commit 63731bb. Bugbot is set up for automated code reviews on this repo. Configure here.}

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 58.08%. Comparing base (0b4754b) to head (8124edc).

Additional details and impacted files

@@                  Coverage Diff                   @@
##           ln/fe-1431-plugins    #9349      +/-   ##
======================================================
- Coverage               60.93%   58.08%   -2.85%     
======================================================
  Files                    1324     1121     -203     
  Lines                  135760   115492   -20268     
  Branches                 6249     5155    -1094     
======================================================
- Hits                    82722    67088   -15634     
+ Misses                  51997    47568    -4429     
+ Partials                 1041      836     -205     

Flag	Coverage Δ
apps.hash-ai-worker-ts	1.99% <ø> (ø)
apps.hash-api	14.68% <ø> (ø)
local.claude-hooks	0.00% <ø> (ø)
local.hash-backend-utils	?
local.hash-graph-sdk	?
local.hash-isomorphic-utils	12.22% <ø> (ø)
rust.antsi	?
rust.error-stack	90.81% <ø> (ø)
rust.harpc-net	96.21% <ø> (ø)
rust.harpc-tower	67.03% <ø> (ø)
rust.harpc-types	0.00% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-codec	72.76% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-api	24.95% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-authentication	96.05% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-authorization	63.14% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-postgres-store	29.39% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-store	48.48% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-temporal-versioning	47.95% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-types	0.00% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-validation	84.71% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-ast	89.63% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-compiletest	28.39% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-core	78.95% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-diagnostics	72.51% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-eval	79.82% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-hir	89.09% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-mir	?

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[codspeed-hq]

Merging this PR will not alter performance

✅ 98 untouched benchmarks

---

_{Comparing ln/fe-1507-topology (63731bb) with ln/fe-1431-plugins (a48e4c2)}

[github-actions]

Benchmark results

@rust/hash-graph-benches – Integrations

policy_resolution_large

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 2002	$$27.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 204 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.710 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.46 \mathrm{ms} \pm 20.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.225 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1002	$$14.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 107 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.665 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 3314	$$44.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 365 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.60 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$16.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 120 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.342 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 1527	$$26.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 233 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.189 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 2078	$$28.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 187 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.233 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.96 \mathrm{ms} \pm 30.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.67 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 1033	$$15.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 91.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.70 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_medium

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 102	$$3.81 \mathrm{ms} \pm 23.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.18 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.04 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.50 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 52	$$3.40 \mathrm{ms} \pm 23.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.402 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 269	$$5.19 \mathrm{ms} \pm 37.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.512 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.61 \mathrm{ms} \pm 21.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.765 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 108	$$4.27 \mathrm{ms} \pm 36.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.30 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 133	$$4.44 \mathrm{ms} \pm 45.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.69 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.52 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.152 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 63	$$4.14 \mathrm{ms} \pm 29.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.03 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_none

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 2	$$2.62 \mathrm{ms} \pm 20.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.620 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.53 \mathrm{ms} \pm 20.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.027 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 2	$$2.57 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.989 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 8	$$2.85 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.529 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.68 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.627 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 3	$$2.88 \mathrm{ms} \pm 19.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.448 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_small

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 52	$$3.06 \mathrm{ms} \pm 24.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.240 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.77 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.115 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 26	$$2.97 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.870 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 94	$$3.41 \mathrm{ms} \pm 21.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.03 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.01 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.205 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 27	$$3.29 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.584 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 66	$$3.33 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.964 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.99 \mathrm{ms} \pm 19.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.978 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 29	$$3.34 \mathrm{ms} \pm 25.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.900 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_complete

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id;one_depth	1 entities	$$42.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 246 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.225 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	10 entities	$$33.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 264 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.149 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	25 entities	$$36.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 264 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.448 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	5 entities	$$32.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 197 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.382 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	50 entities	$$44.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 272 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-7.785 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	1 entities	$$50.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 397 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.871 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	10 entities	$$41.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 263 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.545 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	25 entities	$$91.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 457 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.713 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	5 entities	$$35.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 227 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.994 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	50 entities	$$277 \mathrm{ms} \pm 1.22 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{gray}-0.991 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	1 entities	$$10.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 61.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.520 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	10 entities	$$10.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 66.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.254 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	25 entities	$$10.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 77.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.725 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	5 entities	$$10.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 70.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.843 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	50 entities	$$10.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 76.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.734 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_linkless

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id	1 entities	$$10.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 71.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.33 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10 entities	$$11.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 89.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.72 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	100 entities	$$10.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 68.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.55 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	1000 entities	$$11.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 72.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.91 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10000 entities	$$11.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 81.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.46 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_entity

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/block/v/1	$$11.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 66.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.393 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/book/v/1	$$11.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 76.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.27 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/building/v/1	$$11.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 103 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.694 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/organization/v/1	$$11.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 68.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.440 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/page/v/2	$$11.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 75.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.50 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/person/v/1	$$11.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 76.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.274 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/playlist/v/1	$$11.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 80.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.54 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/song/v/1	$$11.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 68.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.59 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/uk-address/v/1	$$11.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 104 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.69 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_entity_type

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
get_entity_type_by_id	Account ID: bf5a9ef5-dc3b-43cf-a291-6210c0321eba	$$8.26 \mathrm{ms} \pm 48.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.94 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_multiple_entities

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$61.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 483 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.94 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$113 \mathrm{ms} \pm 629 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.20 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$68.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 448 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.35 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$78.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 555 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.38 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$86.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 549 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.63 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$91.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 549 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.85 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$45.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 291 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.002 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$73.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 361 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.232 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$50.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 361 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.538 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$60.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 410 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.610 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$63.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 400 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.87 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$64.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 442 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.87 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$

scenarios

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
full_test	query-limited	$$126 \mathrm{ms} \pm 733 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.02 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
full_test	query-unlimited	$$135 \mathrm{ms} \pm 516 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.63 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-limited	$$18.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 137 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.513 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-unlimited	$$555 \mathrm{ms} \pm 1.10 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{gray}-0.697 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph