Schema validation analysis - no discrepancies found

[Copilot]

Description

Performed meticulous reconciliation of docs/reference/definition-files/schema.json against the verification logic in internal/workshop/workshop_file.go and related validation code.

Analysis Results

No changes required. The schema accurately represents all enforced validation rules:

• Workshop names: Pattern ^[a-z](?:-?[a-z0-9])*$ with 40 char limit matches Go validation
• SDK names: Complex conditional patterns correctly handle try-/project- prefixes (max 44/48 chars), prevent prefix chaining, and reject reserved name "agent"
• Channels: Pattern matches Go regex for track/risk format
• Plug/slot bindings: Reference patterns properly enforce colon separator, allow empty SDK part (defaults to "system"), and prevent additional attributes when bind is set
• Connections & actions: Patterns consistent with above rules

All 46 workshop tests and 55 SDK tests pass. Schema appropriately delegates semantic validations (e.g., SDK existence checks) to Go code where full context is available.

Self-review quick check

• Make decisions that cost a lot to reverse explicit in the PR description.
• Avoid nested conditions.
• Delete dead code and redundant comments.
• Normalise symmetries by sticking to doing identical things identically.
• Check that coupled code elements, files, and directories are adjacent.
• Put variable declaration and initialisation together.
• Divide large expressions into digestable and self-explanatory ones.
• Put a blank line between two logically different chunks of code.
• Follow the style guide for new error messages.

Docs

• I confirm the PR has no implications for documentation.

Original prompt

perform your instructions

Custom agent used: Doc Schema Update Bot
Updates the schema.json in the docs to reflect the code changes

---

💬 We'd love your input! Share your thoughts on Copilot coding agent in our 2 minute survey.