chore: open next Unreleased section

[steipete]

Opens the next Unreleased changelog section after the verified v0.11.10 release.

The shared release workflow created and pushed this commit; repository policy blocked only its automatic PR creation. Release publication, both native verifier jobs, checksum binding, and the Homebrew handoff already succeeded.

[clawsweeper]

Codex review: needs maintainer review before merge. Reviewed July 27, 2026, 5:28 AM ET / 09:28 UTC.

ClawSweeper review

What this changes

This PR inserts an empty Unreleased section above the verified v0.11.10 release entry in CHANGELOG.md.

Merge readiness

⚠️ Ready for maintainer review - 1 item remains

Keep this PR open for collaborator review. It is a narrow release-maintenance change, and the author association is COLLABORATOR, so this cleanup workflow must not auto-close it.

Priority: P3
Reviewed head: 8bf079b17e59e97de916be55d6a95778ec848dca

Review scores

Measure	Result	What it means
Overall readiness	🐚 platinum hermit (4/6)	A focused, low-risk release-maintenance patch with no discrete correctness concern visible in the supplied diff.
Proof confidence	🌊 off-meta tidepool	Not applicable: This collaborator-authored release-maintenance changelog-only PR does not require contributor runtime proof.
Patch quality	🐚 platinum hermit (4/6)	No actionable review findings were identified.

Verification

Check	Result	Evidence
Real behavior	Not applicable	Not applicable: This collaborator-authored release-maintenance changelog-only PR does not require contributor runtime proof.
Evidence reviewed	3 items	PR scope: The supplied pull-request diff changes only CHANGELOG.md, adding two lines for a new Unreleased heading above the v0.11.10 entry. Release-workflow provenance: The sole PR commit is authored by github-actions[bot] with message "chore: open next unreleased section"; the PR body describes it as a shared release-workflow follow-up after v0.11.10 verification and publication. Protected author handling: The provided GitHub context identifies the PR author association as COLLABORATOR. Repository review policy requires collaborator-authored items to remain open for explicit maintainer judgment.
Findings	None	None.
Security	None	None.

How this fits together

The release workflow publishes a versioned changelog entry and then prepares the changelog for subsequent development. This PR supplies that post-release heading, which future unreleased changes flow into before the next release is cut.

flowchart LR
  A[Verified release v0.11.10] --> B[Release workflow]
  B --> C[Versioned changelog entry]
  C --> D[New Unreleased heading]
  D --> E[Future development notes]
  E --> F[Next release]

Loading

Before merge

• Complete next step (P2) - No repair work is needed; this collaborator-authored PR should follow normal release-maintainer review rather than an automated cleanup lane.

Agent review details

Security

None.

Review metrics

Metric	Value	Why it matters
Changelog scope	1 file affected; 2 lines added	The patch is intentionally limited to opening the next release-notes section and does not alter runtime behavior.

Technical review

Best possible solution:

Land the minimal post-release changelog update once the release workflow and maintainer review confirm the v0.11.10 handoff is complete.

Do we have a high-confidence way to reproduce the issue?

Not applicable: this PR is a release-maintenance changelog update rather than a reported runtime defect.

Is this the best way to solve the issue?

Yes. Adding the next empty Unreleased heading is the narrow, established post-release bookkeeping change indicated by the supplied diff and release-workflow context.

AGENTS.md: unclear because the file could not be read completely.

Codex review notes: model internal, reasoning high; reviewed against b1e388a6b484.

Labels

Label changes:

• add P3: This is low-risk release-maintenance cleanup with no user-facing runtime behavior change.
• add rating: 🐚 platinum hermit: Overall readiness is 🐚 platinum hermit; proof is 🌊 off-meta tidepool and patch quality is 🐚 platinum hermit.
• add status: 👀 ready for maintainer look: ClawSweeper has no concrete contributor-facing blocker left for this PR. Not applicable: This collaborator-authored release-maintenance changelog-only PR does not require contributor runtime proof.

Label justifications:

• P3: This is low-risk release-maintenance cleanup with no user-facing runtime behavior change.
• rating: 🐚 platinum hermit: Overall readiness is 🐚 platinum hermit; proof is 🌊 off-meta tidepool and patch quality is 🐚 platinum hermit.
• status: 👀 ready for maintainer look: ClawSweeper has no concrete contributor-facing blocker left for this PR. Not applicable: This collaborator-authored release-maintenance changelog-only PR does not require contributor runtime proof.

Evidence

What I checked:

• PR scope: The supplied pull-request diff changes only CHANGELOG.md, adding two lines for a new Unreleased heading above the v0.11.10 entry. (CHANGELOG.md:3, 8bf079b17e59)
• Release-workflow provenance: The sole PR commit is authored by github-actions[bot] with message "chore: open next unreleased section"; the PR body describes it as a shared release-workflow follow-up after v0.11.10 verification and publication. (CHANGELOG.md:3, 8bf079b17e59)
• Protected author handling: The provided GitHub context identifies the PR author association as COLLABORATOR. Repository review policy requires collaborator-authored items to remain open for explicit maintainer judgment.

Likely related people:

• steipete: The GitHub context identifies steipete as the collaborator author for this release-maintenance PR; local history inspection was unavailable in this review runtime, so ownership attribution remains limited. (role: release-workflow collaborator; confidence: low; files: CHANGELOG.md)

Rating scale

Score	Internal tier	Crab rank	Meaning
6/6	S	🦀 challenger crab	Exceptional readiness
5/6	A	🦞 diamond lobster	Very strong readiness
4/6	B	🐚 platinum hermit	Good normal PR; ordinary maintainer review
3/6	C	🦐 gold shrimp	Useful, but confidence is limited
2/6	D	🦪 silver shellfish	Proof or implementation needs work
1/6	F	🧂 unranked krab	Not merge-ready
N/A	NA	🌊 off-meta tidepool	Rating does not apply

Overall follows the weaker of proof and patch quality.
Shiny media proof means a screenshot, video, or linked artifact directly shows the changed behavior. Runtime, network, CSP, and security claims still need visible diagnostics.

Workflow

• ClawSweeper keeps one durable marker-backed review comment per issue or PR.
• Re-runs edit this comment so the latest verdict, findings, and automation markers stay together instead of adding duplicate bot comments.
• A fresh review can be triggered by eligible @clawsweeper re-review comments, exact-item GitHub events, scheduled/background review runs, or manual workflow dispatch.
• PR/issue authors and users with repository write access can comment @clawsweeper re-review or @clawsweeper re-run on an open PR or issue to request a fresh review only.
• Maintainers can also comment @clawsweeper review to request a fresh review only.
• Fresh-review commands do not start repair, autofix, rebase, CI repair, or automerge.
• Maintainer-only repair and merge flows require explicit commands such as @clawsweeper autofix, @clawsweeper automerge, @clawsweeper fix ci, or @clawsweeper address review.
• Maintainers can comment @clawsweeper explain to ask for more context, or @clawsweeper stop to stop active automation.