docs: add maintainer bounty post template

[akmhatey-ai]

Summary

• Add a copy-pasteable maintainer bounty post template with stable headings in docs/bounty-rules.md.
• Point the admin runbook's bounty-posting checklist at that template and the amount-in-title format.
• Align .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/bounty.yml with the same evidence, out-of-scope, duplicate/stale, and public artifact hygiene prompts, then guard the headings in docs smoke.

Refs #456

Evidence

• Current docs/bounty-rules.md already has contributor submission evidence templates from merged PR docs: add bounty evidence templates #433, but it did not document a maintainer-facing bounty post template.
• Current docs/admin-runbook.md only had a short "Post a Bounty" checklist without stable heading or amount-in-title guidance.
• Current .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/bounty.yml used the title prefix [bounty] and required only work, reward, max awards, and acceptance fields.
• Live MRWK bounty API shows issue MRWK bounty: 150 MRWK - document agent-friendly bounty post template #456 / internal bounty id 75 is open, reward 150 MRWK, max awards 1, awards paid 0, awards remaining 1, and active attempts [].
• Public duplicate checks for agent-friendly bounty post template, bounty post template, stable headings, and amount-in-title found no same-scope open PR or claim. Adjacent PR docs: document bounty sort and limit filters #457 is MRWK bounty: documentation updates and improvements #426 API docs, and owner draft PR add treasury governance proposals #458 is governance proposal work, not this template.

Validation

• uv run --extra dev python scripts/docs_smoke.py -> docs smoke ok
• uv run --extra dev python -m pytest tests/test_docs_public_urls.py -q -> 22 passed
• uv run --extra dev ruff check scripts/docs_smoke.py -> passed
• uv run --extra dev ruff format --check scripts/docs_smoke.py -> already formatted
• uv run --extra dev ruff check . -> passed
• uv run --extra dev ruff format --check . -> 79 files already formatted
• uv run --extra dev python -m mypy app -> success
• uv run --extra dev python -m pytest -q -> 413 passed
• git diff --check -> clean
• Diff-scoped gitleaks detect --pipe --redact --no-banner --no-color --exit-code 1 -> no leaks found

MRWK

Related bounty or issue (Bounty #N or Refs #N for multi-award bounties): Refs #456

No private keys, seed material, credentials, private vulnerability details, deployment secrets, price claims, investment claims, liquidity claims, exchange claims, bridge promises, off-ramp promises, or fabricated payout claims are included.

Summary by CodeRabbit

Release Notes

• Documentation

  • Standardized bounty issue template with updated title format and expanded guidance fields
  • Created comprehensive bounty post template documentation covering reward details, work scope, acceptance criteria, evidence/testing requirements, out-of-scope items, and duplicate/stale work handling

• Chores

  • Enhanced documentation validation to ensure bounty template consistency and compliance

[coderabbitai]

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

This PR standardizes the bounty request process by updating the GitHub issue template with new form fields, documenting a consistent bounty post template in the bounty rules, updating the admin runbook with clear posting steps, and adding smoke test validation to ensure the template and documentation remain synchronized.

Changes

Bounty Template Standardization

Layer / File(s)	Summary
GitHub issue template form updates .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/bounty.yml	Bounty template title changes to "MRWK bounty: <amount> MRWK -" format. Descriptions are expanded for work, reward, and max_awards fields. New textarea fields are added for evidence, out_of_scope, duplicate_stale, and public_artifact_hygiene with inline guidance text.
Bounty documentation and guidelines docs/bounty-rules.md, docs/admin-runbook.md	New "Maintainer Bounty Post Template" section in bounty-rules.md prescribes heading structure and content for work scope, acceptance criteria, evidence/tests, out-of-scope items, and artifact hygiene. Admin runbook steps are expanded to enforce the standardized issue title format, clarify acceptance text requirements, and detail the max_awards and bounty admin token workflow.
Documentation validation enforcement scripts/docs_smoke.py	Smoke test adds BOUNTY_ISSUE_TEMPLATE constant and extends REQUIRED_PUBLIC_PHRASES validation for bounty-rules.md sections. New runtime check verifies the bounty template file exists and contains required phrases: MRWK bounty format, "Evidence or Tests", "Duplicate and Stale Work", and "Public Artifact Hygiene".

Possibly related issues

• MRWK bounty: 150 MRWK - document agent-friendly bounty post template #456: This PR implements the agent-friendly bounty template and guidance requested in issue #456 by updating the issue template, bounty rules documentation, admin runbook, and adding validation checks.

Possibly related PRs

• ramimbo/mergework#433: Both PRs update docs/bounty-rules.md with bounty template guidance and extend scripts/docs_smoke.py smoke test validation for bounty-related documentation.
• ramimbo/mergework#397: Both PRs modify scripts/docs_smoke.py to enforce required phrases validation through the REQUIRED_PUBLIC_PHRASES smoke check mechanism.
• ramimbo/mergework#392: Both PRs update scripts/docs_smoke.py with bounty-related template and guidance validation checks alongside updates to docs/bounty-rules.md.

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 6

✅ Passed checks (6 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Title check	✅ Passed	The title clearly and concretely names the changed surface: adding a maintainer bounty post template to documentation.
Description check	✅ Passed	The description includes all required sections (Summary, Evidence, Test Evidence, MRWK) with concrete details about changes, validation results, and bounty references.
Linked Issues check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Out of Scope Changes check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Mergework Public Artifact Hygiene	✅ Passed	MRWK described as native work ledger coin with no fiat peg. Future bridges/snapshots contingent on discussion. Hygiene guidance warns against price/investment claims without making them.
Bounty Pr Focus	✅ Passed	PR references Bounty #456 with diff exactly matching stated files; test results documented; no unrelated scope.

_{✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.}

---

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

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 1

---

ℹ️ Review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml

Review profile: ASSERTIVE

Plan: Pro Plus

Run ID: 8b010afd-adfd-42e0-b14f-f6c8d6509e98

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 12c3dbd and e5e69ef.

📒 Files selected for processing (4)

• .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/bounty.yml
• docs/admin-runbook.md
• docs/bounty-rules.md
• scripts/docs_smoke.py

[coderabbitai]

🛠️ Refactor suggestion | 🟠 Major | ⚡ Quick win

Strengthen heading validation to require the full stable title pattern.

The check currently accepts mrwk bounty: <amount> mrwk - alone, so CI won’t catch regressions that drop <short scope>. Require the full phrase to enforce the documented contract.

Proposed diff

-            "mrwk bounty: <amount> mrwk -",
+            "mrwk bounty: <amount> mrwk - <short scope>",

Based on learnings: “Bounty issues must use stable headings in the format: `MRWK bounty: MRWK - ` in the title.”

📝 Committable suggestion

‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.

Suggested change

	"mrwk bounty: <amount> mrwk -",
	"mrwk bounty: <amount> mrwk - <short scope>",

[akmhatey-ai]

Closing this PR because #460 was already open for the same #456 bounty scope before this one. #460 covers the maintainer bounty-post template path, so keeping this open would duplicate work for a single-award bounty.