@lotics/cli 0.172.0 → 0.172.1

package/dist/src/cli.js

@@ -45696,7 +45696,7 @@ function resultSideEffects(result) {
 }
 
 // src/version.ts
-var VERSION = "0.172.0";
+var VERSION = "0.172.1";
 
 // src/timezone.ts
 function machineTimezone() {

package/docs/building_an_app.md

@@ -206,6 +206,17 @@ lotics app check                     # every pre-flight a deploy runs, without b
 lotics app deploy -m "<what changed + why>"
 ```
 
+**A green suite says nothing about how the screen LOOKS**, and that half has its own pass:
+`lotics docs reviewing` — render it, look at it, then measure what the look is telling you. Run it
+before the deploy, not as an audit someone schedules after a complaint.
+
+Every check above reads the SOURCE; none of them renders it. So the entire class of defect that
+lives in the pixels — wrong form for the subject, a treatment that contradicts what an element
+means, a surface that measures clean and still tells the reader nothing — passes all of them
+silently, and arrives later as "it looks bad", which is a report about a cause the reporter cannot
+name. That is what the review is for, and why it belongs here rather than in whoever remembers to
+ask for it.
+
 `-m` is optional; the deploy derives a message from what it pushed. Write one when the *why* is
 worth keeping.
 

package/package.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "@lotics/cli",
-  "version": "0.172.0",
+  "version": "0.172.1",
   "description": "Lotics SDK and CLI for AI agents",
   "type": "module",
   "bin": {