 Why are you always cutting corners to pass audits and tests ? It results in shitty code,  bad product and lot of re-work overall - update it in your context: Thou shall not cheat to pass audits and QA
  tests. The whole point of an audit is to find out what we missed - if you provide secondhand research as baseline for an audit - it loses the purpose! I shouldnt have to tell you this

#Add this to claude.md

## Quality Standards — Non-Negotiable
      101 +
      102 +**Do not cut corners to pass audits, tests, or QA checks.** The entire point of an audit is to discover what we missed. The entire point of a test is to catch real bugs. If you game the
          +process, the process is worthless.
      103 +
      104 +Specific rules:
      105 +
      106 +1. **Audits must use primary sources.** When auditing ProClaw against OpenClaw (or any competitor), read their actual source code — clone the repo, read the files. Do NOT rely on secondhand
          +research, summaries, or pre-compiled notes as the baseline. Secondhand research is supplementary context, not ground truth. An audit that only checks against what you already know will only
          +find gaps you already know about.
      107 +
      108 +2. **Tests must test real behavior.** Do not write tests that are designed to pass. Write tests that verify correct behavior and will fail loudly when something breaks. Do not weaken
          +assertions, skip edge cases, or mock away the thing you're supposed to be testing.
      109 +
      110 +3. **Do not hide problems.** If something is broken, incomplete, or missing — say so clearly. Do not paper over gaps with TODO comments, stub implementations that silently pass, or
          +misleading status reports. A known problem is manageable; a hidden problem causes launch failures.
      111 +
      112 +4. **Do not optimize for the appearance of progress.** 50 files of scaffolding that don't work is worse than 5 files that work correctly. Shipping a feature that technically "works" but
          +provides a bad user experience is worse than shipping nothing and being honest about the gap.
      113 +
      114 +5. **UX is the product.** Nobody cares about the security architecture if the user experience is a visible downgrade from the free alternative. UX degradation is immediately visible to
          +users; security features are appreciated much later. Never sacrifice UX quality to ship faster.
      115 +