Add a session prompt for taking gatelock's pylint to 10.00

gatelock is not the docstring problem its siblings are -- 312 of its 394
findings are pytest fixture idiom (redefined-outer-name, protected-access),
so the prompt makes that the explicit fork to settle with the user first,
citing screen-locker's tests hook as the existing precedent.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01VCucBhUkHBBHHbsY7bSdGV

gatelock/prompts/pylint-to-ten.md

@@ -0,0 +1,111 @@
+# Session prompt: take gatelock's pylint from 9.06 to 10.00
+
+Paste everything below the line into a fresh Claude Code session started in
+`~/utils` (the monorepo root — **not** `~/utils/gatelock`; pre-commit runs
+hooks from the git root and every path in the hook config is relative to it).
+
+---
+
+Take `gatelock`'s pylint score from **9.06/10 to a clean 10.00/10**, without
+weakening the linter.
+
+## Why
+
+The pylint hook runs with `--fail-under=8.0`, so 9.06 passes while carrying
+~394 findings. The same job was done in the sibling package
+`~/utils/crdt-sync` on 2026-08-21 (8.58 -> 10.00), so the conventions and the
+gate are already proven one directory over — read that package's
+`crdt_sync/tests/conftest.py` and the commits `1b8c99d` / `2005c40` in
+`~/utils` for the worked example.
+
+Measured on this machine, 2026-08-21, with
+`~/.cache/pre-commit/repo01lfw04p/py_env-python3/bin/pylint --rcfile=pyproject.toml gatelock`
+run from `~/utils/gatelock`:
+
+| category | count |
+|---|---|
+| redefined-outer-name | 171 |
+| protected-access | 141 |
+| missing-function-docstring | 19 |
+| use-implicit-booleaness-not-comparison-to-zero | 14 |
+| use-implicit-booleaness-not-comparison | 12 |
+| unbalanced-tuple-unpacking | 9 |
+
+**312 of the top two categories are in `gatelock/tests/`.** This repo is NOT
+the docstring problem the other two are — only 19 docstrings are missing.
+It is dominated by **pytest fixture idiom**, which makes it a different job:
+
+- `redefined-outer-name` (171) is the classic fixture-shadowing pattern — a
+  test parameter named the same as the module-level fixture function.
+- `protected-access` (141) is tests reaching into the private members that
+  are the unit under test.
+
+Note for context: `~/screen-locker`'s tests hook already disables
+`protected-access` / `unused-argument` / `duplicate-code` for exactly this
+reason. gatelock does not, and that gap is most of the 0.94.
+
+Re-measure before you start and again at the end.
+
+## Scope
+
+**In scope**
+1. Every pylint finding under `gatelock/`.
+
+**Out of scope — do not touch**
+- `--fail-under` in `gatelock/.pre-commit-config.yaml`. Do NOT raise it to
+  hide a shortfall, and do NOT lower it. Leave it at 8.0.
+- Any sibling package in the monorepo — `crdt-sync/`, `web_ui/`,
+  `design_system/`, `sync_settings_ui/`. Stage narrowly: `gatelock/` only.
+- Note `crdt-sync/tool/seed_session.py` is modified and
+  `crdt-sync/firebase-debug.log` is untracked; both predate this task. Keep
+  them out of your commit.
+
+## The decision this task actually turns on
+
+The 312 fixture-idiom findings are not individually fixable in any
+satisfying way, and this is the fork to bring to the user **before** doing
+the work, not after:
+
+- **Option A — configure the checks off for tests only.** Add a
+  `[tool.pylint...]` per-path setting or a tests-scoped disable for
+  `redefined-outer-name` + `protected-access`. This is what screen-locker
+  already does, it is honest (the checks are wrong for pytest, not the code),
+  and it is one reviewable decision instead of 312 edits. It IS a config
+  change, which the user has previously refused when the alternative was
+  real work — so it must be asked, with the screen-locker precedent cited.
+- **Option B — rename every shadowing parameter** and re-examine all 141
+  protected accesses individually. No config change; a very large diff
+  touching most of the test suite.
+
+Ask which, in one question, with A recommended and the precedent named. Do
+not start either until answered.
+
+## The rule for everything else
+
+**Fix the underlying issue; do not suppress it.** The repo blocks `noqa` and
+`type: ignore` outright. Inline `# pylint: disable=` is permitted only for a
+genuine false positive, scoped to the narrowest unit, placed on the line
+that actually triggers it (verify — a `disable-next` one line off silently
+does nothing and pylint reports `useless-suppression`), with a comment
+saying why.
+
+`unbalanced-tuple-unpacking` (9) is worth reading carefully rather than
+suppressing: it sometimes flags a real latent IndexError.
+
+## Gates
+
+- `python -m pytest -q` from `~/utils/gatelock` — **389 passing at 100%
+  branch coverage** (measured 2026-08-21). Both numbers must hold.
+- `pre-commit run --config gatelock/.pre-commit-config.yaml --files <changed>`
+  — run it from `~/utils`, and note the config's `files:` filter means paths
+  must be repo-root-relative (`gatelock/...`) or the hooks silently skip.
+- `ruff format` will reformat what you touch; re-run the suite afterwards.
+
+## Done means
+
+1. pylint reports **10.00/10** for `gatelock`.
+2. `--fail-under` still 8.0.
+3. 389 tests still passing at 100% branch coverage.
+4. No sibling package appears in your diff.
+5. The final report states which option the user chose for the fixture-idiom
+   findings, and lists every suppression with its justification.