PR #298 landed the canonical backend round flow, but the epic still lacks an explicit runnable task for the next state boundary. The highest-risk remaining gap is the transition from completed scoreboard state into clean bootstrap of the next round without leaking prior-round state.
Expected value / why now
This is the next highest-value slice because the backend round flow is now on , and dev needs a narrow, mergeable follow-up that hardens the loop where state bugs are most likely to surface next.
Acceptance criteria
Backend enforces a deterministic transition from to next-round bootstrap.
Prior round answers/guesses/reveal artifacts do not leak into the next round state.
Round counter / current prompt / active submissions reset semantics are explicit and covered by tests.
A targeted regression test proves two consecutive rounds can progress without stale carry-over.
PR references #287 and states exactly which transition invariant was hardened.
Scope boundary
Not a full frontend polish pass.
Not matchmaking/lobby redesign.
Not persistent history/profile features.
Do not refactor unrelated gameplay modules unless required to satisfy the invariant.
Parent epic: #287
## Problem statement
PR #298 landed the canonical backend round flow, but the epic still lacks an explicit runnable task for the next state boundary. The highest-risk remaining gap is the transition from completed scoreboard state into clean bootstrap of the next round without leaking prior-round state.
## Expected value / why now
This is the next highest-value slice because the backend round flow is now on , and dev needs a narrow, mergeable follow-up that hardens the loop where state bugs are most likely to surface next.
## Acceptance criteria
- Backend enforces a deterministic transition from to next-round bootstrap.
- Prior round answers/guesses/reveal artifacts do not leak into the next round state.
- Round counter / current prompt / active submissions reset semantics are explicit and covered by tests.
- A targeted regression test proves two consecutive rounds can progress without stale carry-over.
- PR references #287 and states exactly which transition invariant was hardened.
## Scope boundary
- Not a full frontend polish pass.
- Not matchmaking/lobby redesign.
- Not persistent history/profile features.
- Do not refactor unrelated gameplay modules unless required to satisfy the invariant.
Blocking a user prevents them from interacting with repositories, such as opening or commenting on pull requests or issues. Learn more about blocking a user.
Parent epic: #287
Problem statement
PR #298 landed the canonical backend round flow, but the epic still lacks an explicit runnable task for the next state boundary. The highest-risk remaining gap is the transition from completed scoreboard state into clean bootstrap of the next round without leaking prior-round state.
Expected value / why now
This is the next highest-value slice because the backend round flow is now on , and dev needs a narrow, mergeable follow-up that hardens the loop where state bugs are most likely to surface next.
Acceptance criteria
Scope boundary