docs(drift): draft from internal source

[pedromcunha]

Drafted from an internal source repo, requested by @silverbackc.

This PR was auto-generated by the reusable-docs-draft-pr workflow from a Claude-drafted update in the source repo. It is opened as a draft — please review, edit as needed, and mark ready for review before merging.

Review checklist

• Content matches the behavior shipped in the source PR
• No internal-only details (service names, file paths, unreleased names, security internals) leaked into the draft
• Conforms to CLAUDE.md style rules
• Cross-references and internal links resolve
• Any Needs human input items from the source comment are addressed

---

Generated by reusable-docs-draft-pr.yml in relayprotocol/agents-config.

[mintlify]

Preview deployment for your docs. Learn more about Mintlify Previews.

Project	Status	Preview	Updated (UTC)
unevenlabs	🟢 Ready	View Preview	Jul 10, 2026, 10:41 AM

💡 Tip: Enable Workflows to automatically generate PRs for you.

[github-actions]

Claude finished @pedromcunha's task in 2m 5s —— View job

---

Code Review: PR #363 — docs(drift): draft from internal source

• Read the PR diff against origin/main
• Review references/api/api_guides/solana.mdx changes
• Review references/api/changelog.mdx changes
• Check conformance to CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md style rules
• Verify links, cross-references, and no internal leaks

---

Reviewed the two-file drift draft. This is a clean, well-formed update — the content is internally consistent and follows the changelog conventions. Two minor style nits below, plus one item for the human reviewer to confirm against the source PR.

✅ What's correct

• Numbers agree across both files. 1232 − 60 = 1172; the effective quote-time limit, the reserved-bytes figure, and the 400-threshold all match between solana.mdx and the changelog entry. The new entry also reads correctly as a follow-on to the 2026-05-29 entry that introduced the original 1232-byte check.
• Link resolves. [Solana Support](/references/api/api_guides/solana#transaction-size-optimization) uses a root-relative path (§2.6) and the #transaction-size-optimization anchor matches the ## Transaction Size Optimization heading.
• Changelog format conforms to §4.5: ## <date> — <summary> heading, newest-first ordering, bolded **Behavior change** lead. **Behavior change** is already the established lead for non-breaking behavioral entries in this file (2026-06-19, -06-10, -06-05), so this is consistent.
• Parameter references use bold+backticks (**maxRouteLength**, **includedOriginSwapSources**) per §2.9, and spelling is consistent with the code example in the <Tip>.
• No internal leaks — "compute-budget instructions" / "compiled deposit transaction" are standard Solana terminology, no service names or file paths.

🔸 Minor: paragraph length (§2.10)

references/api/api_guides/solana.mdx:222 — the rewritten first paragraph is 4 sentences; §2.10 caps paragraphs at 2–3 sentences (this page is an API integration guide, §3.3b → treated as a feature guide, so §2.10 applies). Suggest splitting after the 1172-byte definition:

Solana transactions have a hard 1232-byte size limit. Wallets and SDKs prepend compute-budget instructions to the transaction at send time, which consume up to 60 bytes. Relay reserves that headroom at quote time, so the effective quote-time limit is 1172 bytes.

If additional custom instructions (e.g., for tracking, fee collection, or other logic) push the transaction past 1232 bytes at send time, it will fail.

(The changelog's long single-paragraph entries are fine — §4.5 defines that page's own format and every existing entry follows it.)

Fix this →

🔸 Minor: line wrapping

The two new paragraphs (solana.mdx:222, :224) are written as single long lines, whereas the surrounding prose in this file is hard-wrapped at ~80 columns (e.g. lines 226–227). Renders identically, but wrapping the new lines keeps the file diff-friendly and consistent.

👀 For the human reviewer to confirm against the source PR

The changelog states the 400 response body "now names the effective limit and the reserved-bytes reason." That's a claim about the exact response shape that I can't verify from the docs repo — worth confirming it matches what the source PR actually ships (checklist item: "Content matches the behavior shipped in the source PR"). If the body also gained a stable errorCode, consider naming it, since other error entries in this changelog (e.g. INVALID_SLIPPAGE_TOLERANCE) do.

Overall: 👍 approvable after the paragraph split. The remaining items are optional polish / source verification.
• Branch: docs-drift/src-102fb9f122-2ab4235