docs(modeling): fix organization context authorization inconsistencies

[yinshi197]

Summary

Fix inconsistencies in the organization-context-authorization modeling guide.

Changes

• Corrected Beth's tuple in the scenario setup (user:beth instead of user:anne).
• Fixed the contextual tuple description for Anne's organization C check.
• Updated the requirements summary table to show No for:
  • Anne | Organization C | View

Why

These mismatches made the doc internally inconsistent and could mislead readers when reproducing checks with fga model test or Check API calls.

Verification

• Cross-checked the scenario requirements and check examples in the same page.
• Ensured the final table now matches the stated requirement: Anne in org C cannot view or delete project X.

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Documentation
  • Updated organization context authorization examples with corrected user references and permission configurations.

[linux-foundation-easycla]

• ❌ - login: @yinshi197 / name: yinshi197 . The commit (dca54f8) is not authorized under a signed CLA. Please click here to be authorized. For further assistance with EasyCLA, please submit a support request ticket.

[coderabbitai]

Walkthrough

A single documentation file was updated to correct example data in the organization-context-authorization guide, changing user references and authorization context values to reflect accurate scenarios.

Changes

Cohort / File(s)	Summary
Documentation Updates docs/content/modeling/organization-context-authorization.mdx	Updated example data: changed Beth's project_manager relation reference from user:anne to user:beth, updated contextual authorization example from organization:A to organization:C, and corrected Anne's View permission from Yes to No in the requirements table.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~2 minutes

Suggested reviewers

• rhamzeh
• dyeam0

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 3

✅ Passed checks (3 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Description Check	✅ Passed	Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check	✅ Passed	The title clearly and specifically describes the main change: fixing inconsistencies in organization context authorization documentation.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.

_{✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.}

✨ Finishing touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Post copyable unit tests in a comment

---

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉

Tip

Issue Planner is now in beta. Read the docs and try it out! Share your feedback on Discord.

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

This PR fixes internal inconsistencies in the “organization context authorization” modeling guide so the described tuples, contextual tuple examples, and the final requirements table all agree—reducing the chance of readers getting misleading fga model test / Check API results.

Changes:

• Corrected Beth’s relationship tuple to use user:beth (instead of user:anne).
• Fixed the contextual tuple description for Anne authorizing from organization C.
• Updated the requirements summary table to reflect that Anne in organization C cannot view project X.

---

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

[ewanharris]

Thanks for your PR @yinshi197! Could you please sign the CLA and we can then look to get this reviewed and merged