[aryansk]

Problem

Closes #1376. When no runner is active, safe_get_runner_context() raises ContextError with notes that point users at rt.Session(). Session is largely internal, and the maintainer asked to stop actively referencing it and to remove it from the public interface.

Change

• context/central.py: the ContextError notes now point at the public rt.Flow API instead of rt.Session().
• __init__.py: Session and session are removed from __all__, so they no longer appear in the documented public surface (pdoc renders from __all__) or star-imports.
• Both names remain reachable as module attributes (rt.Session, rt.session) for backward compatibility; only the advertised interface changes.
• prompts/prompt.py: internal comment updated to match.

Why this approach

Removing the names entirely would be a hard breaking change (they are used widely in tests and by existing users). Keeping them importable while dropping them from __all__ matches the repository's own precedent for de-emphasized public names and the maintainer's explicit request.

Testing

uv run python -m pytest packages/railtracks/tests/unit_tests/context   packages/railtracks/tests/unit_tests/prompt packages/railtracks/tests/unit_tests/test_pending_changes.py   packages/railtracks/tests/unit_tests/test_session.py packages/railtracks/tests/unit_tests/test_exceptions.py   packages/railtracks/tests/unit_tests/observability -q
result: 199 passed

uv run ruff check packages/railtracks/src/railtracks/ && uv run ruff format --check
result: All checks passed / 259 files already formatted

Full unit suite: 2008 passed; the 18 failures + 16 collection errors are
pre-existing on clean main (optional-extra deps: portkey, boto3, datasets).

Documentation and release impact

• User-facing documentation updated (public __all__ surface)
• Changelog/release note needed
• Migration or compatibility note needed (names remain reachable, so none)
• No documentation impact

Review notes

• Known limitations: Session/session are still accessible as attributes for backward compatibility; a future release can remove them entirely.
• Follow-up issue, if any: none
• Security/licensing considerations: none

[soulFood5632]

LGTM

[soulFood5632]

There is a minor conflict here that you will need to handle on your end but it looks good to me. Let me know once it is ready for review and I'll trigger the tests and we can merge.

[soulFood5632]

@aryansk pinging here to see if you would still like to handle the conflicts on your end. If not I would be happy to take over

[Amir-R25]

Hey @aryansk, just pinging this PR again since it's been in draft for a month, we'd close it in a few days if we don't hear back from you. Thanks for your interest in helping our project!

[Amir-R25]

@aryansk I'm closing this as we did not hear back from you, please do another PR if you still want to contribute. Thanks for your interest in Railtracks!