/**
 * Regression tests for cross-protocol prune cascade — closes #298.
 *
 * Semantics (decision under #298):
 * A `RecordsDelete` with `prune: true` cascades to every descendant of the
 * pruned record, regardless of which protocol a descendant declares itself
 * under. `parentContextId` is a structural link — pruning a parent removes
 * the entire subtree it rooted. Cross-protocol composing children (records
 * in a different protocol that reference the parent via `$ref` / `uses`)
 * participate in the cascade on equal footing with same-protocol children.
 *
 * Rationale:
 * - A DWN is tenant-owned storage. The tenant's prune authority extends
 *   across the whole subtree they rooted, so walking the `parentId` chain
 *   unconditionally is the correct semantic.
 * - Preserving cross-protocol orphans creates a half-alive state — readable
 *   but not updatable, since `validateReferentialIntegrity` in the
 *   `RecordsWrite` handler rejects any write whose parent is missing —
 *   which is worse for callers than cascading.
 * - Same-protocol descendants at arbitrary depth already cascade via
 *   `parentId` with no protocol filter; treating a cross-protocol hop
 *   specially was inconsistent.
 *
 * These tests install multiple protocols linked via `uses` + `$ref`, write
 * records across protocol boundaries, and assert that the entire subtree —
 * same protocol or cross protocol, at any depth — is fully purged on prune.
 */
export declare function testRecordsPruneCrossProtocol(): void;
//# sourceMappingURL=records-prune-cross-protocol.spec.d.ts.map