diff --git a/.drive/projects/prisma-cli-v8/assets/briefs/dev-tag-parity-handover.md b/.drive/projects/prisma-cli-v8/assets/briefs/dev-tag-parity-handover.md
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..63b21924
--- /dev/null
+++ b/.drive/projects/prisma-cli-v8/assets/briefs/dev-tag-parity-handover.md
@@ -0,0 +1,56 @@
+# Handover brief — the `dev` dist-tag must never fall behind `latest`
+
+For the agents working in `prisma/composer` and `prisma/prisma`. Small, self-contained, one step in each publish workflow.
+
+## The defect
+
+A release publish moves `latest` (or `next`) and leaves the `dev` tag where the last routine push to `main` put it. So immediately after a release, `dev` points at an **older** version than `latest`:
+
+```console
+$ npm view @prisma/composer-cli dist-tags
+{ latest: '0.7.0', dev: '0.6.0-dev.23' }     # dev is older than latest
+```
+
+That is wrong on its own terms: `dev` means "the newest build from `main`", and a release commit is a build of `main`. It stays wrong until someone happens to push another commit.
+
+`prisma/prisma-cli` has the same defect in its own workflow (`dev` at `8.0.0-rc.2-dev.51` while `next` is at `8.0.0-rc.3`) and is fixing it the same way.
+
+## Why it matters to us specifically
+
+`prisma/prisma-cli` follows your `dev` tags to build the CLI's dev channel: a dev build of the CLI depends on your latest dev builds, and a release of the CLI depends on your releases (operator ruling 2026-08-17; `docs/oss/release-automation.md` in prisma-cli). We read the tag and trust it.
+
+So while your `dev` tag lags, every dev build of the CLI **regresses** to an older version of your product than the released CLI carries. It does not fail any check — a dev build depending on dev builds is exactly what that channel is for — it just quietly tests older code than the release does, which is the opposite of what a dev channel is for.
+
+We are deliberately not working around it in prisma-cli by comparing versions and picking the newer tag. The tag should be right.
+
+## The fix
+
+Publish a dev build of the release commit too. A release commit is a build of `main`, so it gets a dev version like any other build of `main`: after the release publish succeeds, publish the same tree again as `<version>-dev.<run>`, explicitly tagged:
+
+```bash
+npm publish --tag dev
+```
+
+The tag is not optional. Without it npm publishes to `latest`, which would put a dev build in front of every consumer.
+
+**Do not try to move the tag with `npm dist-tag add`.** If you publish over npm OIDC trusted publishing, that will not work: npm's documentation states that OIDC authentication supports `npm publish` and `npm stage publish` only, and that other commands still require traditional authentication. A dist-tag change is one of those. Reaching for a long-lived npm token to work around it would give up the property that makes trusted publishing worth having — that no credential exists which could publish out-of-band if leaked. Publishing a second version needs no new credential, because it goes through the same `npm publish` path that already works.
+
+The version this produces sorts above the release under semver (`8.0.0-rc.4-dev.55` > `8.0.0-rc.4`), which is correct: it is a later build of the same code.
+
+The cost is one extra published version per release. That is the price of the `dev` tag meaning what it says.
+
+## How to know it worked
+
+After the next release, for every published package:
+
+```bash
+npm view <package> dist-tags
+```
+
+`dev` should name the dev build of the release commit, and never an older version than the release tag. Assert it in the workflow rather than checking by eye — the failure is silent otherwise:
+
+```bash
+npm view <package> dist-tags --json
+```
+
+The pair to expect after releasing `8.0.0-rc.4` is `latest: 8.0.0-rc.4` (or `next:`, per your convention) and `dev: 8.0.0-rc.4-dev.<run>`. Note that the dev version sorts *above* the release under semver, because a longer pre-release with an alphanumeric identifier ranks higher: `8.0.0-rc.4` < `8.0.0-rc.4-dev.55`. That is the ordering you want, and it is worth checking your assertion agrees with it rather than assuming string comparison does the right thing.