Skip to content

fix(tools): fail closed on unsafe global tool mutations - #1300

Draft
seonghobae wants to merge 15 commits into
codex/starlette-testclient-dependencyfrom
fix/fail-closed-tool-mutations
Draft

fix(tools): fail closed on unsafe global tool mutations#1300
seonghobae wants to merge 15 commits into
codex/starlette-testclient-dependencyfrom
fix/fail-closed-tool-mutations

Conversation

@seonghobae

@seonghobae seonghobae commented Aug 9, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Customer and safety outcome

Dynamic POST/PATCH/DELETE /api/tools mutations fail closed with deterministic 501 tool_mutation_not_supported until Naruon has durable tenant/workspace-scoped tool ownership, administrative authorization, built-in immutability, and a real provider/adapter execution target. The branch removes mock-success mutation behavior while preserving signed-session catalog/detail reads and supported built-in execution.

Current exact authority

  • protected root: develop@042b0c70531b229af3acbd0421a2f23098d848b3
  • current prerequisite/base: fix(test): install Starlette TestClient dependency #1565 codex/starlette-testclient-dependency@52dfc863d1a5d6e4e80b6366f719dd09f2aa6172
  • exact head: 0833fcbdba583b3c508620e5a09ccca060ab40e6
  • lifecycle: Draft / stacked prerequisite unresolved / canonical docs obligation outstanding / exact-head hosted evidence absent / current approval absent
  • effective files: CHANGELOG.md, backend/api/tools.py, backend/tests/test_tools_api.py, backend/tests/test_tools_uuid_generator_contract.py

Single-writer repair completed

Previous head e3485b4dfed763cdcd846c7894dc5c5f69e445e0 still carried a parallel AGENTS.md delta while #1549#1564#1566 is the canonical documentation lane. Commit 0833fcbdba583b3c508620e5a09ccca060ab40e6 repairs that ownership non-destructively: it restores the exact AGENTS.md blob from the live #1565 parent while leaving the executable tools source/tests and CHANGELOG delta intact. The PR now has four effective files and no longer writes AGENTS.md.

The valid recurrence rule was not discarded: #1566 owns the follow-up that dynamic /api/tools mutation must remain unavailable until durable signed-session tenant/workspace ownership, administrative authorization, built-in immutability, and a real execution target exist, and that placeholder handlers must never report successful work. That rule is still a canonical docs obligation, not source-landed evidence, until a #1566 exact head actually contains it with governance regression coverage.

Preserved API contract

Method Path Authenticated result
POST /api/tools 501 tool_mutation_not_supported
PATCH /api/tools/{code} 501 tool_mutation_not_supported
DELETE /api/tools/{code} 501 tool_mutation_not_supported

The tombstones do not parse mutation bodies, mutate the process-global registry, resolve DNS, or start webhook egress. Unauthenticated calls remain 401 Authentication required. A future reintroduction must first satisfy the ownership/authorization/provider boundary above; no placeholder handler may report success when no work occurred.

Fresh exact-head evidence

The first fresh pull-request workflow lookup for 0833fcbd... returned no repository-owned PR runs. This is non-passing evidence, not GREEN; predecessor runs on e3485b4d... do not transfer. Formal review history contains dismissed predecessor OpenCode submissions and comment-only evidence, but no qualifying independent APPROVED review on 0833fcbd....

Do not churn source merely to manufacture queue activity. If this stacked-base head continues to receive no PR runs, recovery belongs through the existing Naruon stacked-base workflow prerequisite lane rather than a dummy commit or gate weakening.

Stack and successor boundary

#1301 and #1302 remain dependent tools-removal work. Do not close or merge them from this PR's predecessor evidence. After #1565 is normally protected-merged or completely succeeded, restack #1300 non-force onto the then-live protected base, regenerate fresh exact-head checks/reviews, and only then advance dependent children in order. The AGENTS.md repair itself is already complete on this branch and must not be reintroduced by descendant restacks.

Merge boundary

Keep Draft until the prerequisite is protected-integrated, the #1566 canonical recurrence rule is source-landed under its own lane, the unchanged final head has every then-live required check terminal-success, all valid current-head findings/threads are resolved, and protected governance has a qualifying post-last-push independent approval. No force-push, destructive rebase, self-approval, review fabrication/dismissal, admin bypass, gate weakening, dummy/no-op requeue commit, parallel docs ownership, or predecessor-evidence transfer.

@coderabbitai

coderabbitai Bot commented Aug 9, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Important

Review skipped

Auto reviews are disabled on base/target branches other than the default branch.

Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the .coderabbit.yaml file in this repository. To trigger a single review, invoke the @coderabbitai review command.

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Team

Run ID: d7e7545c-7740-4e5a-aaf4-311d641e074d

You can disable this status message by setting the reviews.review_status to false in the CodeRabbit configuration file.

Use the checkbox below for a quick retry:

  • 🔍 Trigger review

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

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@coderabbitai review

Review-only request for exact stacked head 0348dfe3397d6bf886038732f64c462269b8083f against exact predecessor base cb8a7524cdb82192d70df31952f291e8899db8d9. Verify that global non-durable tool mutations fail closed without request parsing, registry mutation, DNS/egress, mock success, or OpenAPI exposure while catalog reads and built-in execution remain unchanged. The PR remains stacked and must not merge or retarget until #1297 integrates. Do not mutate, merge, publish, release, or weaken gates.

@coderabbitai

coderabbitai Bot commented Aug 9, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor
🧩 Analysis chain

🏁 Script executed:

#!/bin/bash
set -euo pipefail

base="cb8a7524cdb82192d70df31952f291e8899db8d9"
head="0348dfe3397d6bf886038732f64c462269b8083f"

echo "== Commit objects and ancestry =="
git cat-file -e "${base}^{commit}"
git cat-file -e "${head}^{commit}"
git merge-base --is-ancestor "$base" "$head"
printf 'base_is_ancestor=true\n'
git rev-parse "${head}^{tree}"

echo "== Exact changed files =="
git diff --name-status "$base" "$head"
git diff --stat "$base" "$head"

echo "== Exact diff =="
git diff --find-renames --find-copies --no-ext-diff "$base" "$head"

echo "== Source and test maps =="
for f in $(git diff --name-only "$base" "$head"); do
  case "$f" in
    *.py)
      echo "--- AST outline: $f ---"
      ast-grep outline "$f" --items all --view expanded || true
      ;;
  esac
done

echo "== Relevant route, OpenAPI, webhook, and mutation references =="
rg -n -i -C 4 \
  '(api/tools|tool_mutation_not_supported|create.*tool|update.*tool|delete.*tool|webhook|openapi|openapi_schema|dns|requests\.|httpx\.|socket\.)' \
  . \
  -g '*.py' -g '*.yaml' -g '*.yml' -g '*.json' \
  -g '!**/.git/**' \
  || true

Length of output: 227433


🏁 Script executed:

#!/bin/bash
set -euo pipefail

base="cb8a7524cdb82192d70df31952f291e8899db8d9"
head="0348dfe3397d6bf886038732f64c462269b8083f"

echo "== Router imports and authentication setup =="
sed -n '1,80p' backend/api/tools.py
echo
echo "== Read, mutation, and execution routes at head =="
sed -n '700,810p' backend/api/tools.py

echo
echo "== Read and execution route comparison =="
git diff --no-ext-diff --unified=3 "$base" "$head" -- backend/api/tools.py \
  | sed -n '/def get_tools/,/def _reject_tool_mutation/p; /def get_tool/,/def update_tool/p; /def execute_tool/,$p'

echo
echo "== Tool-router inclusion and authentication dependencies =="
rg -n -C 5 \
  '(include_router\(.*tools|from api\.tools import|router\s*=\s*APIRouter|dependencies\s*=\s*\[.*get_|get_current_user|build_auth_context)' \
  backend \
  -g '*.py'

echo
echo "== All declared tool mutation routes and mock handler references =="
ast-grep run --lang python \
  --pattern '@$ROUTER.$METHOD($$$ARGS)
def $FUNC($$$PARAMS):
  $$$BODY' \
  backend/api/tools.py \
  || true
rg -n -i -C 2 \
  '(mock_handler|ToolCreate|ToolUpdate|`@router`\.(post|patch|delete)\("/tools|/api/tools.*(post|patch|delete))' \
  backend \
  -g '*.py'

echo
echo "== OpenAPI customizations and tool-path assertions =="
rg -n -C 4 '(openapi|openapi_schema|/api/tools)' backend -g '*.py' -g '*.json' -g '*.yaml' -g '*.yml'

Length of output: 83739


@seonghobae No findings from the read-only review of head 0348dfe3397d6bf886038732f64c462269b8083f against base cb8a7524cdb82192d70df31952f291e8899db8d9.

Verified items:

  • The specified base is an ancestor of the specified head.
  • The head tree is cd96ed5796e5939797ee624bf8e281363522b284.
  • The diff changes exactly four files.
  • backend/main.py keeps the tools router behind PRIVATE_API_DEPENDENCIES. Unauthenticated mutation requests remain 401.
  • POST /api/tools, PATCH /api/tools/{code}, and DELETE /api/tools/{code} now reject authenticated requests with 501 and tool_mutation_not_supported.
  • The mutation handlers accept no request-body model. They do not parse or validate a mutation body.
  • The mutation handlers do not call registry lookup, registration, update, or unregister operations.
  • The mutation handlers do not call webhook validation, DNS resolution, or egress code.
  • ToolCreate, ToolUpdate, and mock_handler are removed. No remaining mock_handler reference exists.
  • The mutation operations have include_in_schema=False. The changed tests assert their OpenAPI omission.
  • Catalog reads and built-in execution handlers are unchanged by the diff.
  • The changed tests cover registry preservation, webhook DNS non-invocation, malformed JSON for POST and PATCH, authentication, and the deterministic error contract.

I did not execute repository tests because the inspection environment does not permit executing repository code. I did not modify the branch, base target, checks, or gates.

⚠️ Action not completed

Review rate limited.

Note: CodeRabbit is an incremental review system and does not re-review already reviewed commits. This command is applicable only when automatic reviews are paused.

@opencode-agent opencode-agent Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Pull request overview

OpenCode cannot approve yet because required coverage evidence did not pass.

Review outcome

1. HIGH .github/workflows/opencode-review.yml:1 - Coverage evidence did not prove required test/docstring evidence

  • Problem: The required coverage-evidence job result was failure, so OpenCode cannot establish approval sufficiency for this head.

  • Root cause: Automated approval is only valid when the same-head coverage-evidence job proves supported repository test suites passed and configured docstring gates passed or were advisory, or reports not applicable because no supported source files or package manifests exist. Missing, failed, skipped, unavailable, or unsupported-tooling test evidence is a blocker.

  • Fix: Install or configure the repository test/docstring evidence tooling when source files or package manifests exist, rerun the current-head coverage-evidence job, and approve only after it reports success with required evidence or explicit no-source not-applicable evidence.

  • Regression test: Keep the approval branch checking needs.coverage-evidence.result == success before posting APPROVE, and publish REQUEST_CHANGES when coverage-evidence blocker states such as cancelled, skipped, failed, unsupported-tooling, or below-100 evidence are present.

  • Result: REQUEST_CHANGES

  • Reason: coverage-evidence result was failure, so required test/docstring evidence was not proven for current head be3bf773baf31b36952ac8bd9a48fbd76dc0f3cd.

  • Head SHA: be3bf773baf31b36952ac8bd9a48fbd76dc0f3cd

  • Workflow run: 31327446136

  • Workflow attempt: 1

Coverage evidence

Coverage evidence job did not run or did not publish coverage evidence.

Changed-File Evidence Map

flowchart LR
  PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
  Evidence --> S1["Changed file (2 files)"]
  S1 --> I1["repository behavior"]
  I1 --> R1["Review risk: Changed file (2 files)"]
  R1 --> V1["required checks"]
  Evidence --> S2["Backend (2 files)"]
  S2 --> I2["API and service runtime"]
  I2 --> R2["Review risk: Backend (2 files)"]
  R2 --> V2["backend tests"]
Loading

@opencode-agent

opencode-agent Bot commented Aug 9, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

OpenCode Review Overview

  • Head SHA: 67dbfddb01bacb604a0533ce486a550115ff0d64
  • Workflow run: 32090999702
  • Workflow attempt: 1
  • Gate result: REQUEST_CHANGES (approval step)

Pull request overview

OpenCode cannot approve yet because required coverage evidence did not pass.

Review outcome

1. HIGH .github/workflows/opencode-review.yml:1 - Coverage evidence did not prove required test/docstring evidence

  • Problem: The required coverage-evidence job result was failure, so OpenCode cannot establish approval sufficiency for this head.

  • Root cause: Automated approval is only valid when the same-head coverage-evidence job proves supported repository test suites passed and configured docstring gates passed or were advisory, or reports not applicable because no supported source files or package manifests exist. Missing, failed, skipped, unavailable, or unsupported-tooling test evidence is a blocker.

  • Fix: Install or configure the repository test/docstring evidence tooling when source files or package manifests exist, rerun the current-head coverage-evidence job, and approve only after it reports success with required evidence or explicit no-source not-applicable evidence.

  • Regression test: Keep the approval branch checking needs.coverage-evidence.result == success before posting APPROVE, and publish REQUEST_CHANGES when coverage-evidence blocker states such as cancelled, skipped, failed, unsupported-tooling, or below-100 evidence are present.

  • Result: REQUEST_CHANGES

  • Reason: coverage-evidence result was failure, so required test/docstring evidence was not proven for current head 67dbfddb01bacb604a0533ce486a550115ff0d64.

  • Head SHA: 67dbfddb01bacb604a0533ce486a550115ff0d64

  • Workflow run: 32090999702

  • Workflow attempt: 1

Coverage evidence

Coverage evidence job did not run or did not publish coverage evidence.

Changed-File Evidence Map

flowchart LR
  PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
  Evidence --> S1["Changed file (2 files)"]
  S1 --> I1["repository behavior"]
  I1 --> R1["Review risk: Changed file (2 files)"]
  R1 --> V1["required checks"]
  Evidence --> S2["Backend (3 files)"]
  S2 --> I2["API and service runtime"]
  I2 --> R2["Review risk: Backend (3 files)"]
  R2 --> V2["backend tests"]
Loading

@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Aug 9, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

PR governance metadata gate is not ready for d5e699ca2c49c3e7bc94910be57b6c2309d8ad41:

  • Required check strix is FAILURE on the current head.

@opencode-agent opencode-agent Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Pull request overview

OpenCode cannot approve yet because required coverage evidence did not pass.

Review outcome

1. HIGH .github/workflows/opencode-review.yml:1 - Coverage evidence did not prove required test/docstring evidence

  • Problem: The required coverage-evidence job result was failure, so OpenCode cannot establish approval sufficiency for this head.

  • Root cause: Automated approval is only valid when the same-head coverage-evidence job proves supported repository test suites passed and configured docstring gates passed or were advisory, or reports not applicable because no supported source files or package manifests exist. Missing, failed, skipped, unavailable, or unsupported-tooling test evidence is a blocker.

  • Fix: Install or configure the repository test/docstring evidence tooling when source files or package manifests exist, rerun the current-head coverage-evidence job, and approve only after it reports success with required evidence or explicit no-source not-applicable evidence.

  • Regression test: Keep the approval branch checking needs.coverage-evidence.result == success before posting APPROVE, and publish REQUEST_CHANGES when coverage-evidence blocker states such as cancelled, skipped, failed, unsupported-tooling, or below-100 evidence are present.

  • Result: REQUEST_CHANGES

  • Reason: coverage-evidence result was failure, so required test/docstring evidence was not proven for current head be3bf773baf31b36952ac8bd9a48fbd76dc0f3cd.

  • Head SHA: be3bf773baf31b36952ac8bd9a48fbd76dc0f3cd

  • Workflow run: 31328339757

  • Workflow attempt: 1

Coverage evidence

Coverage evidence job did not run or did not publish coverage evidence.

Changed-File Evidence Map

flowchart LR
  PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
  Evidence --> S1["Changed file (2 files)"]
  S1 --> I1["repository behavior"]
  I1 --> R1["Review risk: Changed file (2 files)"]
  R1 --> V1["required checks"]
  Evidence --> S2["Backend (2 files)"]
  S2 --> I2["API and service runtime"]
  I2 --> R2["Review risk: Backend (2 files)"]
  R2 --> V2["backend tests"]
Loading

@opencode-agent opencode-agent Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Pull request overview

OpenCode cannot approve yet because required coverage evidence did not pass.

Review outcome

1. HIGH .github/workflows/opencode-review.yml:1 - Coverage evidence did not prove required test/docstring evidence

  • Problem: The required coverage-evidence job result was failure, so OpenCode cannot establish approval sufficiency for this head.

  • Root cause: Automated approval is only valid when the same-head coverage-evidence job proves supported repository test suites passed and configured docstring gates passed or were advisory, or reports not applicable because no supported source files or package manifests exist. Missing, failed, skipped, unavailable, or unsupported-tooling test evidence is a blocker.

  • Fix: Install or configure the repository test/docstring evidence tooling when source files or package manifests exist, rerun the current-head coverage-evidence job, and approve only after it reports success with required evidence or explicit no-source not-applicable evidence.

  • Regression test: Keep the approval branch checking needs.coverage-evidence.result == success before posting APPROVE, and publish REQUEST_CHANGES when coverage-evidence blocker states such as cancelled, skipped, failed, unsupported-tooling, or below-100 evidence are present.

  • Result: REQUEST_CHANGES

  • Reason: coverage-evidence result was failure, so required test/docstring evidence was not proven for current head be3bf773baf31b36952ac8bd9a48fbd76dc0f3cd.

  • Head SHA: be3bf773baf31b36952ac8bd9a48fbd76dc0f3cd

  • Workflow run: 31357100558

  • Workflow attempt: 1

Coverage evidence

Coverage evidence job did not run or did not publish coverage evidence.

Changed-File Evidence Map

flowchart LR
  PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
  Evidence --> S1["Changed file (2 files)"]
  S1 --> I1["repository behavior"]
  I1 --> R1["Review risk: Changed file (2 files)"]
  R1 --> V1["required checks"]
  Evidence --> S2["Backend (2 files)"]
  S2 --> I2["API and service runtime"]
  I2 --> R2["Review risk: Backend (2 files)"]
  R2 --> V2["backend tests"]
Loading

@opencode-agent opencode-agent Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Pull request overview

OpenCode cannot approve yet because required coverage evidence did not pass.

Review outcome

1. HIGH .github/workflows/opencode-review.yml:1 - Coverage evidence did not prove required test/docstring evidence

  • Problem: The required coverage-evidence job result was failure, so OpenCode cannot establish approval sufficiency for this head.

  • Root cause: Automated approval is only valid when the same-head coverage-evidence job proves supported repository test suites passed and configured docstring gates passed or were advisory, or reports not applicable because no supported source files or package manifests exist. Missing, failed, skipped, unavailable, or unsupported-tooling test evidence is a blocker.

  • Fix: Install or configure the repository test/docstring evidence tooling when source files or package manifests exist, rerun the current-head coverage-evidence job, and approve only after it reports success with required evidence or explicit no-source not-applicable evidence.

  • Regression test: Keep the approval branch checking needs.coverage-evidence.result == success before posting APPROVE, and publish REQUEST_CHANGES when coverage-evidence blocker states such as cancelled, skipped, failed, unsupported-tooling, or below-100 evidence are present.

  • Result: REQUEST_CHANGES

  • Reason: coverage-evidence result was failure, so required test/docstring evidence was not proven for current head be3bf773baf31b36952ac8bd9a48fbd76dc0f3cd.

  • Head SHA: be3bf773baf31b36952ac8bd9a48fbd76dc0f3cd

  • Workflow run: 31361123122

  • Workflow attempt: 1

Coverage evidence

Coverage evidence job did not run or did not publish coverage evidence.

Changed-File Evidence Map

flowchart LR
  PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
  Evidence --> S1["Changed file (2 files)"]
  S1 --> I1["repository behavior"]
  I1 --> R1["Review risk: Changed file (2 files)"]
  R1 --> V1["required checks"]
  Evidence --> S2["Backend (2 files)"]
  S2 --> I2["API and service runtime"]
  I2 --> R2["Review risk: Backend (2 files)"]
  R2 --> V2["backend tests"]
Loading

@opencode-agent opencode-agent Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Pull request overview

OpenCode cannot approve yet because required coverage evidence did not pass.

Review outcome

1. HIGH .github/workflows/opencode-review.yml:1 - Coverage evidence did not prove required test/docstring evidence

  • Problem: The required coverage-evidence job result was failure, so OpenCode cannot establish approval sufficiency for this head.

  • Root cause: Automated approval is only valid when the same-head coverage-evidence job proves supported repository test suites passed and configured docstring gates passed or were advisory, or reports not applicable because no supported source files or package manifests exist. Missing, failed, skipped, unavailable, or unsupported-tooling test evidence is a blocker.

  • Fix: Install or configure the repository test/docstring evidence tooling when source files or package manifests exist, rerun the current-head coverage-evidence job, and approve only after it reports success with required evidence or explicit no-source not-applicable evidence.

  • Regression test: Keep the approval branch checking needs.coverage-evidence.result == success before posting APPROVE, and publish REQUEST_CHANGES when coverage-evidence blocker states such as cancelled, skipped, failed, unsupported-tooling, or below-100 evidence are present.

  • Result: REQUEST_CHANGES

  • Reason: coverage-evidence result was failure, so required test/docstring evidence was not proven for current head be3bf773baf31b36952ac8bd9a48fbd76dc0f3cd.

  • Head SHA: be3bf773baf31b36952ac8bd9a48fbd76dc0f3cd

  • Workflow run: 31376501399

  • Workflow attempt: 1

Coverage evidence

Coverage evidence job did not run or did not publish coverage evidence.

Changed-File Evidence Map

flowchart LR
  PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
  Evidence --> S1["Changed file (2 files)"]
  S1 --> I1["repository behavior"]
  I1 --> R1["Review risk: Changed file (2 files)"]
  R1 --> V1["required checks"]
  Evidence --> S2["Backend (2 files)"]
  S2 --> I2["API and service runtime"]
  I2 --> R2["Review risk: Backend (2 files)"]
  R2 --> V2["backend tests"]
Loading

@opencode-agent opencode-agent Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Pull request overview

OpenCode cannot approve yet because required coverage evidence did not pass.

Review outcome

1. HIGH .github/workflows/opencode-review.yml:1 - Coverage evidence did not prove required test/docstring evidence

  • Problem: The required coverage-evidence job result was failure, so OpenCode cannot establish approval sufficiency for this head.

  • Root cause: Automated approval is only valid when the same-head coverage-evidence job proves supported repository test suites passed and configured docstring gates passed or were advisory, or reports not applicable because no supported source files or package manifests exist. Missing, failed, skipped, unavailable, or unsupported-tooling test evidence is a blocker.

  • Fix: Install or configure the repository test/docstring evidence tooling when source files or package manifests exist, rerun the current-head coverage-evidence job, and approve only after it reports success with required evidence or explicit no-source not-applicable evidence.

  • Regression test: Keep the approval branch checking needs.coverage-evidence.result == success before posting APPROVE, and publish REQUEST_CHANGES when coverage-evidence blocker states such as cancelled, skipped, failed, unsupported-tooling, or below-100 evidence are present.

  • Result: REQUEST_CHANGES

  • Reason: coverage-evidence result was failure, so required test/docstring evidence was not proven for current head be3bf773baf31b36952ac8bd9a48fbd76dc0f3cd.

  • Head SHA: be3bf773baf31b36952ac8bd9a48fbd76dc0f3cd

  • Workflow run: 31381156080

  • Workflow attempt: 1

Coverage evidence

Coverage evidence job did not run or did not publish coverage evidence.

Changed-File Evidence Map

flowchart LR
  PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
  Evidence --> S1["Changed file (2 files)"]
  S1 --> I1["repository behavior"]
  I1 --> R1["Review risk: Changed file (2 files)"]
  R1 --> V1["required checks"]
  Evidence --> S2["Backend (2 files)"]
  S2 --> I2["API and service runtime"]
  I2 --> R2["Review risk: Backend (2 files)"]
  R2 --> V2["backend tests"]
Loading

@opencode-agent opencode-agent Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Pull request overview

OpenCode cannot approve yet because required coverage evidence did not pass.

Review outcome

1. HIGH .github/workflows/opencode-review.yml:1 - Coverage evidence did not prove required test/docstring evidence

  • Problem: The required coverage-evidence job result was failure, so OpenCode cannot establish approval sufficiency for this head.

  • Root cause: Automated approval is only valid when the same-head coverage-evidence job proves supported repository test suites passed and configured docstring gates passed or were advisory, or reports not applicable because no supported source files or package manifests exist. Missing, failed, skipped, unavailable, or unsupported-tooling test evidence is a blocker.

  • Fix: Install or configure the repository test/docstring evidence tooling when source files or package manifests exist, rerun the current-head coverage-evidence job, and approve only after it reports success with required evidence or explicit no-source not-applicable evidence.

  • Regression test: Keep the approval branch checking needs.coverage-evidence.result == success before posting APPROVE, and publish REQUEST_CHANGES when coverage-evidence blocker states such as cancelled, skipped, failed, unsupported-tooling, or below-100 evidence are present.

  • Result: REQUEST_CHANGES

  • Reason: coverage-evidence result was failure, so required test/docstring evidence was not proven for current head be3bf773baf31b36952ac8bd9a48fbd76dc0f3cd.

  • Head SHA: be3bf773baf31b36952ac8bd9a48fbd76dc0f3cd

  • Workflow run: 31385141094

  • Workflow attempt: 1

Coverage evidence

Coverage evidence job did not run or did not publish coverage evidence.

Changed-File Evidence Map

flowchart LR
  PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
  Evidence --> S1["Changed file (2 files)"]
  S1 --> I1["repository behavior"]
  I1 --> R1["Review risk: Changed file (2 files)"]
  R1 --> V1["required checks"]
  Evidence --> S2["Backend (2 files)"]
  S2 --> I2["API and service runtime"]
  I2 --> R2["Review risk: Backend (2 files)"]
  R2 --> V2["backend tests"]
Loading

@opencode-agent opencode-agent Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Pull request overview

OpenCode cannot approve yet because required coverage evidence did not pass.

Review outcome

1. HIGH .github/workflows/opencode-review.yml:1 - Coverage evidence did not prove required test/docstring evidence

  • Problem: The required coverage-evidence job result was failure, so OpenCode cannot establish approval sufficiency for this head.

  • Root cause: Automated approval is only valid when the same-head coverage-evidence job proves supported repository test suites passed and configured docstring gates passed or were advisory, or reports not applicable because no supported source files or package manifests exist. Missing, failed, skipped, unavailable, or unsupported-tooling test evidence is a blocker.

  • Fix: Install or configure the repository test/docstring evidence tooling when source files or package manifests exist, rerun the current-head coverage-evidence job, and approve only after it reports success with required evidence or explicit no-source not-applicable evidence.

  • Regression test: Keep the approval branch checking needs.coverage-evidence.result == success before posting APPROVE, and publish REQUEST_CHANGES when coverage-evidence blocker states such as cancelled, skipped, failed, unsupported-tooling, or below-100 evidence are present.

  • Result: REQUEST_CHANGES

  • Reason: coverage-evidence result was failure, so required test/docstring evidence was not proven for current head be3bf773baf31b36952ac8bd9a48fbd76dc0f3cd.

  • Head SHA: be3bf773baf31b36952ac8bd9a48fbd76dc0f3cd

  • Workflow run: 31388761597

  • Workflow attempt: 1

Coverage evidence

Coverage evidence job did not run or did not publish coverage evidence.

Changed-File Evidence Map

flowchart LR
  PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
  Evidence --> S1["Changed file (2 files)"]
  S1 --> I1["repository behavior"]
  I1 --> R1["Review risk: Changed file (2 files)"]
  R1 --> V1["required checks"]
  Evidence --> S2["Backend (2 files)"]
  S2 --> I2["API and service runtime"]
  I2 --> R2["Review risk: Backend (2 files)"]
  R2 --> V2["backend tests"]
Loading

@opencode-agent opencode-agent Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Pull request overview

OpenCode cannot approve yet because required coverage evidence did not pass.

Review outcome

1. HIGH .github/workflows/opencode-review.yml:1 - Coverage evidence did not prove required test/docstring evidence

  • Problem: The required coverage-evidence job result was failure, so OpenCode cannot establish approval sufficiency for this head.

  • Root cause: Automated approval is only valid when the same-head coverage-evidence job proves supported repository test suites passed and configured docstring gates passed or were advisory, or reports not applicable because no supported source files or package manifests exist. Missing, failed, skipped, unavailable, or unsupported-tooling test evidence is a blocker.

  • Fix: Install or configure the repository test/docstring evidence tooling when source files or package manifests exist, rerun the current-head coverage-evidence job, and approve only after it reports success with required evidence or explicit no-source not-applicable evidence.

  • Regression test: Keep the approval branch checking needs.coverage-evidence.result == success before posting APPROVE, and publish REQUEST_CHANGES when coverage-evidence blocker states such as cancelled, skipped, failed, unsupported-tooling, or below-100 evidence are present.

  • Result: REQUEST_CHANGES

  • Reason: coverage-evidence result was failure, so required test/docstring evidence was not proven for current head be3bf773baf31b36952ac8bd9a48fbd76dc0f3cd.

  • Head SHA: be3bf773baf31b36952ac8bd9a48fbd76dc0f3cd

  • Workflow run: 31406453824

  • Workflow attempt: 1

Coverage evidence

Coverage evidence job did not run or did not publish coverage evidence.

Changed-File Evidence Map

flowchart LR
  PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
  Evidence --> S1["Changed file (2 files)"]
  S1 --> I1["repository behavior"]
  I1 --> R1["Review risk: Changed file (2 files)"]
  R1 --> V1["required checks"]
  Evidence --> S2["Backend (2 files)"]
  S2 --> I2["API and service runtime"]
  I2 --> R2["Review risk: Backend (2 files)"]
  R2 --> V2["backend tests"]
Loading

@opencode-agent opencode-agent Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Pull request overview

OpenCode cannot approve yet because required coverage evidence did not pass.

Review outcome

1. HIGH .github/workflows/opencode-review.yml:1 - Coverage evidence did not prove required test/docstring evidence

  • Problem: The required coverage-evidence job result was failure, so OpenCode cannot establish approval sufficiency for this head.

  • Root cause: Automated approval is only valid when the same-head coverage-evidence job proves supported repository test suites passed and configured docstring gates passed or were advisory, or reports not applicable because no supported source files or package manifests exist. Missing, failed, skipped, unavailable, or unsupported-tooling test evidence is a blocker.

  • Fix: Install or configure the repository test/docstring evidence tooling when source files or package manifests exist, rerun the current-head coverage-evidence job, and approve only after it reports success with required evidence or explicit no-source not-applicable evidence.

  • Regression test: Keep the approval branch checking needs.coverage-evidence.result == success before posting APPROVE, and publish REQUEST_CHANGES when coverage-evidence blocker states such as cancelled, skipped, failed, unsupported-tooling, or below-100 evidence are present.

  • Result: REQUEST_CHANGES

  • Reason: coverage-evidence result was failure, so required test/docstring evidence was not proven for current head be3bf773baf31b36952ac8bd9a48fbd76dc0f3cd.

  • Head SHA: be3bf773baf31b36952ac8bd9a48fbd76dc0f3cd

  • Workflow run: 31411021981

  • Workflow attempt: 1

Coverage evidence

Coverage evidence job did not run or did not publish coverage evidence.

Changed-File Evidence Map

flowchart LR
  PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
  Evidence --> S1["Changed file (2 files)"]
  S1 --> I1["repository behavior"]
  I1 --> R1["Review risk: Changed file (2 files)"]
  R1 --> V1["required checks"]
  Evidence --> S2["Backend (2 files)"]
  S2 --> I2["API and service runtime"]
  I2 --> R2["Review risk: Backend (2 files)"]
  R2 --> V2["backend tests"]
Loading

@opencode-agent opencode-agent Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Pull request overview

OpenCode cannot approve yet because required coverage evidence did not pass.

Review outcome

1. HIGH .github/workflows/opencode-review.yml:1 - Coverage evidence did not prove required test/docstring evidence

  • Problem: The required coverage-evidence job result was failure, so OpenCode cannot establish approval sufficiency for this head.

  • Root cause: Automated approval is only valid when the same-head coverage-evidence job proves supported repository test suites passed and configured docstring gates passed or were advisory, or reports not applicable because no supported source files or package manifests exist. Missing, failed, skipped, unavailable, or unsupported-tooling test evidence is a blocker.

  • Fix: Install or configure the repository test/docstring evidence tooling when source files or package manifests exist, rerun the current-head coverage-evidence job, and approve only after it reports success with required evidence or explicit no-source not-applicable evidence.

  • Regression test: Keep the approval branch checking needs.coverage-evidence.result == success before posting APPROVE, and publish REQUEST_CHANGES when coverage-evidence blocker states such as cancelled, skipped, failed, unsupported-tooling, or below-100 evidence are present.

  • Result: REQUEST_CHANGES

  • Reason: coverage-evidence result was failure, so required test/docstring evidence was not proven for current head be3bf773baf31b36952ac8bd9a48fbd76dc0f3cd.

  • Head SHA: be3bf773baf31b36952ac8bd9a48fbd76dc0f3cd

  • Workflow run: 31429233895

  • Workflow attempt: 1

Coverage evidence

Coverage evidence job did not run or did not publish coverage evidence.

Changed-File Evidence Map

flowchart LR
  PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
  Evidence --> S1["Changed file (2 files)"]
  S1 --> I1["repository behavior"]
  I1 --> R1["Review risk: Changed file (2 files)"]
  R1 --> V1["required checks"]
  Evidence --> S2["Backend (2 files)"]
  S2 --> I2["API and service runtime"]
  I2 --> R2["Review risk: Backend (2 files)"]
  R2 --> V2["backend tests"]
Loading

@opencode-agent opencode-agent Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Pull request overview

OpenCode cannot approve yet because required coverage evidence did not pass.

Review outcome

1. HIGH .github/workflows/opencode-review.yml:1 - Coverage evidence did not prove required test/docstring evidence

  • Problem: The required coverage-evidence job result was failure, so OpenCode cannot establish approval sufficiency for this head.

  • Root cause: Automated approval is only valid when the same-head coverage-evidence job proves supported repository test suites passed and configured docstring gates passed or were advisory, or reports not applicable because no supported source files or package manifests exist. Missing, failed, skipped, unavailable, or unsupported-tooling test evidence is a blocker.

  • Fix: Install or configure the repository test/docstring evidence tooling when source files or package manifests exist, rerun the current-head coverage-evidence job, and approve only after it reports success with required evidence or explicit no-source not-applicable evidence.

  • Regression test: Keep the approval branch checking needs.coverage-evidence.result == success before posting APPROVE, and publish REQUEST_CHANGES when coverage-evidence blocker states such as cancelled, skipped, failed, unsupported-tooling, or below-100 evidence are present.

  • Result: REQUEST_CHANGES

  • Reason: coverage-evidence result was failure, so required test/docstring evidence was not proven for current head be3bf773baf31b36952ac8bd9a48fbd76dc0f3cd.

  • Head SHA: be3bf773baf31b36952ac8bd9a48fbd76dc0f3cd

  • Workflow run: 31433247869

  • Workflow attempt: 1

Coverage evidence

Coverage evidence job did not run or did not publish coverage evidence.

Changed-File Evidence Map

flowchart LR
  PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
  Evidence --> S1["Changed file (2 files)"]
  S1 --> I1["repository behavior"]
  I1 --> R1["Review risk: Changed file (2 files)"]
  R1 --> V1["required checks"]
  Evidence --> S2["Backend (2 files)"]
  S2 --> I2["API and service runtime"]
  I2 --> R2["Review risk: Backend (2 files)"]
  R2 --> V2["backend tests"]
Loading

@opencode-agent opencode-agent Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Pull request overview

OpenCode cannot approve yet because required coverage evidence did not pass.

Review outcome

1. HIGH .github/workflows/opencode-review.yml:1 - Coverage evidence did not prove required test/docstring evidence

  • Problem: The required coverage-evidence job result was failure, so OpenCode cannot establish approval sufficiency for this head.

  • Root cause: Automated approval is only valid when the same-head coverage-evidence job proves supported repository test suites passed and configured docstring gates passed or were advisory, or reports not applicable because no supported source files or package manifests exist. Missing, failed, skipped, unavailable, or unsupported-tooling test evidence is a blocker.

  • Fix: Install or configure the repository test/docstring evidence tooling when source files or package manifests exist, rerun the current-head coverage-evidence job, and approve only after it reports success with required evidence or explicit no-source not-applicable evidence.

  • Regression test: Keep the approval branch checking needs.coverage-evidence.result == success before posting APPROVE, and publish REQUEST_CHANGES when coverage-evidence blocker states such as cancelled, skipped, failed, unsupported-tooling, or below-100 evidence are present.

  • Result: REQUEST_CHANGES

  • Reason: coverage-evidence result was failure, so required test/docstring evidence was not proven for current head be3bf773baf31b36952ac8bd9a48fbd76dc0f3cd.

  • Head SHA: be3bf773baf31b36952ac8bd9a48fbd76dc0f3cd

  • Workflow run: 31436737155

  • Workflow attempt: 1

Coverage evidence

Coverage evidence job did not run or did not publish coverage evidence.

Changed-File Evidence Map

flowchart LR
  PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
  Evidence --> S1["Changed file (2 files)"]
  S1 --> I1["repository behavior"]
  I1 --> R1["Review risk: Changed file (2 files)"]
  R1 --> V1["required checks"]
  Evidence --> S2["Backend (2 files)"]
  S2 --> I2["API and service runtime"]
  I2 --> R2["Review risk: Backend (2 files)"]
  R2 --> V2["backend tests"]
Loading

@opencode-agent opencode-agent Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Pull request overview

OpenCode cannot approve yet because required coverage evidence did not pass.

Review outcome

1. HIGH .github/workflows/opencode-review.yml:1 - Coverage evidence did not prove required test/docstring evidence

  • Problem: The required coverage-evidence job result was failure, so OpenCode cannot establish approval sufficiency for this head.

  • Root cause: Automated approval is only valid when the same-head coverage-evidence job proves supported repository test suites passed and configured docstring gates passed or were advisory, or reports not applicable because no supported source files or package manifests exist. Missing, failed, skipped, unavailable, or unsupported-tooling test evidence is a blocker.

  • Fix: Install or configure the repository test/docstring evidence tooling when source files or package manifests exist, rerun the current-head coverage-evidence job, and approve only after it reports success with required evidence or explicit no-source not-applicable evidence.

  • Regression test: Keep the approval branch checking needs.coverage-evidence.result == success before posting APPROVE, and publish REQUEST_CHANGES when coverage-evidence blocker states such as cancelled, skipped, failed, unsupported-tooling, or below-100 evidence are present.

  • Result: REQUEST_CHANGES

  • Reason: coverage-evidence result was failure, so required test/docstring evidence was not proven for current head be3bf773baf31b36952ac8bd9a48fbd76dc0f3cd.

  • Head SHA: be3bf773baf31b36952ac8bd9a48fbd76dc0f3cd

  • Workflow run: 31438919305

  • Workflow attempt: 1

Coverage evidence

Coverage evidence job did not run or did not publish coverage evidence.

Changed-File Evidence Map

flowchart LR
  PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
  Evidence --> S1["Changed file (2 files)"]
  S1 --> I1["repository behavior"]
  I1 --> R1["Review risk: Changed file (2 files)"]
  R1 --> V1["required checks"]
  Evidence --> S2["Backend (2 files)"]
  S2 --> I2["API and service runtime"]
  I2 --> R2["Review risk: Backend (2 files)"]
  R2 --> V2["backend tests"]
Loading

@opencode-agent opencode-agent Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Pull request overview

OpenCode cannot approve yet because required coverage evidence did not pass.

Review outcome

1. HIGH .github/workflows/opencode-review.yml:1 - Coverage evidence did not prove required test/docstring evidence

  • Problem: The required coverage-evidence job result was failure, so OpenCode cannot establish approval sufficiency for this head.

  • Root cause: Automated approval is only valid when the same-head coverage-evidence job proves supported repository test suites passed and configured docstring gates passed or were advisory, or reports not applicable because no supported source files or package manifests exist. Missing, failed, skipped, unavailable, or unsupported-tooling test evidence is a blocker.

  • Fix: Install or configure the repository test/docstring evidence tooling when source files or package manifests exist, rerun the current-head coverage-evidence job, and approve only after it reports success with required evidence or explicit no-source not-applicable evidence.

  • Regression test: Keep the approval branch checking needs.coverage-evidence.result == success before posting APPROVE, and publish REQUEST_CHANGES when coverage-evidence blocker states such as cancelled, skipped, failed, unsupported-tooling, or below-100 evidence are present.

  • Result: REQUEST_CHANGES

  • Reason: coverage-evidence result was failure, so required test/docstring evidence was not proven for current head be3bf773baf31b36952ac8bd9a48fbd76dc0f3cd.

  • Head SHA: be3bf773baf31b36952ac8bd9a48fbd76dc0f3cd

  • Workflow run: 31441463395

  • Workflow attempt: 1

Coverage evidence

Coverage evidence job did not run or did not publish coverage evidence.

Changed-File Evidence Map

flowchart LR
  PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
  Evidence --> S1["Changed file (2 files)"]
  S1 --> I1["repository behavior"]
  I1 --> R1["Review risk: Changed file (2 files)"]
  R1 --> V1["required checks"]
  Evidence --> S2["Backend (2 files)"]
  S2 --> I2["API and service runtime"]
  I2 --> R2["Review risk: Backend (2 files)"]
  R2 --> V2["backend tests"]
Loading

@opencode-agent opencode-agent Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Pull request overview

OpenCode cannot approve yet because required coverage evidence did not pass.

Review outcome

1. HIGH .github/workflows/opencode-review.yml:1 - Coverage evidence did not prove required test/docstring evidence

  • Problem: The required coverage-evidence job result was failure, so OpenCode cannot establish approval sufficiency for this head.

  • Root cause: Automated approval is only valid when the same-head coverage-evidence job proves supported repository test suites passed and configured docstring gates passed or were advisory, or reports not applicable because no supported source files or package manifests exist. Missing, failed, skipped, unavailable, or unsupported-tooling test evidence is a blocker.

  • Fix: Install or configure the repository test/docstring evidence tooling when source files or package manifests exist, rerun the current-head coverage-evidence job, and approve only after it reports success with required evidence or explicit no-source not-applicable evidence.

  • Regression test: Keep the approval branch checking needs.coverage-evidence.result == success before posting APPROVE, and publish REQUEST_CHANGES when coverage-evidence blocker states such as cancelled, skipped, failed, unsupported-tooling, or below-100 evidence are present.

  • Result: REQUEST_CHANGES

  • Reason: coverage-evidence result was failure, so required test/docstring evidence was not proven for current head be3bf773baf31b36952ac8bd9a48fbd76dc0f3cd.

  • Head SHA: be3bf773baf31b36952ac8bd9a48fbd76dc0f3cd

  • Workflow run: 31444204610

  • Workflow attempt: 1

Coverage evidence

Coverage evidence job did not run or did not publish coverage evidence.

Changed-File Evidence Map

flowchart LR
  PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
  Evidence --> S1["Changed file (2 files)"]
  S1 --> I1["repository behavior"]
  I1 --> R1["Review risk: Changed file (2 files)"]
  R1 --> V1["required checks"]
  Evidence --> S2["Backend (2 files)"]
  S2 --> I2["API and service runtime"]
  I2 --> R2["Review risk: Backend (2 files)"]
  R2 --> V2["backend tests"]
Loading

@opencode-agent opencode-agent Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Pull request overview

OpenCode cannot approve yet because required coverage evidence did not pass.

Review outcome

1. HIGH .github/workflows/opencode-review.yml:1 - Coverage evidence did not prove required test/docstring evidence

  • Problem: The required coverage-evidence job result was failure, so OpenCode cannot establish approval sufficiency for this head.

  • Root cause: Automated approval is only valid when the same-head coverage-evidence job proves supported repository test suites passed and configured docstring gates passed or were advisory, or reports not applicable because no supported source files or package manifests exist. Missing, failed, skipped, unavailable, or unsupported-tooling test evidence is a blocker.

  • Fix: Install or configure the repository test/docstring evidence tooling when source files or package manifests exist, rerun the current-head coverage-evidence job, and approve only after it reports success with required evidence or explicit no-source not-applicable evidence.

  • Regression test: Keep the approval branch checking needs.coverage-evidence.result == success before posting APPROVE, and publish REQUEST_CHANGES when coverage-evidence blocker states such as cancelled, skipped, failed, unsupported-tooling, or below-100 evidence are present.

  • Result: REQUEST_CHANGES

  • Reason: coverage-evidence result was failure, so required test/docstring evidence was not proven for current head be3bf773baf31b36952ac8bd9a48fbd76dc0f3cd.

  • Head SHA: be3bf773baf31b36952ac8bd9a48fbd76dc0f3cd

  • Workflow run: 31447790791

  • Workflow attempt: 1

Coverage evidence

Coverage evidence job did not run or did not publish coverage evidence.

Changed-File Evidence Map

flowchart LR
  PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
  Evidence --> S1["Changed file (2 files)"]
  S1 --> I1["repository behavior"]
  I1 --> R1["Review risk: Changed file (2 files)"]
  R1 --> V1["required checks"]
  Evidence --> S2["Backend (2 files)"]
  S2 --> I2["API and service runtime"]
  I2 --> R2["Review risk: Backend (2 files)"]
  R2 --> V2["backend tests"]
Loading

@opencode-agent opencode-agent Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Pull request overview

OpenCode cannot approve yet because required coverage evidence did not pass.

Review outcome

1. HIGH .github/workflows/opencode-review.yml:1 - Coverage evidence did not prove required test/docstring evidence

  • Problem: The required coverage-evidence job result was failure, so OpenCode cannot establish approval sufficiency for this head.

  • Root cause: Automated approval is only valid when the same-head coverage-evidence job proves supported repository test suites passed and configured docstring gates passed or were advisory, or reports not applicable because no supported source files or package manifests exist. Missing, failed, skipped, unavailable, or unsupported-tooling test evidence is a blocker.

  • Fix: Install or configure the repository test/docstring evidence tooling when source files or package manifests exist, rerun the current-head coverage-evidence job, and approve only after it reports success with required evidence or explicit no-source not-applicable evidence.

  • Regression test: Keep the approval branch checking needs.coverage-evidence.result == success before posting APPROVE, and publish REQUEST_CHANGES when coverage-evidence blocker states such as cancelled, skipped, failed, unsupported-tooling, or below-100 evidence are present.

  • Result: REQUEST_CHANGES

  • Reason: coverage-evidence result was failure, so required test/docstring evidence was not proven for current head be3bf773baf31b36952ac8bd9a48fbd76dc0f3cd.

  • Head SHA: be3bf773baf31b36952ac8bd9a48fbd76dc0f3cd

  • Workflow run: 31454314237

  • Workflow attempt: 1

Coverage evidence

Coverage evidence job did not run or did not publish coverage evidence.

Changed-File Evidence Map

flowchart LR
  PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
  Evidence --> S1["Changed file (2 files)"]
  S1 --> I1["repository behavior"]
  I1 --> R1["Review risk: Changed file (2 files)"]
  R1 --> V1["required checks"]
  Evidence --> S2["Backend (2 files)"]
  S2 --> I2["API and service runtime"]
  I2 --> R2["Review risk: Backend (2 files)"]
  R2 --> V2["backend tests"]
Loading

@opencode-agent opencode-agent Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Pull request overview

OpenCode cannot approve yet because required coverage evidence did not pass.

Review outcome

1. HIGH .github/workflows/opencode-review.yml:1 - Coverage evidence did not prove required test/docstring evidence

  • Problem: The required coverage-evidence job result was failure, so OpenCode cannot establish approval sufficiency for this head.

  • Root cause: Automated approval is only valid when the same-head coverage-evidence job proves supported repository test suites passed and configured docstring gates passed or were advisory, or reports not applicable because no supported source files or package manifests exist. Missing, failed, skipped, unavailable, or unsupported-tooling test evidence is a blocker.

  • Fix: Install or configure the repository test/docstring evidence tooling when source files or package manifests exist, rerun the current-head coverage-evidence job, and approve only after it reports success with required evidence or explicit no-source not-applicable evidence.

  • Regression test: Keep the approval branch checking needs.coverage-evidence.result == success before posting APPROVE, and publish REQUEST_CHANGES when coverage-evidence blocker states such as cancelled, skipped, failed, unsupported-tooling, or below-100 evidence are present.

  • Result: REQUEST_CHANGES

  • Reason: coverage-evidence result was failure, so required test/docstring evidence was not proven for current head be3bf773baf31b36952ac8bd9a48fbd76dc0f3cd.

  • Head SHA: be3bf773baf31b36952ac8bd9a48fbd76dc0f3cd

  • Workflow run: 31458477906

  • Workflow attempt: 1

Coverage evidence

Coverage evidence job did not run or did not publish coverage evidence.

Changed-File Evidence Map

flowchart LR
  PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
  Evidence --> S1["Changed file (2 files)"]
  S1 --> I1["repository behavior"]
  I1 --> R1["Review risk: Changed file (2 files)"]
  R1 --> V1["required checks"]
  Evidence --> S2["Backend (2 files)"]
  S2 --> I2["API and service runtime"]
  I2 --> R2["Review risk: Backend (2 files)"]
  R2 --> V2["backend tests"]
Loading

@opencode-agent opencode-agent Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Pull request overview

OpenCode cannot approve yet because required coverage evidence did not pass.

Review outcome

1. HIGH .github/workflows/opencode-review.yml:1 - Coverage evidence did not prove required test/docstring evidence

  • Problem: The required coverage-evidence job result was failure, so OpenCode cannot establish approval sufficiency for this head.

  • Root cause: Automated approval is only valid when the same-head coverage-evidence job proves supported repository test suites passed and configured docstring gates passed or were advisory, or reports not applicable because no supported source files or package manifests exist. Missing, failed, skipped, unavailable, or unsupported-tooling test evidence is a blocker.

  • Fix: Install or configure the repository test/docstring evidence tooling when source files or package manifests exist, rerun the current-head coverage-evidence job, and approve only after it reports success with required evidence or explicit no-source not-applicable evidence.

  • Regression test: Keep the approval branch checking needs.coverage-evidence.result == success before posting APPROVE, and publish REQUEST_CHANGES when coverage-evidence blocker states such as cancelled, skipped, failed, unsupported-tooling, or below-100 evidence are present.

  • Result: REQUEST_CHANGES

  • Reason: coverage-evidence result was failure, so required test/docstring evidence was not proven for current head be3bf773baf31b36952ac8bd9a48fbd76dc0f3cd.

  • Head SHA: be3bf773baf31b36952ac8bd9a48fbd76dc0f3cd

  • Workflow run: 31462975235

  • Workflow attempt: 1

Coverage evidence

Coverage evidence job did not run or did not publish coverage evidence.

Changed-File Evidence Map

flowchart LR
  PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
  Evidence --> S1["Changed file (2 files)"]
  S1 --> I1["repository behavior"]
  I1 --> R1["Review risk: Changed file (2 files)"]
  R1 --> V1["required checks"]
  Evidence --> S2["Backend (2 files)"]
  S2 --> I2["API and service runtime"]
  I2 --> R2["Review risk: Backend (2 files)"]
  R2 --> V2["backend tests"]
Loading

@seonghobae
seonghobae dismissed stale reviews from opencode-agent[bot], opencode-agent[bot], opencode-agent[bot], opencode-agent[bot], opencode-agent[bot], opencode-agent[bot], opencode-agent[bot], opencode-agent[bot], opencode-agent[bot], opencode-agent[bot], opencode-agent[bot], opencode-agent[bot], opencode-agent[bot], opencode-agent[bot], opencode-agent[bot], opencode-agent[bot], opencode-agent[bot], opencode-agent[bot], and opencode-agent[bot] August 22, 2026 07:41

Stale review: cited a coverage-evidence/required-check failure on an earlier commit; current head has been verified (gh pr checks) to pass coverage-evidence and all other non-metadata-gate required checks, with no current-head review from this reviewer. Dismissing as superseded per AGENTS.md stale-review guidance.

@coderabbitai

coderabbitai Bot commented Aug 22, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Caution

Review failed

An error occurred during the review process. Please try again later.


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

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.

@seonghobae

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Exact head e3485b4dfed763cdcd846c7894dc5c5f69e445e0를 최신 develop#1565(52dfc863d1a5d6e4e80b6366f719dd09f2aa6172) 위에 ordinary merge로 non-force restack하고 base를 codex/starlette-testclient-dependency로 retarget했습니다. CHANGELOG 충돌은 tool-mutation 경계와 TestClient dependency 근거를 모두 보존해 해결했습니다.

검증: 도구 API·UUID·attachment parent regression·dependency pin 86개가 -W error로 통과했고 Ruff와 diff check도 통과했습니다. 과거 Strix/metadata 실패와 review는 새 head의 병합 증거로 재사용하지 않습니다.

@chatgpt-codex-connector

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot commented Sep 5, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codex Review Summary

This comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.

Review Status Commit Review trigger
📝 Code Review Completed 2026-09-05T05:41:29.829167Z 0833fcb New commits
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review" or "@codex security review".

Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings.

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: e3485b4dfe

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

Comment thread AGENTS.md Outdated
Comment on lines +443 to +444
required snapshot revision, model version, request/result scope, and label
version. Never join snapshots, model artifacts, topic components, or label

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

P2 Badge Restore entity-specific identity bindings

This unrelated governance edit changes an entity-specific alternative into a requirement that every identity contain a snapshot revision, model version, request/result scope, and label version. The cross-file counterpart in docs/topic-intelligence/DATA_MODEL.md:155-165 defines distinct tuples—for example, document snapshots have no model or label fields, while model artifacts have no request or label fields—so the new wording contradicts the canonical data model and would cause future reviews to demand irrelevant fields. Restore the previous entity-specific wording while retaining the separate tools mutation rule.

AGENTS.md reference: AGENTS.md:L245-L249

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

bug Something isn't working priority: medium Normal-priority or P2 work status: draft Draft pull request type: bug Defect or incorrect behavior

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants