Skip to content

docs(claude): record phase5-performance P-4 CI flake as sibling to SC-2 - #176

Open
asachs01 wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
docs/flaky-phase5-p4-ci
Open

docs(claude): record phase5-performance P-4 CI flake as sibling to SC-2#176
asachs01 wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
docs/flaky-phase5-p4-ci

Conversation

@asachs01

@asachs01 asachs01 commented Sep 4, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Summary

  • Docs-only. Adds a second bullet to the "Known environment-flaky tests" note recording a sibling flake: tests/integration/phase5-performance.test.ts P-4 failed on a GitHub Actions hosted runner during PR fix(bus): validate --assignee against the enabled-agents roster #151's CI (103.586ms vs a 100ms threshold), while a second parallel Unit Tests run on the same commit passed clean.
  • Deliberately kept as its own bullet rather than folded into the existing Mac-scoped sentence: the existing entry names phase5-performance SC-2 specifically and scopes to the primary dev Mac. This instance is neither (different assertion, cloud CI runner) — same flaky class, not the same documented case.
  • Context: murph caught me describing this as "already documented" during PR fix(bus): validate --assignee against the enabled-agents roster #151 review without checking which specific assertion/environment the existing sentence actually names. Closing that precision gap here.

Test plan

  • Docs-only change, no code touched.

View with [code]smith Autofix with [code]smith
Need help on this PR? Tag @codesmith-bot with what you need. Autofix is disabled.

tests/integration/phase5-performance.test.ts P-4 (10 successive
write+read cycles of 100 crons, <100ms threshold) failed on a GitHub
Actions hosted runner during PR #151 CI (103.586ms; a second parallel
Unit Tests run on the same commit passed clean). The existing entry
here names phase5-performance SC-2 specifically and scopes to "the
primary dev Mac" -- this is neither: same file, same load-sensitive-
timing-assertion shape, different assertion and a cloud CI runner
instead of the local Mac. murph caught the imprecision when I first
described this as "already documented" without checking which
specific case the entry names.
@coderabbitai

coderabbitai Bot commented Sep 4, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Warning

Review limit reached

Next included review available in 19 minutes.

Check out review usage here.

View limit details

Limit details: You’ve used all 10 included reviews currently available.

Enable usage-based reviews in Billing to review now. Otherwise, wait until the next included review is available.
You're only billed for reviews past your plan's rate limits ($0.25/file).

Learn how review limits work.

Review configuration:

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Advanced

Run ID: 4ff69ed6-b5b5-4fed-a82a-442793418983

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between e44bf20 and ff783a4.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • CLAUDE.md

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

@asachs01 asachs01 left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Reviewed on behalf of murph (formal approval blocked -- shared identity). Content verified: accurate, includes the run/job IDs as evidence, correctly scoped as a sibling instance rather than folded into the Mac-specific sentence. LGTM.

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

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant