docs: establish authoritative automation control-plane specifications - #896
docs: establish authoritative automation control-plane specifications#896seonghobae wants to merge 69 commits into
Conversation
|
Warning Review limit reached
Next review available in: 26 minutes You've used all free OSS reviews for now. Wait for the free limit to reset to keep reviewing this public repository. How can I continue?After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the To avoid repeated limits, reduce automatic review volume by pausing incremental auto-reviews earlier, using label-based review opt-in, excluding WIP or generated PR titles, or requesting reviews manually when the PR is ready. If your team needs uninterrupted high-volume reviews, an organization admin can enable usage-based reviews. How do review limits work?CodeRabbit enforces per-developer PR review limits for each organization. Most developers receive the normal plan review availability. For paid Pro and Pro+ PR reviews, CodeRabbit uses adaptive limits for sustained high-volume activity. When a developer's recent PR review activity reaches the 95th percentile or higher among CodeRabbit users, additional reviews become available more gradually as earlier reviews age out of the rolling window. Please refer docs for additional details. Review details⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: Organization UI Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro Plus Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (56)
✨ Finishing Touches📝 Generate docstrings
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
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. Comment |
|
Canonical-documentation consolidation review on exact head Required delta on this existing branch, after refetching both live heads:
After those are exact-head green, request current automated review. Do not merge both #886 and #896; preserve one canonical history and close the other only after verifying no unique accepted decision was dropped. |
|
@coderabbitai review @cwl-noema-review @opencode-agent Review only exact current head |
|
I will evaluate the requested documentation graph and its machine contracts as
|
|
@coderabbitai review @cwl-noema-review @opencode-agent Review only exact current head |
|
I will evaluate the documentation graph as
|
|
Exact-head documentation review requested: This head preserves the already-audited documentation baseline and updates only the redaction lineage/contract: #888 is closed-unmerged @cwl-noema-review @opencode-agent Please review this exact head. Its 11 Actions workflows are currently queued/in progress, so predecessor success and pending checks are not acceptance. A model comment/check/status is also not a qualifying independent formal approval. |
|
Exact-head documentation review requested: The continuation handoff sink/acknowledgement contract is aligned across the enabled hourly automation prompt, Automation Documentation Quality CI run 31321656195 checked out this exact head and completed successfully: @cwl-noema-review @opencode-agent Please review only this exact current head. Do not carry forward predecessor-head evidence, mutate the branch, merge, retarget, or change rulesets. A current automated source review and a qualifying independent non-author formal approval remain separate required authorities. |
|
@coderabbitai review @cwl-noema-review @opencode-agent Review only exact current head |
🧩 Analysis chain🏁 Script executed: #!/bin/bash
set -euo pipefail
repo="ContextualWisdomLab/.github"
pr="896"
expected_head="4dbf099fc55d13e0af677a39c9221b462112af61"
echo "== Exact commit identity =="
actual_head="$(git rev-parse HEAD)"
printf 'checked_out=%s\nexpected=%s\nmatch=%s\n' \
"$actual_head" "$expected_head" \
"$(test "$actual_head" = "$expected_head" && echo yes || echo no)"
git status --short
echo "== Pull request identity and review state =="
gh pr view "$pr" --repo "$repo" \
--json number,state,baseRefName,baseRefOid,headRefName,headRefOid,mergeable,reviewDecision \
--jq '{number,state,baseRefName,baseRefOid,headRefName,headRefOid,mergeable,reviewDecision}'
echo "== Exact-head checks not completed successfully =="
gh api "repos/${repo}/commits/${expected_head}/check-runs?per_page=100" \
--jq '[.check_runs[] | select(.status != "completed" or (.conclusion != "success" and .conclusion != "neutral" and .conclusion != "skipped")) | {name,status,conclusion,details_url}]'
echo "== Files changed at requested head =="
gh pr view "$pr" --repo "$repo" --json files --jq '.files[].path' | sort
echo "== Candidate authoritative files =="
fd -t f . docs tests .github 2>/dev/null \
| rg -i '(adr-000[47]|architecture|erd|data.model|traceability|continuation|doctor|standards|audit|prd|trd|documentation.*contract|automation-documentation-quality)' \
| sort
echo "== Authoritative headings and focused contract text =="
for f in \
$(fd -t f -e md docs 2>/dev/null | rg -i '(adr-000[47]|architecture|erd|data.model|traceability|continuation|doctor|standards|audit|prd|trd)' | sort) \
$(fd -t f -e py tests 2>/dev/null | rg -i '(automation.*documentation.*contract|documentation.*contract)' | sort) \
$(fd -t f -e yml -e yaml .github/workflows 2>/dev/null | rg -i 'automation.*documentation.*quality'); do
echo "--- $f"
rg -n -i -C 2 \
'fixed.wall.clock|no.soft.timeout|two.fresh|double.*(exit|sweep)|COPILOT_GITHUB_TOKEN|central|leaf.owner|remediation_candidate|continuation_handoff|documentation_artifact|traceability_record|logical|persistence|evidence.authority|ISO/IEC/IEEE 29148:2018|ISO/IEC 25010:2023|SLSA 1\.2|SSDF|github\.sha|event.*sha|fail-under|coverage' \
"$f" || true
done
echo "== Static local Markdown link and fence validation =="
python3 - <<'PY'
from pathlib import Path
import re, sys
root = Path.cwd()
errors = []
for path in sorted((root / "docs").rglob("*.md")):
text = path.read_text(encoding="utf-8")
if text.count("```") % 2:
errors.append(f"unbalanced fence: {path.relative_to(root)}")
for raw in re.findall(r'(?<!!)\[[^\]]*\]\(([^)\s]+)(?:\s+"[^"]*")?\)', text):
target = raw.split("#", 1)[0]
if not target or "://" in target or target.startswith(("mailto:", "#")):
continue
if not (path.parent / target).resolve().exists():
errors.append(f"missing target: {path.relative_to(root)} -> {raw}")
if errors:
print("\n".join(errors))
sys.exit(1)
print("PASS")
PYLength of output: 7206 🏁 Script executed: #!/bin/bash
set -euo pipefail
echo "== Commit-level diff summary =="
git diff --stat 6eb06cdd08c79a06f7b390069d4ffa49e2eb7dba..HEAD
git diff --name-status 6eb06cdd08c79a06f7b390069d4ffa49e2eb7dba..HEAD
echo "== ADR-0007: work conservation and fresh-exit rules =="
sed -n '1,280p' docs/automation/adr/0007-work-conserving-maintenance.md
echo "== ADR-0004: explicit secret contracts and retired alias =="
sed -n '1,280p' docs/automation/adr/0004-explicit-secret-contracts.md
echo "== Central versus leaf ownership audit =="
sed -n '1,300p' docs/automation/DOCUMENTATION_AUDIT.md
echo "== Logical data model and ERD =="
sed -n '1,320p' docs/automation/DATA_MODEL.md
sed -n '1,260p' docs/automation/ERD.md
echo "== Evidence authority and identity model =="
rg -n -i -C 4 \
'evidence.authorit|source_revision|pr.base|live.base|merge_revision|check|status|review|model.output|authority' \
docs/automation/{ARCHITECTURE.md,TRD.md,TRACEABILITY.md,PRD.md,EVENT_CONTRACTS.md}
echo "== Standards baseline =="
sed -n '1,320p' docs/doctoring/automation-control-plane-standards.md
echo "== Retired alias: every repository occurrence =="
rg -n -i -C 3 --hidden -g '!.git/**' 'COPILOT_GITHUB_TOKEN' . || true
echo "== Documentation quality workflow =="
sed -n '1,260p' .github/workflows/automation-documentation-quality-ci.yml
echo "== Documentation contract tests: relevant assertions =="
rg -n -i -C 5 \
'ADR-0007|ADR-0004|fixed.wall.clock|no.soft.timeout|two.fresh|double.*(exit|sweep)|COPILOT_GITHUB_TOKEN|central|leaf|remediation_candidate|continuation_handoff|documentation_artifact|traceability_record|evidence.authority|29148|25010|doctoring|checkout|coverage' \
tests/test_automation_documentation_contract.py \
tests/test_automation_historical_loop_supersession_contract.py \
tests/test_automation_doctoring_index_contract.py
echo "== Test file structure and full requested-contract test =="
ast-grep outline tests/test_automation_documentation_contract.py --items all --view expanded
sed -n '1,460p' tests/test_automation_documentation_contract.pyLength of output: 205470
I found no source-backed actionable defect in the requested documentation scope. The reviewed sources show these controls:
I cannot give an acceptance or approval verdict yet. The exact-head
|
|
@coderabbitai full review |
|
OpenCode Review Overview
Pull request overviewOpenCode reviewed the current-head bounded evidence and requested changes before merge. Findings1. P2 .github/workflows/strix.yml:41 - strix.yml concurrency comment claims cancellation behavior this PR does not implement
SummaryREQUEST_CHANGES for PR #896 (docs: establish authoritative automation control-plane specifications; base 6eb06cd..head 26c7a8c, repository ContextualWisdomLab/.github). The PR establishes the authoritative automation documentation graph (docs/automation/ARCHITECTURE, AUTONOMY_THREATS, CONTINUATION_RUNBOOK, DATA_MODEL, DOCUMENTATION_AUDIT, ERD, EVENT_CONTRACTS, INCIDENT_RUNBOOK, OPERABILITY, PRD, README, RUNBOOK, SECURITY, TEST_STRATEGY, THREAT_MODEL, TRACEABILITY, TRD, UML, ADRs 0001-0016, doctoring standards), reconciles AGENTS.md/CLAUDE.md/README/CHANGELOG supersession guidance, adds machine-checkable contracts (tests/test_automation_documentation_contract.py, tests/test_automation_doctoring_index_contract.py, tests/test_automation_historical_loop_supersession_contract.py, test_pr_governance_audit_contract.py +12), adds the new hash-pinned full-suite workflow .github/workflows/automation-documentation-quality-ci.yml (Python 3.14, exact-head checkout ref=${{ github.event.pull_request.head.sha || github.sha }}, pip --require-hashes, coverage --fail-under=100, compileall), and makes comment-only edits to .github/workflows/pr-review-merge-scheduler.yml and .github/workflows/strix.yml. Inspected changed-file evidence and focused hunks for .github/workflows/strix.yml, .github/workflows/automation-documentation-quality-ci.yml, .github/workflows/pr-review-merge-scheduler.yml, AGENTS.md, ARCHITECTURE.md, CHANGELOG.md. Blocking P2 finding: .github/workflows/strix.yml:41 claims concurrency is 'event-class/repository/PR-number scoped and cancels obsolete work within that class. Separate event classes keep a default-branch dispatch from cancelling the required pull_request_target context,' yet the base..head diff stat shows strix.yml | 8 +- (4 added, 4 removed comment lines only), the concurrency block is unchanged from base, the removed base text states Strix runs 'intentionally do not cancel in progress because a pre-job cancellation leaves no scanner log to review', and neither tests/test_strix_workflow_dependency_hashes.py nor tests/test_strix_nvidia_nim_not_found_fallback.py (the covering workflow-contract tests per CodeGraph) asserts the claimed concurrency semantics. DAG: flowchart LR A['docs/automation graph (PRD/TRD/ADR/UML/SECURITY)'] --> B['machine-checkable contract tests (tests/test_automation_)'] --> C['automation-documentation-quality-ci.yml (coverage 100%, compileall)']; A --> D['strix.yml:41 concurrency comment'] --> E['claims cancellation absent from unchanged concurrency block (P2)'] --> F['align comment or add concurrency block plus contract assertion']; C --> G['exact-head artifact gate (ref=head.sha)']. Approval sufficiency: not granted because changed documentation contradicts current code inside the same changed file. Verification posture: Coverage execution evidence Result: PASS with supported repository test suites passed and configured docstring gates passed/advisory; Failed GitHub Check evidence: no completed failed checks at head 26c7a8c; mergeStateStatus blocked is branch-policy/review state, not DIRTY/CONFLICTING conflict evidence. Linter/static: no actionlint in repository test_commands; workflow hunks inspected directly; the new workflow mirrors the repository's existing exact-head/hash-pinned quality pattern (agent-mention-router-quality-ci.yml per workflow_versions Python 3.14). TDD/regression: new doc-contract tests cover the graph and supersession; scheduler hunk is comment-only because the untouched if condition already evaluates github.event.schedule == '/15 * * * *'. Coverage: permanent 100% gate enforced by the new workflow and corroborated by PASS coverage evidence. Docstring coverage: interrogate --fail-under=100 contract reported passed/advisory in coverage evidence. DAG: source-backed flowchart above reflects base-to-head changed flow. PoC/execution: no web surface; evidence is trusted current-head diff, CodeGraph, and coverage-execution traces; no OPENCODE_EXECUTION_RECEIPT required for non-web surfaces and none fabricated. DDD/domain: central control-plane boundary documented consistently with ARCHITECTURE.md index and ADR-0008. CDD/context: docs reference existing workflows and scripts (agent_mention_router.py, strix.yml, pr_review_merge_scheduler.py) confirmed present in the head index. Similar issues: strix.yml changed at 9a86fa9/edd9a37f in PR history with matching contract-test coverage expectations. Claim/concept check: sixteen ADRs, COPILOT_GITHUB_TOKEN retirement, and fixed-wall-clock supersession claims are reconciled by ADR-0004/ADR-0007, CHANGELOG entries, and the historical-loop-supersession contract test; no external standards needed. Standards search: GitHub Actions schedule/concurrency semantics verified against the workflow source itself; no numerical/ML references in this PR. Compatibility/convention: no new DB/API/route identifiers; workflow and env names are descriptive multi-word tokens (FORCE_JAVASCRIPT_ACTIONS_TO_NODE24, PYTHONDONTWRITEBYTECODE are repository conventions); action pins use immutable SHA with version comments per repo convention; runtime versions Python 3.14/Node24 not challenged from model memory. Breaking-change/backcompat: the new workflow makes docs/PR path changes run the full suite plus 100% coverage (intended per PR body); scheduler/strix changes are comment-only with no behavior delta. Performance: scheduler cadence unchanged (cron already */15); new workflow bounded by timeout-minutes 20 with concurrency cancel-in-progress for PR pushes. Developer experience: AGENTS.md now routes agents to docs/automation/README.md with traceability/ADR update duties; actionable and consistent with sibling repo conventions. User experience: non-web surface (workflow comments, docs, log output); the inaccurate strix.yml comment misleads operators and agents about security-scan cancellation semantics. Visual/DOM: non-web changes; per contract the CLI/workflow/docs surface is the reviewed interaction surface instead of Playwright/DOM evidence. Accessibility/i18n: no UI change; docs are plain English. Supply-chain/license: new workflow installs with --require-hashes from requirements-opencode-review-ci-hashes.txt, immutable action pins, and step-security egress audit; no new dependencies. Packaging: pyproject.toml (Python >=3.10), pip/coverage/interrogate/pytest contracts present; unpackaged_source_surfaces empty. Security/privacy: pull_request_target paths-ignore semantics unchanged; exact-head checkout with persist-credentials false and contents: read only; no new secrets; the misleading cancellation claim could encourage unsafe concurrency assumptions around required security scans. Adversarial validation{"status":"failed","probes":[{"path":".github/workflows/strix.yml","line":41,"hypothesis":"The replacement comment asserts Strix concurrency is event-class/repository/PR-number scoped and cancels obsolete work, yet the head workflow never changed its concurrency block, so the claimed behavior does not exist at head.","attack_or_counterexample":"Stack a default-branch repository_dispatch while a pull_request_target scan for the same PR is running: with the unchanged block the runs overlap and no class-scoped cancellation exists, so a dispatch can still preempt or overlap the required PR scan and no scanner-log-preserving cancellation is present.","evidence":"Current-head diff trace: diff stat shows .github/workflows/strix.yml | 8 +- and the only hunk is -4/+4 comment lines, leaving the concurrency block byte-identical to base whose removed text explicitly stated Strix runs intentionally do not cancel in progress because a pre-job cancellation leaves no scanner log to review; CodeGraph covering tests (tests/test_strix_workflow_dependency_hashes.py, tests/test_strix_nvidia_nim_not_found_fallback.py) assert hashes and provider fallback, not the claimed concurrency semantics; trusted source trace at .github/workflows/strix.yml:41 observed the contested claim exists only in comment text with no implementing concurrency change; source-line-sha256=0580bbb47dfc55eef3b5b10179fd6367b01b5c6d5285333ee8bc310ff3c6906f","outcome":"confirmed"},{"path":".github/workflows/pr-review-merge-scheduler.yml","line":556,"hypothesis":"The hourly-to-15-minute heartbeat comment edit could drift from the real schedule trigger and misrepresent the org sweep cadence.","attack_or_counterexample":"A schedule whose if condition referenced a different cron than the new comment would make the documentation false and change sweep cadence relative to the stated contract.","evidence":"Current-head hunk trace: the only change is the comment line at .github/workflows/pr-review-merge-scheduler.yml:556 ('every organization repository on a 15-minute heartbeat'); the untouched surrounding if condition in the same hunk already evaluates (github.event_name == 'schedule' && github.event.schedule == '*/15 * * * *') at base, so the edit only reconciles prose with the pre-existing cron and no scheduling behavior changed; trusted source trace at .github/workflows/pr-review-merge-scheduler.yml:556 observed the comment/cron agreement; source-line-sha256=617966aedba9fa3573274a76f3107e7f70a87e5e8ed79f78edd0d181c50be94f","outcome":"falsified"},{"path":".github/workflows/automation-documentation-quality-ci.yml","line":74,"hypothesis":"The new full-suite job with a permanent 100% coverage gate and hash-pinned install could fail on this PR's own doc-contract tests, or the checkout could measure GitHub's merge revision instead of the exact head.","attack_or_counterexample":"A docs-only PR triggering the paths filter whose suite failed the coverage --fail-under=100 gate, or a checkout that omits ref and measures the merge commit.","evidence":"Trusted coverage execution evidence reports Result: PASS with supported repository test suites passed and configured docstring gates passed/advisory; the workflow's checkout pins ref: ${{ github.event.pull_request.head.sha || github.sha }} (exact-head, matching the repository's established two-checkout exact-head contract) and Failed GitHub Check evidence lists no completed failed checks for head 26c7a8c4a6a7f593e1cbbb88f66fb2a604f8309b; trusted source trace at .github/workflows/automation-documentation-quality-ci.yml:74 observed the exact-head ref and gate behavior; source-line-sha256=f732055dbb2f88915f634e2e105262e6f305614d620a60e86d6588042333f8f6","outcome":"falsified"}],"residual_risk":"Until the strix.yml comment is aligned with the unchanged concurrency block (or the block is actually implemented), operators and agents reading the workflow may assume security-scan cancellation that does not exist, leaving PR-scan queue pressure unhandled exactly as the removed comment warned. The new documentation-quality workflow adds one full-suite 100%-coverage job per docs/PR change, increasing CI cost on every documentation push. Behavioral claims in the new docs graph are active_pr documentation and their runtime maturity remains separately tracked per the PR body."}
Changed-File Evidence Mapflowchart LR
PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
Evidence --> S1["Workflow (3 files)"]
S1 --> I1["GitHub Actions review job"]
I1 --> R1["Review risk: Workflow (3 files)"]
R1 --> V1["actionlint plus required checks"]
Evidence --> S2["Changed file (6 files)"]
S2 --> I2["repository behavior"]
I2 --> R2["Review risk: Changed file (6 files)"]
R2 --> V2["required checks"]
Evidence --> S3["Docs (43 files)"]
S3 --> I3["operator or user guidance"]
I3 --> R3["Review risk: Docs (43 files)"]
R3 --> V3["docs review"]
Evidence --> S4["Test (4 files)"]
S4 --> I4["regression suite"]
I4 --> R4["Review risk: Test (4 files)"]
R4 --> V4["targeted test run"]
|
![opencode-agent[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1549082?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull request overview
OpenCode reviewed the current-head bounded evidence and requested changes before merge.
Findings
1. P2 .github/workflows/strix.yml:41 - strix.yml concurrency comment claims cancellation behavior this PR does not implement
- Problem: The new comment states concurrency is 'event-class/repository/PR-number scoped and cancels obsolete work within that class. Separate event classes keep a default-branch dispatch from cancelling the required pull_request_target context,' implying a functional concurrency redesign. The PR diff for .github/workflows/strix.yml is 4 added + 4 removed comment lines only (diff stat '8 +-'); the concurrency block is byte-identical to base, and the removed base lines documented the actual contract: runs 'intentionally do not cancel in progress because a pre-job cancellation leaves no scanner log to review.' Observable impact: after merge, the workflow prose promises cancellation and event-class separation that do not exist, so a default-branch repository_dispatch can still overlap or preempt a required pull_request_target scan and queue pressure remains unhandled, contradicting the PR's own documentation-reconciliation intent. Trigger condition: any operator or agent reading strix.yml concurrency comments to schedule dispatches, or a future maintainer trusting the comment while editing concurrency.
- Root cause: Comment-only edit: the author described an intended concurrency redesign (event-class/repository/PR-number grouping with cancel-in-progress) but the corresponding concurrency: block change was not made or not included in this diff, leaving the prose describing nonexistent behavior.
- Fix: Either implement the described concurrency block in strix.yml (e.g., group: strix-${{ github.event_name }}-${{ github.repository }}-${{ github.event.pull_request.number || github.ref }} with cancel-in-progress: true, keeping repository_dispatch and pull_request_target in separate event classes) OR restore a comment that accurately describes the unchanged non-cancelling behavior; do not merge a workflow whose comment contradicts its own executable configuration.
- Regression test: python3 -m pytest tests/test_strix_workflow_dependency_hashes.py tests/test_strix_nvidia_nim_not_found_fallback.py -q, plus add a source-level contract assertion in the existing strix workflow-contract test that ties the concurrency group/cancel-in-progress keys to whatever the comment claims, so future comment/code drift fails CI.
- Suggested diff: posted in this finding's inline review thread.
Summary
REQUEST_CHANGES for PR #896 (docs: establish authoritative automation control-plane specifications; base 6eb06cd..head 26c7a8c, repository ContextualWisdomLab/.github). The PR establishes the authoritative automation documentation graph (docs/automation/ARCHITECTURE, AUTONOMY_THREATS, CONTINUATION_RUNBOOK, DATA_MODEL, DOCUMENTATION_AUDIT, ERD, EVENT_CONTRACTS, INCIDENT_RUNBOOK, OPERABILITY, PRD, README, RUNBOOK, SECURITY, TEST_STRATEGY, THREAT_MODEL, TRACEABILITY, TRD, UML, ADRs 0001-0016, doctoring standards), reconciles AGENTS.md/CLAUDE.md/README/CHANGELOG supersession guidance, adds machine-checkable contracts (tests/test_automation_documentation_contract.py, tests/test_automation_doctoring_index_contract.py, tests/test_automation_historical_loop_supersession_contract.py, test_pr_governance_audit_contract.py +12), adds the new hash-pinned full-suite workflow .github/workflows/automation-documentation-quality-ci.yml (Python 3.14, exact-head checkout ref=${{ github.event.pull_request.head.sha || github.sha }}, pip --require-hashes, coverage --fail-under=100, compileall), and makes comment-only edits to .github/workflows/pr-review-merge-scheduler.yml and .github/workflows/strix.yml. Inspected changed-file evidence and focused hunks for .github/workflows/strix.yml, .github/workflows/automation-documentation-quality-ci.yml, .github/workflows/pr-review-merge-scheduler.yml, AGENTS.md, ARCHITECTURE.md, CHANGELOG.md. Blocking P2 finding: .github/workflows/strix.yml:41 claims concurrency is 'event-class/repository/PR-number scoped and cancels obsolete work within that class. Separate event classes keep a default-branch dispatch from cancelling the required pull_request_target context,' yet the base..head diff stat shows strix.yml | 8 +- (4 added, 4 removed comment lines only), the concurrency block is unchanged from base, the removed base text states Strix runs 'intentionally do not cancel in progress because a pre-job cancellation leaves no scanner log to review', and neither tests/test_strix_workflow_dependency_hashes.py nor tests/test_strix_nvidia_nim_not_found_fallback.py (the covering workflow-contract tests per CodeGraph) asserts the claimed concurrency semantics. DAG: flowchart LR A['docs/automation graph (PRD/TRD/ADR/UML/SECURITY)'] --> B['machine-checkable contract tests (tests/test_automation_)'] --> C['automation-documentation-quality-ci.yml (coverage 100%, compileall)']; A --> D['strix.yml:41 concurrency comment'] --> E['claims cancellation absent from unchanged concurrency block (P2)'] --> F['align comment or add concurrency block plus contract assertion']; C --> G['exact-head artifact gate (ref=head.sha)']. Approval sufficiency: not granted because changed documentation contradicts current code inside the same changed file. Verification posture: Coverage execution evidence Result: PASS with supported repository test suites passed and configured docstring gates passed/advisory; Failed GitHub Check evidence: no completed failed checks at head 26c7a8c; mergeStateStatus blocked is branch-policy/review state, not DIRTY/CONFLICTING conflict evidence. Linter/static: no actionlint in repository test_commands; workflow hunks inspected directly; the new workflow mirrors the repository's existing exact-head/hash-pinned quality pattern (agent-mention-router-quality-ci.yml per workflow_versions Python 3.14). TDD/regression: new doc-contract tests cover the graph and supersession; scheduler hunk is comment-only because the untouched if condition already evaluates github.event.schedule == '/15 * * * *'. Coverage: permanent 100% gate enforced by the new workflow and corroborated by PASS coverage evidence. Docstring coverage: interrogate --fail-under=100 contract reported passed/advisory in coverage evidence. DAG: source-backed flowchart above reflects base-to-head changed flow. PoC/execution: no web surface; evidence is trusted current-head diff, CodeGraph, and coverage-execution traces; no OPENCODE_EXECUTION_RECEIPT required for non-web surfaces and none fabricated. DDD/domain: central control-plane boundary documented consistently with ARCHITECTURE.md index and ADR-0008. CDD/context: docs reference existing workflows and scripts (agent_mention_router.py, strix.yml, pr_review_merge_scheduler.py) confirmed present in the head index. Similar issues: strix.yml changed at 9a86fa9/edd9a37f in PR history with matching contract-test coverage expectations. Claim/concept check: sixteen ADRs, COPILOT_GITHUB_TOKEN retirement, and fixed-wall-clock supersession claims are reconciled by ADR-0004/ADR-0007, CHANGELOG entries, and the historical-loop-supersession contract test; no external standards needed. Standards search: GitHub Actions schedule/concurrency semantics verified against the workflow source itself; no numerical/ML references in this PR. Compatibility/convention: no new DB/API/route identifiers; workflow and env names are descriptive multi-word tokens (FORCE_JAVASCRIPT_ACTIONS_TO_NODE24, PYTHONDONTWRITEBYTECODE are repository conventions); action pins use immutable SHA with version comments per repo convention; runtime versions Python 3.14/Node24 not challenged from model memory. Breaking-change/backcompat: the new workflow makes docs/PR path changes run the full suite plus 100% coverage (intended per PR body); scheduler/strix changes are comment-only with no behavior delta. Performance: scheduler cadence unchanged (cron already */15); new workflow bounded by timeout-minutes 20 with concurrency cancel-in-progress for PR pushes. Developer experience: AGENTS.md now routes agents to docs/automation/README.md with traceability/ADR update duties; actionable and consistent with sibling repo conventions. User experience: non-web surface (workflow comments, docs, log output); the inaccurate strix.yml comment misleads operators and agents about security-scan cancellation semantics. Visual/DOM: non-web changes; per contract the CLI/workflow/docs surface is the reviewed interaction surface instead of Playwright/DOM evidence. Accessibility/i18n: no UI change; docs are plain English. Supply-chain/license: new workflow installs with --require-hashes from requirements-opencode-review-ci-hashes.txt, immutable action pins, and step-security egress audit; no new dependencies. Packaging: pyproject.toml (Python >=3.10), pip/coverage/interrogate/pytest contracts present; unpackaged_source_surfaces empty. Security/privacy: pull_request_target paths-ignore semantics unchanged; exact-head checkout with persist-credentials false and contents: read only; no new secrets; the misleading cancellation claim could encourage unsafe concurrency assumptions around required security scans.
Adversarial validation
{"status":"failed","probes":[{"path":".github/workflows/strix.yml","line":41,"hypothesis":"The replacement comment asserts Strix concurrency is event-class/repository/PR-number scoped and cancels obsolete work, yet the head workflow never changed its concurrency block, so the claimed behavior does not exist at head.","attack_or_counterexample":"Stack a default-branch repository_dispatch while a pull_request_target scan for the same PR is running: with the unchanged block the runs overlap and no class-scoped cancellation exists, so a dispatch can still preempt or overlap the required PR scan and no scanner-log-preserving cancellation is present.","evidence":"Current-head diff trace: diff stat shows .github/workflows/strix.yml | 8 +- and the only hunk is -4/+4 comment lines, leaving the concurrency block byte-identical to base whose removed text explicitly stated Strix runs intentionally do not cancel in progress because a pre-job cancellation leaves no scanner log to review; CodeGraph covering tests (tests/test_strix_workflow_dependency_hashes.py, tests/test_strix_nvidia_nim_not_found_fallback.py) assert hashes and provider fallback, not the claimed concurrency semantics; trusted source trace at .github/workflows/strix.yml:41 observed the contested claim exists only in comment text with no implementing concurrency change; source-line-sha256=0580bbb47dfc55eef3b5b10179fd6367b01b5c6d5285333ee8bc310ff3c6906f","outcome":"confirmed"},{"path":".github/workflows/pr-review-merge-scheduler.yml","line":556,"hypothesis":"The hourly-to-15-minute heartbeat comment edit could drift from the real schedule trigger and misrepresent the org sweep cadence.","attack_or_counterexample":"A schedule whose if condition referenced a different cron than the new comment would make the documentation false and change sweep cadence relative to the stated contract.","evidence":"Current-head hunk trace: the only change is the comment line at .github/workflows/pr-review-merge-scheduler.yml:556 ('every organization repository on a 15-minute heartbeat'); the untouched surrounding if condition in the same hunk already evaluates (github.event_name == 'schedule' && github.event.schedule == '*/15 * * * *') at base, so the edit only reconciles prose with the pre-existing cron and no scheduling behavior changed; trusted source trace at .github/workflows/pr-review-merge-scheduler.yml:556 observed the comment/cron agreement; source-line-sha256=617966aedba9fa3573274a76f3107e7f70a87e5e8ed79f78edd0d181c50be94f","outcome":"falsified"},{"path":".github/workflows/automation-documentation-quality-ci.yml","line":74,"hypothesis":"The new full-suite job with a permanent 100% coverage gate and hash-pinned install could fail on this PR's own doc-contract tests, or the checkout could measure GitHub's merge revision instead of the exact head.","attack_or_counterexample":"A docs-only PR triggering the paths filter whose suite failed the coverage --fail-under=100 gate, or a checkout that omits ref and measures the merge commit.","evidence":"Trusted coverage execution evidence reports Result: PASS with supported repository test suites passed and configured docstring gates passed/advisory; the workflow's checkout pins ref: ${{ github.event.pull_request.head.sha || github.sha }} (exact-head, matching the repository's established two-checkout exact-head contract) and Failed GitHub Check evidence lists no completed failed checks for head 26c7a8c4a6a7f593e1cbbb88f66fb2a604f8309b; trusted source trace at .github/workflows/automation-documentation-quality-ci.yml:74 observed the exact-head ref and gate behavior; source-line-sha256=f732055dbb2f88915f634e2e105262e6f305614d620a60e86d6588042333f8f6","outcome":"falsified"}],"residual_risk":"Until the strix.yml comment is aligned with the unchanged concurrency block (or the block is actually implemented), operators and agents reading the workflow may assume security-scan cancellation that does not exist, leaving PR-scan queue pressure unhandled exactly as the removed comment warned. The new documentation-quality workflow adds one full-suite 100%-coverage job per docs/PR change, increasing CI cost on every documentation push. Behavioral claims in the new docs graph are active_pr documentation and their runtime maturity remains separately tracked per the PR body."}-
Result: REQUEST_CHANGES
-
Reason: The changed strix.yml comment claims Strix concurrency is now event-class/repository/PR-number scoped and cancels obsolete work, but this PR changes only four comment lines (+4/-4) and the concurrency block is byte-identical to base; head behavior therefore does not implement the described cancellation, contradicting the removed base comment that runs intentionally do not cancel in progress.
-
Head SHA:
26c7a8c4a6a7f593e1cbbb88f66fb2a604f8309b -
Workflow run: 31355250619
-
Workflow attempt: 1
Changed-File Evidence Map
flowchart LR
PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
Evidence --> S1["Workflow (3 files)"]
S1 --> I1["GitHub Actions review job"]
I1 --> R1["Review risk: Workflow (3 files)"]
R1 --> V1["actionlint plus required checks"]
Evidence --> S2["Changed file (6 files)"]
S2 --> I2["repository behavior"]
I2 --> R2["Review risk: Changed file (6 files)"]
R2 --> V2["required checks"]
Evidence --> S3["Docs (43 files)"]
S3 --> I3["operator or user guidance"]
I3 --> R3["Review risk: Docs (43 files)"]
R3 --> V3["docs review"]
Evidence --> S4["Test (4 files)"]
S4 --> I4["regression suite"]
I4 --> R4["Review risk: Test (4 files)"]
R4 --> V4["targeted test run"]
| # cancel in progress because a pre-job cancellation leaves no scanner log to | ||
| # review. Queue pressure should be handled by stale-run cleanup outside this | ||
| # current-head evidence path. For PRs the merge scheduler manages, same-head | ||
| # event-class/repository/PR-number scoped and cancels obsolete work within |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
P2 strix.yml concurrency comment claims cancellation behavior this PR does not implement
- Location:
.github/workflows/strix.yml:41 - Problem: The new comment states concurrency is 'event-class/repository/PR-number scoped and cancels obsolete work within that class. Separate event classes keep a default-branch dispatch from cancelling the required pull_request_target context,' implying a functional concurrency redesign. The PR diff for .github/workflows/strix.yml is 4 added + 4 removed comment lines only (diff stat '8 +-'); the concurrency block is byte-identical to base, and the removed base lines documented the actual contract: runs 'intentionally do not cancel in progress because a pre-job cancellation leaves no scanner log to review.' Observable impact: after merge, the workflow prose promises cancellation and event-class separation that do not exist, so a default-branch repository_dispatch can still overlap or preempt a required pull_request_target scan and queue pressure remains unhandled, contradicting the PR's own documentation-reconciliation intent. Trigger condition: any operator or agent reading strix.yml concurrency comments to schedule dispatches, or a future maintainer trusting the comment while editing concurrency.
- Root cause: Comment-only edit: the author described an intended concurrency redesign (event-class/repository/PR-number grouping with cancel-in-progress) but the corresponding concurrency: block change was not made or not included in this diff, leaving the prose describing nonexistent behavior.
- Fix: Either implement the described concurrency block in strix.yml (e.g., group: strix-${{ github.event_name }}-${{ github.repository }}-${{ github.event.pull_request.number || github.ref }} with cancel-in-progress: true, keeping repository_dispatch and pull_request_target in separate event classes) OR restore a comment that accurately describes the unchanged non-cancelling behavior; do not merge a workflow whose comment contradicts its own executable configuration.
- Regression test: python3 -m pytest tests/test_strix_workflow_dependency_hashes.py tests/test_strix_nvidia_nim_not_found_fallback.py -q, plus add a source-level contract assertion in the existing strix workflow-contract test that ties the concurrency group/cancel-in-progress keys to whatever the comment claims, so future comment/code drift fails CI.
Suggested diff
- # event-class/repository/PR-number scoped and cancels obsolete work within
- # that class. Separate event classes keep a default-branch dispatch from
- # cancelling the required pull_request_target context. For PRs the merge
+ # PR-number based for status grouping, but Strix runs intentionally do not
+ # cancel in progress because a pre-job cancellation leaves no scanner log to
+ # review. Queue pressure should be handled by stale-run cleanup. For PRs the
+ # merge scheduler manages, same-head1 participant
Outcome
The protected-main documentation baseline was not sufficient as a durable automation-control-plane source of truth: product requirements, technical interfaces, evidence authorities, logical data relationships, operations, security, standards, whole-conversation ownership, and autonomous continuation semantics were fragmented across workflow prose, rollout ledgers, PR bodies, incident notes, prompts, and planning material.
This PR establishes one authoritative indexed documentation graph, explicitly separates shipped/proposed/planned maturity, and turns remaining runtime/product drift into traceable implementation debt rather than hiding it behind document existence.
Canonical scope
implemented_on_protected_main,active_pr,accepted_architecture,planned,research_only,superseded,out_of_scope;Premature-stop incident reconciliation
Repeated user reports that safe work remained exposed a scheduler-control defect that the earlier documentation did not make falsifiable enough. The canonical graph now treats a user-reported early stop as
USER_REDIRECTION_INCIDENT:superseded; only genuine practical execution/tool-budget exhaustion or a second fresh all-lanes-nonactionable sweep permits termination.ADR-0007,
CONTINUATION_RUNBOOK.md,UML.md,DOCUMENTATION_AUDIT.md,TRACEABILITY.md, and permanent regression tests all carry the same contract.Whole-conversation documentation-fitness judgment
For the central automation/control-plane scope, every required family is now
ADEQUATEon thisactive_prbaseline: PRD, TRD/event contracts, Architecture, UML, conceptual ERD/Data Model, Security/Threat Model, Test Strategy, Operability/Runbooks, ADR set, Traceability, Documentation Audit, and standards/doctoring authority.ADEQUATEis deliberately narrower than “software complete.” It means the active documentation graph covers the accepted central contract coherently enough to review and machine-check. It does not promote active PRs, planned gaps, releases, or protected-main acceptance into shipped truth. Product-specific PRDs/data models remain in their owning repositories rather than being duplicated centrally.Exact current identity and verification
main;6eb06cdd08c79a06f7b390069d4ffa49e2eb7dba(historical provenance; merge decisions must resolve the live protected base independently);26c7a8c4a6a7f593e1cbbb88f66fb2a604f8309b;31354468286checked out26c7a8c4a6a7f593e1cbbb88f66fb2a604f8309band completed1004 passed, 16 subtests passedwith6978/6978statements and2790/2790branches at 100%, followed by successful test compilation.Earlier exact-head failures were real documentation-contract drift: Traceability had correctly moved
IG-008to active repair PR #899 while TRD and the machine contract still pointed to planned Issue #894. The current head reconciles all three to PR #899 /active_pr, and the complete exact-head suite is green.Remaining implementation/control-plane debt — not documentation-family omissions
IG-001throughIG-008remainactive_prorplanned; in particularIG-008is the active scheduler repair PR fix(scheduler): fail after summarized action errors #899, not the older planning issue;Merge authority and rollback
This PR changes documentation, documentation contracts, and stale explanatory comments; it does not intentionally grant reviewer/mutation authority or change product data. Current automated source review, zero valid unresolved findings, a qualifying independent non-author formal approval, live branch protection, and expected-head merge authority remain separate requirements. Predecessor-head comments or model evidence are historical only.
After protected merge, refetch the canonical index from protected
mainbefore changing any baseline maturity toimplemented_on_protected_main. Rollback is a normal protected revert; active/planned runtime work remains independently gated.