docs(review): record the actual cause — the Greptile trial ran out (GTM-45)

[qmarcelle]

Follow-up to #17, correcting a root cause I recorded wrong in that PR.

#17 stated "emission on this repository is not dependable." That was accurate about the symptom and wrong about the cause, and the difference decides what anyone does next: a flaky app is waited out, an exhausted trial is topped up.

What is actually happening

Greptile posts this in place of a review, and emits no check run:

qmarcelle has reached the 50-credit limit for trial accounts. To continue receiving code reviews, upgrade your plan.

That explains the timeline exactly: the check fired on integrations #10 and #13 and stopped at #14 because the credits ran out in between — not because emission became unreliable on this repository.

The prediction it implies was confirmed the same day

If the cause is account-wide, workspacejson/standard was not working — it simply had not opened a pull request since the credits ran out. It has now:

PR #34 head 1692e7b4 : Greptile Review check runs = 1
PR #35 head 207e2c8e : Greptile Review check runs = 1
PR #36 head b8289a07 : Greptile Review check runs = 1
PR #37 head 4f9e8f6f : Greptile Review check runs = 0   <- reviewed, zero checks

standard hit the identical deadlock and its requirement was withdrawn the same way, recorded in that repository's docs/repository-settings.md.

Why this correction is worth a PR

The original evidence leaned on "it still works next door" as proof the fault was local to integrations. That observation was true and temporary, and acting on it would have sent the investigation looking for a repository-specific defect that does not exist.

Restoring the signal is a billing action, not a debugging one. The re-admission rule is unchanged and still requires both a substantive review on the current head and a mechanically enforceable current-head signal — Greptile satisfied the second only while its trial lasted.

Summary by Sourcery

Clarify Greptile review behavior by correcting the documented root cause from a repository-specific emission issue to an exhausted trial credit limit and its implications for merge policy.

Documentation:

• Update calibration documentation to record the Greptile trial credit limit as the confirmed cause of missing check runs and to reference corroborating behavior in a sibling repository.
• Revise merge policy docs to explain that restoring Greptile review signals is a billing action driven by trial credits rather than debugging a repository-specific configuration problem.

[Copilot]

Copilot was unable to review this pull request because the user who requested the review has reached their quota limit.

[sourcery-ai]

Reviewer's Guide

This PR updates the review documentation to correct the recorded root cause of missing Greptile check runs from a supposed repository-specific emission issue to the actual Greptile trial credit limit exhaustion, and aligns merge policy text with the corrected diagnosis and implications for remediation.

Flow diagram for Greptile review behavior at trial credit limit

flowchart TD
    A[GitHub PR opened] --> B[Greptile trial credits exhausted?]
    B -->|no| C[Greptile posts review]
    C --> D[Greptile emits check run]
    D --> E[Status check requirement can remain]
    B -->|yes| F[Greptile posts credit limit notice]
    F --> G[Greptile emits no check run]
    G --> H[Status check requirement must be withdrawn]

Loading

File-Level Changes

Change	Details	Files
Correct the documented root cause of missing Greptile check runs to trial credit exhaustion and document the cross-repository confirmation and operational implications.	Replace prior text that attributed missing Greptile checks to unreliable emission on the repository with an explicit explanation that the Greptile trial account hit its 50-credit limit. Add the exact Greptile credit-limit message to the calibration doc to show what appears in place of a review and clarify that no check run is emitted in this state. Describe the cross-repository behavior on workspacejson/standard PRs #34–#37 to demonstrate the account-wide nature of the failure and mirror the identical deadlock and requirement withdrawal. Clarify that remediation is a billing/top-up action rather than debugging, emphasizing the distinction between a flaky app and an exhausted trial.	docs/review/calibration-2026-08.md
Align merge-policy documentation with the corrected, account-wide root cause and link to the calibration document for details.	Remove language that claims the mechanism’s emission on the repository is not dependable and instead state that the Greptile trial credit limit is the cause. Explain that after the 50-credit limit is reached Greptile posts a notice instead of a review and emits no check run, affecting multiple repositories. Reference specific PR behavior on workspacejson/standard (#34–#37) as evidence and note that its requirement was withdrawn similarly. Add a cross-link to calibration-2026-08.md for full context on the diagnosis and behavior.	docs/review/merge-policy.md

---

Tips and commands

Interacting with Sourcery

• Trigger a new review: Comment @sourcery-ai review on the pull request.
• Continue discussions: Reply directly to Sourcery's review comments.
• Generate a GitHub issue from a review comment: Ask Sourcery to create an
  issue from a review comment by replying to it. You can also reply to a
  review comment with @sourcery-ai issue to create an issue from it.
• Generate a pull request title: Write @sourcery-ai anywhere in the pull
  request title to generate a title at any time. You can also comment
  @sourcery-ai title on the pull request to (re-)generate the title at any time.
• Generate a pull request summary: Write @sourcery-ai summary anywhere in
  the pull request body to generate a PR summary at any time exactly where you
  want it. You can also comment @sourcery-ai summary on the pull request to
  (re-)generate the summary at any time.
• Generate reviewer's guide: Comment @sourcery-ai guide on the pull
  request to (re-)generate the reviewer's guide at any time.
• Resolve all Sourcery comments: Comment @sourcery-ai resolve on the
  pull request to resolve all Sourcery comments. Useful if you've already
  addressed all the comments and don't want to see them anymore.
• Dismiss all Sourcery reviews: Comment @sourcery-ai dismiss on the pull
  request to dismiss all existing Sourcery reviews. Especially useful if you
  want to start fresh with a new review - don't forget to comment
  @sourcery-ai review to trigger a new review!

Customizing Your Experience

Access your dashboard to:

• Enable or disable review features such as the Sourcery-generated pull request
  summary, the reviewer's guide, and others.
• Change the review language.
• Add, remove or edit custom review instructions.
• Adjust other review settings.

Getting Help

• Contact our support team for questions or feedback.
• Visit our documentation for detailed guides and information.
• Keep in touch with the Sourcery team by following us on X/Twitter, LinkedIn or GitHub.

[greptile-apps]

qmarcelle has reached the 50-credit limit for trial accounts. To continue receiving code reviews, upgrade your plan.

[sonarqubecloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
0.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud

[sourcery-ai]

Hey - I've left some high level feedback:

• The explanation of the Greptile credit-limit behavior is now duplicated across calibration-2026-08.md and merge-policy.md; consider tightening the narrative in one place and linking to it from the other to keep future updates simpler.
• In both files you describe timelines and PR numbers in prose; consider adding a short, structured summary (e.g., a small table or bullet list of PR → behavior) to make the causal chain easier to scan when debugging similar issues later.

Prompt for AI Agents

Please address the comments from this code review:

## Overall Comments
- The explanation of the Greptile credit-limit behavior is now duplicated across `calibration-2026-08.md` and `merge-policy.md`; consider tightening the narrative in one place and linking to it from the other to keep future updates simpler.
- In both files you describe timelines and PR numbers in prose; consider adding a short, structured summary (e.g., a small table or bullet list of PR → behavior) to make the causal chain easier to scan when debugging similar issues later.

---

Sourcery is free for open source - if you like our reviews please consider sharing them ✨

• X
• Mastodon
• LinkedIn
• Facebook

_{Help me be more useful! Please click 👍 or 👎 on each comment and I'll use the feedback to improve your reviews.}