mirror of
https://github.com/QwenLM/qwen-code.git
synced 2026-08-31 10:16:57 +00:00
51888210aa
* feat(review): give every line of a large diff an accountable reviewer Review agents were handed the diff *command* and left to run it themselves. Shell tool output is capped at 30 000 characters and split head-1/5 / tail-4/5, so on a large changeset every agent received a few hundred lines off the top of the first file, the tail of the last file, and a truncation marker in place of everything between. Measured on a 211 000-character diff: 14.4% of the changeset, the same 14.4% for all ten agents. Nineteen of the twenty defects maintainers eventually confirmed on that PR lay in the hidden 85.6%. The ten-way dimension fan-out multiplied redundant reads of the visible sliver rather than adding coverage, and each review round sampled a different subset of the bugs depending on which files an agent happened to open on its own. The diff is now captured to a file and partitioned. `read_file` still caps a single read at ~25 000 characters, so writing the diff out is necessary but not sufficient — a whole-file read of that diff returns its first 611 lines. Chunks are therefore bounded by both a line budget (attention) and a character budget (what one un-truncated read returns), split on hunk boundaries, and never through the middle of a function. They tile the diff exactly, which is what makes the new coverage receipts checkable: past 500 diff lines each chunk gets one agent that owns it and must account for it, and a chunk with no receipt is re-reviewed before the run proceeds. "No blockers" can no longer be reported over code nobody read. Coverage alone did not close the gap. Chunk agents held every state-machine defect in that PR inside their assigned territory and reported none of them: the bugs were not inside any hunk but between new lines sitting two thousand lines apart, and what the agents lacked was not the lines but the question. A heavily rewritten file now also gets three whole-file agents that walk a fixed invariant checklist — mutable fields cleared on every exit path, timers cancelled on every close without discarding captured data, map inserts matched by deletes, retry counters incremented at every entry, status returns actually checked, error codes classified permanent versus transient, config honoured on every path, early returns that skip a required side effect. The checklist is split three ways deliberately: one agent asked to run all eight checks over a 2 400-line file runs one of them properly. Verification is sharded at eight findings per agent, because one verifier re-reading code for sixty findings degrades on the tail of its list. A verifier may now downgrade a Critical but never delete one — a rejected Critical is invisible to every later stage, a downgraded one still reaches a human. The reverse audit fans out per chunk instead of asking a single context-starved agent to re-read the whole diff, no longer skips verification, and stops after two consecutive dry rounds rather than one: on the PR that motivated this, the review reported "no blockers" twice and the next round surfaced five Criticals, three of them in code present since the first commit. * fix(review): keep small-diff reads inside the read_file cap Step 3A told every agent to read the whole diff in one call. `read_file` truncates a single call at ~25 000 characters, so a 500-line diff of long lines would come back short — the same blind spot the chunk plan removes, reintroduced at a smaller scale. Across the last 39 merged PRs that take the Step 3A path the largest diff is 23 570 characters, so this never fired in practice, but the margin is six percent. Step 3A now walks the chunk ranges, which are sized to fit one un-truncated read: one or two calls at this size. Derive a file's pre-change line count from the diff instead of measuring it with a second `git show` per file. `git show <base>:<newpath>` returns nothing for a renamed file, reporting zero pre-change lines and classifying a wholesale rewrite as light. The identity holds exactly for creations, deletions, renames and ordinary edits, and halves the process spawns. * fix(review): choose the topology from source lines, not diff lines Diff size is a bad proxy for review risk because test code dominates it. Across this repo's last 40 merged PRs the median diff is 41% test code and 14 of the 40 are more than half tests; PR #6457, which motivated the territory fan-out, is itself 58% tests. Gating on raw diff lines therefore carved small production changes into territories: a change of 173 source lines shipping 489 lines of new tests went to the chunked topology, where its production code ended up owned by a single agent, when the dimension fan-out would have read it through eight lenses. Territory fan-out is worth it when there is a lot of risky code to divide, not a lot of lines. The gate is now `srcDiffLines > 500`, with `diffLines > 2400` as a second clause — a delivery bound rather than a risk one, since past that point chunking uses fewer agents than the ten-lens topology anyway and reading a diff that large dilutes all ten. On the 40-PR sample six PRs move back to the dimension fan-out, for about 5% more agents in total across the sample. Paths are classified as source, test, or generated, and the per-kind line counts ship in the fetch report. Chunking is unchanged: the plan still tiles every line, tests and generated files included. What the gate decides is how many reviewers there are and what each is asked to do. Heaviness is likewise restricted to source files — the invariant checklist asks about fields, timers, collections, and error taxonomies, and a rewritten test file has none of those. * fix(review): decode C-quoted diff paths as bytes `git diff` C-quotes any path with a control character or a non-ASCII byte, so a file named `sub/中文文件.ts` arrives as `"b/sub/\344\270\255..."`. The chunk planner stripped the backslashes, turning it into `sub/344270255...ts` — a name that exists nowhere. Every downstream use of the path then failed silently: the line count came back zero, the file could never be classified as heavy, and the chunk agent was told it was reviewing a file that does not exist. Reuse core's `unquoteCStylePath`, which reassembles the octal escapes as UTF-8 bytes, rather than keeping a second, wrong decoder here. Coverage was never affected — line ranges stayed correct — but this repo has non-ASCII paths, so the mislabelling was reachable. Also correct two places that claimed hunks are never split. They are: a hunk larger than the chunk target is split at a top-level declaration, because a brand-new file arrives as one enormous hunk and treating it as atomic would hand a single agent a 50 000-character territory. * fix(review): make diff capture and header parsing robust to git config Four defects, all found in review of this branch. Diff capture obeyed whatever the user's git config said. With `color.diff=always` every `diff --git` line arrives wrapped in ANSI escapes, the parser recognises none of them, and the plan comes back with zero files and zero chunks — the coverage guarantee silently evaluates to nothing. `diff.mnemonicPrefix` renames the `a/`/`b/` prefixes to `i/`/`w/` and every path is then wrong; `diff.external` and textconv filters emit output that is not a unified diff at all. Capture now pins `--no-ext-diff --no-textconv --no-color --unified=3` and the two prefixes. The `diff --git` header was split with a greedy regex. Git separates the two paths with a space and does not quote a path merely for containing one, so `a/img with space.png b/img with space.png` split into `space.png`. Usually the `---`/`+++` headers disambiguate, but a binary or mode-only section has neither. For a non-rename both paths are the same string, so the split point is arithmetic; a rename states its new path outright in `rename to`. A chunk boundary could land on a `-` line. Those exist only on the old side, so the "starts at a top-level declaration" guarantee did not hold for the post-change file an invariant agent later reads. Split points are now restricted to lines present on the new side. An `oversized` chunk — one hunk with no safe interior boundary — can exceed what a single `read_file` returns. Chunks now carry their character count, and a chunk agent is told to page when a read reports truncation. A `Covered:` receipt for a range the agent only half read is worse than no receipt at all. * fix(review): split past a distant boundary, and stop probing GitHub for anchors Both defects surfaced running the new review against PR #6591. A 1431-line React component was emitted as a single 45 675-character chunk — nearly twice what one `read_file` returns — because the splitter looked for a safe boundary only inside the 400-line budget window, found none, and gave up on the entire remainder. Twenty-seven boundaries existed further along; the first sat 460 lines in. It now reaches past the window for the next one, so a single distant boundary can no longer collapse a whole file into one chunk. That PR goes from 15 chunks with one over the read cap to 18 with none. Step 7 validated comment anchors by trial. GitHub rejects an entire review with a 422 if any comment's line falls outside every hunk of its file, and the skill offered no cheap way to check, so a run against a real PR submitted five throwaway reviews carrying the bodies `Test`, `Test`, `t`, `t`, `t` to discover which anchors would stick. Those are permanent, public reviews on someone else's pull request. The fetch report now carries each file's hunks as new-side line ranges, which turns the check into a lookup, and the skill states plainly that a review is never submitted to test an anchor. * fix(review): stop reading hunk payload as metadata, and harden the plan Eleven defects from review of this branch. The worst two were silent. A unified diff emits a removed line whose content starts with `-- ` as `--- ...`, and an added line whose content starts with `++ ` as `+++ ...`. SQL, Lua and Haskell comments start with `-- `. The parser read those payload lines as file headers: the path was overwritten by the line's text, and the line vanished from the add/remove counts. A two-file diff — one SQL file losing a comment, one text file gaining a `++ ` line — came back with the second file named `plus line`. Metadata is now only recognised before a file's first hunk. The tiling invariant — every diff line belongs to exactly one chunk, which is what makes a missing coverage receipt mean something — was asserted only in tests. `buildDiffPlan` now checks it and refuses to return a plan with a hole. The rest: a split point could take a *deleted* blank line as evidence of the blank line before a declaration, though that blank exists only in the old file; whole-file invariant agents were pointed at `chunks[].files[]`, which merges hunks at lines 10 and 900 into one `10-902` span and would have had them report pre-existing defects as new; pure-deletion hunks were exported as the inclusive range `[N, N]`, so a right-side comment could be anchored where GitHub has no line and the 422 would sink the whole review; a deleted file could be marked heavy and send three agents to read a post-image that does not exist; a chunk holding a single line longer than one `read_file` can never be fully read by paging, and must now report itself uncoverable rather than receipt a lie; capture did not pin rename detection or `--no-relative`; `gitRaw` had no timeout, so a credential prompt on headless CI would hang forever; a failed base fetch was swallowed, leaving a stale merge-base and a structurally complete report describing the wrong diff; and local reviews still captured with a bare `git diff`, which `color.diff=always` alone renders unparseable. Adds an integration test that drives the real capture against a real repository under hostile git config, covering the paths synthetic fixtures cannot: renames and binaries and mode-only changes with spaces in their names, C-quoted non-ASCII names, and payload lines that impersonate headers. * fix(review): pin submodule output, and separate written lines from hunk spans Four defects from review of this branch. Diff capture left submodules to user config. `diff.ignoreSubmodules=all` hides a changed gitlink completely — a silent coverage hole in the file that is now the review's source of truth — and `diff.submodule=log` replaces the whole `diff --git` section with prose no parser can read. Both are pinned now, and the integration test asserts a bumped gitlink survives them. Whole-file invariant agents were handed `files[].hunks[]` as "the changed lines". A hunk spans the three context lines git prints either side of every change: on PR #6457's `QQChannel.ts` those spans cover 1 962 new-side lines of which only 1 403 were written. The agent would have reported defects in 559 lines that predate the PR. The report now also carries `addedRanges[]` — the exact lines the change wrote — and the skill gates invariant agents on those, keeping `hunks[]` for the one thing it is right for, GitHub anchor validation. `Uncoverable:` was introduced as a chunk agent's answer for a chunk holding a line longer than one read, but the receipt accounting still demanded a `Covered:` line from every chunk and relaunched any chunk lacking one — so an uncoverable chunk would have been retried forever. It is now a first-class terminal status: accepted by the accounting, carried into Step 6 under "Not reviewed", and it blocks an Approve verdict. Step 3A, which also walks the chunk plan, is covered by the same rule. The integration test built its fixture repository inside the developer's git environment, so a global `core.hooksPath` or `commit.gpgsign` ran during the test and `~/.gitconfig` decided what the "clean" baseline was. It now disables system and global config, hooks and signing, and sets the executable bit through the index rather than shelling out to `chmod`, which does nothing on Windows. * feat(review): plan any captured diff, and stop the report outgrowing one read Seven items from review of this branch. None blocking; two of them were the skill promising a topology it could not deliver. Step 3B's chunk agents are "one per entry in `chunks[]`", and only `fetch-pr` produced a chunk plan. A local-diff review, and a cross-repo review in lightweight mode, therefore routed into the territory fan-out with no chunk list, no receipts and no tiling guarantee. `qwen review plan-diff <diff-file>` now emits the same plan from any captured diff; redirecting `git diff` or `gh pr diff` to a file already sidesteps the shell's character cap, so all four review paths share one mechanism. A bare diff has no tree to read a post-image from, so it gets chunk agents but no invariant agents, and says so by omission. The fetch report is read with the same `read_file` that truncates at 25 000 characters — and for a seven-file PR it was already 28 056. The tail of `chunks[]` was being silently lost: the coverage hole this design closes, reappearing one level up. `addedRanges[]` now ships only on `heavy` files, its only consumer, which brings that report to 24 992; the skill says to page the read; and the command prints a note when the report exceeds one read. It stays pretty-printed on purpose — a compact one-line JSON cannot be paged by line. The tiling assertion threw inside `fetch-pr` after the worktree existed and before any report was written, so an unforeseen diff shape killed the review outright. It now degrades to the documented diff-less report with a loud warning, keeping both the loudness and the review. `gitOpt` and `git` had no timeout, and `resolveMergeBase` uses `gitOpt` for a network fetch — the exact path whose credential prompt the `gitRaw` timeout was added to survive. All three wrappers now share a deadline and `GIT_TERMINAL_PROMPT=0`. Markdown under `docs/` or at the repository root classifies as `docs` and stays out of `srcDiffLines`, so a translation PR does not trip the territory gate. Markdown inside a source tree stays `source` — the bundled skill prompts are behaviour, not prose. Also: the user docs stated the gate without its `diffLines > 2400` clause, and `READ_FILE_CHAR_CAP` was exported but never used. It now backs the report-size warning. * test(review): unit-test the merge-base and plan-report seams The last open review thread asked for `resolveMergeBase`, `fileMetrics` and `gitRaw` to be testable with git mocked out. Three of the four functions it named have since moved: `classifyHeavy` is a pure function with unit tests, `fileMetrics` became `buildPlanReport`, which already takes an injected post-image resolver, and `gitRaw`'s output path is exercised by the real-git integration test. `resolveMergeBase` was still private and untested. It now lives behind a three-method `GitProbe` — fetch, refExists, mergeBase — that `fetch-pr` fills from the real wrappers. Seven tests cover the branches that matter and that no end-to-end run reaches: the tracking ref preferred over the local branch, the fall-through when the tracking ref shares no history, and above all the dangerous one — a failed fetch that still resolves a merge-base from a stale local ref, which produces a structurally complete report describing a diff nobody wrote. `buildPlanReport` gains seven of its own: the injected resolver is asked once per file and never for a binary, a null resolver means "no tree, decide nothing" rather than a guess, `addedRanges` ship only where an invariant agent will read them, and a pure-deletion hunk never reaches the anchorable ranges. * fix(review): see deletions, survive suppressBlankEmpty, and stop approving unread code Seven findings from review of the merged head. Three of them were the design contradicting itself. `diff.suppressBlankEmpty` prints a blank context line as a physically empty record rather than a lone space, and there is no command-line flag to override it — only `-c`. The parser advanced its new-side cursor for space-prefixed context alone, so every `addedRanges` entry after the first blank line shifted up by one, and the split-point heuristic stopped recognising blank lines. The capture now pins the config, and the parser treats an empty hunk-body record as context regardless, because a diff from `gh pr diff` or a hand-captured file never passes through that pin. A whole-file invariant agent was given the post-change file and the ranges the PR wrote. A deletion appears in neither. Removing a `clearTimeout()`, a `Map.delete()`, or a retry-counter increment is exactly what the checklist hunts, and the text it was handed cannot show a line that is no longer there — telling it to "cite the surrounding hunk" pointed at data it never received. Heavy files now carry a `diffRange` into the report, and the agent reads its own slice of the diff, where the `-` lines are. The receipt accounting demanded exactly one per chunk and said it applied to Step 3A, where nine dimension agents each walk every chunk: literal execution yields nine receipts or none. Territory ownership is a Step 3B idea. What both paths share is the uncoverable rule, and that needs no agent — a chunk is uncoverable iff its `maxLineChars` exceeds the read cap, which the orchestrator reads out of the plan before launching anything. That rule was also never threaded into Step 7, so a green PR with an unread chunk could receive a public LGTM. Any uncoverable chunk now downgrades APPROVE to COMMENT and must be named in the body. Also: the capture recipes redirected into `.qwen/tmp` before anything created it; a file-path review of an unchanged file produced an empty plan that no agent could read, and the skill now branches to a full-file read instead; and the docs classifier called `website/src/App.tsx` prose while calling `packages/cua-driver/docs/*.md` source — it now matches prose extensions under a documentation directory at any depth. * fix(review): tell agents what a severity means before asking for one The severity definitions lived once, in Step 6 — after every severity had already been assigned. Step 3's finding format asked each agent for `Severity: Critical | Suggestion | Nice to have` and never said what the words meant. The agents that fill that field are separate subagents with separate priors and no shared definition between them, so each fell back on its own, and the priors disagree. Observed on a live review of PR #6635 — a run of the skill as it stands on main, whose Step 3 and Step 6 text this branch inherits unchanged. One review, CHANGES_REQUESTED, ten inline comments. Six were Critical, and four of those six were coverage gaps: "zero test coverage", "no references to `workers`", "no test exercises this". Two Suggestions in the same review were the identical class. The verdict is computed from Criticals alone, so that PR was blocked partly on the strength of findings its own reviewer had, elsewhere, called suggestions. The two genuine Criticals — a fail-fast that no longer fires before the daemon reports healthy, and a startup failure path that never closes the HTTP server — would have blocked it on their own. The definitions now sit in the finding format that every agent is handed, they are listed among the things every agent prompt must carry, and Step 6 points back at them rather than restating them. A missing test is a Suggestion: "this file has zero references to X" is a coverage statistic, not a defect. Two shapes stay Critical because something is genuinely wrong — a test asserting the opposite of the intended behaviour, and a test weakened or deleted in the diff so new behaviour passes. If a missing test would let a specific incorrect behaviour ship, report that behaviour and cite the gap as evidence. * fix(review): walk cross-file edges in both directions Cross-file impact analysis only ever asked "will the existing callers break?" Every bullet was about signature compatibility, and the budget rule told agents in so many words to "skip unchanged-signature modifications". A field added to an interface changes no signature and breaks no caller, so the analysis was blind to it by construction. The failure that exposed this, on PR #6621: the diff added `deviceFlowRegistry?` to WorkspaceRuntime and passed it into the dispatcher for every secondary ACP mount, and nothing anywhere assigned it. The reviewing agent saw the declaration, found no writer, wrote "intentionally deferred to a later milestone", and filed a Suggestion to fix the JSDoc. The reader was AcpDispatcher — a file the diff never touched — where `if (!this.deviceFlowRegistry)` turned `auth/device_flow/start` into an INTERNAL_ERROR and `auth/status` into an empty list on every non-primary workspace. Workspace-qualified ACP shipped its authentication dead, and the review called it a documentation nit. A second reviewer filed the same observation as Critical; the author fixed it with code and dropped the field. Reading cannot find this. The declaration, the pass-through, and the read sit in three different places, and the read is outside the diff, so no agent reaches it by paging through hunks. Only a grep for the read sites does. So: for every field, option, or optional parameter the diff adds, grep its read sites, including outside the diff, and ask what happens when it arrives undefined. Severity is decided at the read site, not the declaration. And an agent must not explain an unpopulated field with author intent it cannot observe — "reserved for future use" is a claim about a person, not about code, and reaching for one means filling a hole in your own field of view. * fix(review): pin the diff base, and make the review body checkable Three defects, all found by reading what live reviews actually posted. The diff base. Agents were handed a diff command and left to choose a base. `main..HEAD` and `main...HEAD` differ by one character and by the entire meaning of the review: a two-dot diff against a main that has moved shows main's later commits reversed, so main's fixes read as the branch's regressions. A review of PR #6626 approved the four files the PR actually changed, then warned the author publicly that their branch carried "typo regressions" in a file the PR never touched and should be rebased. main had corrected `compatability` to `compatibility` after the fork point. The branch had done nothing. Capture now resolves the base once and hands agents a file; they never see a ref name, and a finding in a file outside the report's `files[]` is not a finding about this PR. The review body. "A Suggestion never goes in body" is stated twice and was violated anyway, because a model holding a finding it cannot anchor would rather say it somewhere than drop it. On PR #6631 an unanchorable Suggestion about `session.ts:2048` — a line in no hunk — became a second paragraph of the public review body. So the rule stops being prose: for COMMENT the body is exactly one of three sentences plus the footer and nothing else, and you read what you are about to send and confirm it. A Suggestion that will not anchor is deleted; it is already in the terminal output and the Step 8 report. The downgrade sentence. On PR #6489 a review with three Suggestions and no Critical announced it had been "downgraded from Approve" — telling the author the PR would otherwise have been approved, which was false: a Suggestion-only review is COMMENT on its own. Decide the event from the findings first, apply the downgrade flag second, and write the sentence only if it changed the answer. * fix(review): decide the event by counting, not by weighing A review of PR #6584 filed three inline Suggestions and submitted APPROVE with an empty body. GitHub recorded it as an approval. The rule it broke has been in Step 7 all along --- APPROVE means no Critical *and* no Suggestion --- and so has the one about the body, which is empty only for REQUEST_CHANGES. Both were stated twice. Both were ignored. They are ignored because at submit time the model is reasoning about what it wants to say, and "these are only suggestions, the PR is fine" is a sentence it can talk itself into. Nothing in that sentence is a count. So the event and the body become arithmetic. Count the Criticals, count the Suggestions, read the row off a three-row table, and only then apply the downgrade flags --- which can turn APPROVE or REQUEST_CHANGES into COMMENT and nothing else. Then read back what you are about to send and confirm it matches the row. A body holding text the table does not authorise is a finding that failed to anchor; if it is a Suggestion, it gets deleted, not relocated into public prose that no line of code answers to. This subsumes the body-only invariant added in the previous commit, which the same submit-time reasoning had already defeated once, on PR #6631. * fix(review): stop the plan report outgrowing the read it must fit in The report tells an agent how to page everything else, so it has to be readable in one `read_file` — about 25 000 characters. Running the real `fetch-pr` against PR #6457 produced 25 070. Two constraints pull against each other. Compact JSON is a single enormous line, and `read_file` pages at line boundaries, so a report too big for one call could never be read at all. Indented JSON pages fine but spends four lines on `{ "start": 812, "end": 815 }`, and a heavily rewritten file contributes hundreds of them: `QQChannel.ts` alone carries 140 added ranges and 49 hunks. So indent the structure and inline the leaves. Same JSON, same keys, one range per line, still pageable — and 28% smaller. The #6457 report goes from 25 070 bytes to 18 042, and the "page it" warning that used to fire on a seven-file PR now stays quiet. The earlier attempt at this trimmed `addedRanges` to heavy files only and landed at 24 992 bytes on the same PR. Eight bytes of headroom was not a fix. Tests pin the three properties that matter: the collapsed text parses back to an identical object, no range spans two lines, and a path that literally spells a range is not mistaken for one — JSON escapes the quotes inside a string value, and the collapse patterns require unescaped ones. * fix(review): prune the worktree registration a deleted directory leaves behind `cleanStale` and `cleanup` both guarded `git worktree remove` behind `existsSync(path)`, and neither ever pruned. Delete the directory by hand — which is exactly what reclaiming disk with `rm -rf .qwen/tmp` does — and git keeps the worktree registered but missing. From then on `/review` on that PR cannot run: $ git worktree add .qwen/tmp/review-pr-6457 qwen-review/pr-6457 fatal: '...' is a missing but already registered worktree; use 'add -f' to override, or 'prune' or 'remove' to clear and the branch delete that `cleanStale` does next fails too, because the phantom worktree still has that branch checked out. Nothing in the review command surface ran `git worktree prune`, so nothing ever cleared it. This surfaced running the real skill: the orchestrator's first `fetch-pr` failed, it fell back to `qwen review cleanup`, and retried. The leak is not rare — three abandoned worktrees from May and June were still registered in this checkout, one per review that died before Step 9. `releaseWorktree` now does both halves in the order they depend on: remove the directory if it is there, prune the registration unconditionally (a no-op when nothing is stale), and only then let the caller delete the branch. Both callers share it. The tests drive real git. Deleting a worktree directory by hand and re-adding it throws "missing but already registered" without the prune, and `branch -D` throws "used by worktree" — both assertions fail if the prune is removed, which is the point of writing them. * fix(review): put the open comments where a truncated read will find them `read_file` returns the first `truncateToolOutputThreshold` characters — 25 000 by default — sets `isTruncated`, and pages by line. `pr-context` wrote "## Open inline comments (no replies yet — may still need attention)" last, so on a PR with a long history it was the first thing lost, and nothing read the flag that said so. On PR #5738 that section began at character 27 125 of a 31 220-character file. The review submitted "Reviewed — no blockers." Five Critical threads were unresolved; four had in fact been addressed, but the fifth — `clearCiEnv()` clearing only `CI*` while `writeTerminalTitle` branches on `TMUX`/`STY`/ `ZELLIJ`/`DVTM` — was live, in the diff, and never seen. Regenerating the context for ten PRs: four lost part or all of the section, and all four were the PRs with the most review rounds. Small PRs never trip it. - Emit the open threads before the already-discussed ones. The findings a round must answer outrank the ones already settled. - `pr-context` warns when the file exceeds the threshold, naming any headings past the cut, and says so plainly when the loss is inside the last section's body instead. - Step 2 of SKILL.md now tells the agent to read `isTruncated` and page the remainder before Step 3. Reordering buys headroom; it does not create it. A 40 000-character context still loses its tail, which is what the warning is for. * fix(review): load this repo's review rules, and re-check open Criticals before approving Two gaps the dogfood on live PRs surfaced, both invisible from reading the skill. `load-rules` looks for a `## Code Review` heading in AGENTS.md and QWEN.md. Neither had one, so it wrote an empty file on every run: every `/review` in this repo reviewed with zero project rules. Add the section, distilled from the conventions already scattered through AGENTS.md (ESM, no cross-package relative imports, kebab-case/PascalCase naming, collocated tests, comments-only-when-why), plus the two hard lessons below. The section loads from the base branch by design — a PR cannot inject its own review rules — so it takes effect once merged. The skill treated a zero-Critical outcome as a fallback rather than a claim. On one PR it published two Criticals citing code not present at the reviewed commit (a fabricated blocker on an already-approved PR); on another it submitted C=0 while a live, twice-filed Critical still stood (a dropped blocker). Add a step before the verdict: for each unresolved Critical on the PR, read the code at the reviewed commit and record still-stands / fixed-by-this-diff / cannot-tell. The event follows from the code, not from the finding count or the thread flags — `isResolved`/`isOutdated` track the anchored line, not whether the bug was fixed. - AGENTS.md: new `## Code Review` section. - load-rules.ts: export `extractCodeReviewSection`; load-rules.test.ts covers the boundary scan and asserts AGENTS.md's own section extracts non-empty, so deleting the heading fails the build. - SKILL.md: re-verification step ahead of the Verdict. |
||
|---|---|---|
| .. | ||
| design | ||
| developers | ||
| e2e-tests | ||
| plans | ||
| users | ||
| verification/abort-controller-refactor | ||
| _meta.ts | ||
| index.md | ||