Skip to content

docs(rag): document the eval-canary pair protocol's dispatch-only trigger and two canary-reading lessons - #2128

Merged
BigSimmo merged 6 commits into
mainfrom
claude/eval-canary-protocol-docs-01bb49
Aug 18, 2026
Merged

docs(rag): document the eval-canary pair protocol's dispatch-only trigger and two canary-reading lessons#2128
BigSimmo merged 6 commits into
mainfrom
claude/eval-canary-protocol-docs-01bb49

Conversation

@BigSimmo

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

Summary

  • Records the exact eval-canary.yml trigger mechanics in docs/rag-behaviour/safeguards.md: it fires only on the eval-canary repository dispatch and the Sunday 18:00 UTC cron, always loads the default branch, and has no workflow_dispatch/ref input — so a "canary pair" means the latest green run on main before a merge compared against a post-merge dispatch (gh api repos/BigSimmo/Database/dispatches -f event_type=eval-canary), diffed with npm run eval:retrieval:compare -- <baseline.json> <post.json> --fail-on-regression on the two eval-canary-output artifacts.
  • Adds two short "reading a canary result" lessons to the same section: a red first post-run can be an unrelated non-golden case (S1b/S1d precedent, runs 32038751592 -> 32039841070, root-caused by a live re-run/probe), versus a deterministic extractive-path flip being a real regression that needs bisection and a single-commit revert (#2065 -> #2088 precedent, interim red run 32097916649).
  • Cross-checked docs/rag-behaviour/README.md against the updated protocol text for contradictions — found none; left unchanged.
  • Adds one line each to docs/rag-improvement/README.md §5 (Sequencing summary) and §6 (Verification commands): §5 notes #231/#316's already-satisfied cross-links (Phase 5.2 satisfied by S1's healthy-latency probes 2026-08-17; Phase 1.2 found the RPC divergence attribute-only), §6 points at the safeguards.md protocol for trigger mechanics and the comparison command.
  • Closes ledger row #TYJ0XP; records the review and queues the closure request (npm run issues:reconcile applies it after merge).

Verification

  • npm run verify:pr-local — docs-only scope selected format:changed, sitemap:check, docs:check-index, docs:check-inventory, docs:check-scripts, docs:check-links, check:branch-review-ledger, check:outstanding-issues, check:ledger-write-discipline; all passed. Decisive lines: docs link check passed: 1903 repo path references resolve. and summary failed: (none).
  • npm run verify:ui — not run: no UI, routing, styling, or browser behavior changed.
  • npm run verify:release — not run: not a release/handoff confidence claim.
  • npm run eval:retrieval:quality — not run: no retrieval, ranking, selection, chunking, or scoring code changed; this PR only documents the existing protocol.
  • npm run eval:rag -- --limit 15 / npm run eval:quality -- --rag-only — not run: no answer generation, synthesis prompt, or answer post-processing changed.
  • npm run check:production-readiness — not run: no clinical workflow, privacy, environment, Supabase, source governance, or deployment behavior changed.
  • npm run check:deployment-readiness — not run: no deployment startup, hosting, or rollout behavior changed.

RAG impact

RAG impact: no retrieval behaviour change — documentation only. This PR edits docs/rag-behaviour/safeguards.md and docs/rag-improvement/README.md to record how the existing, unmodified eval-canary.yml workflow already triggers and how two already-landed canary results were correctly interpreted; no code under src/lib/rag/**, the eval harness, the golden fixture, or the workflow file itself changed.

Risk and rollout

  • Risk: none — documentation-only change to three files, no source, script, test, workflow, or migration touched.
  • Rollback: revert the commit(s); no state or cache to unwind.
  • Provider or production effects: None.

Clinical Governance Preflight

Not applicable — this diff does not touch ingestion, answer generation, search/ranking, source rendering, document access, privacy, production env, or clinical output; it documents the existing eval-canary protocol and cross-links two already-resolved issue rows.

Notes

  • Ledger row #TYJ0XP closure is queued via npm run issues:done (request file committed on this branch); npm run issues:reconcile from a dedicated ledger branch applies it to the canonical ledger after this PR lands.
  • Review recorded via npm run ledger:append at commit 3e9905d0ac9d88f22dc88d41639399ae69237cf0 (record docs/branch-review-records/65462d1d993e393eb03e0fc2cefc1b6b50174027a14f1831edb0d266829567aa.record.md).

BigSimmoand others added 2 commits August 18, 2026 22:29
…trigger and two bisection lessons
eval-canary.yml fires only on the eval-canary repository dispatch and the Sunday
18:00 UTC cron, always loads the default branch, and has no workflow_dispatch or
ref input — so a canary pair means the latest green run on main before a merge
compared against a post-merge dispatch. Document the exact dispatch command,
comparison gates, and two precedents for reading a canary result: a red first
post-run can be an unrelated non-golden case (S1b/S1d, runs 32038751592 ->
32039841070), while a deterministic extractive-path flip is a real regression
requiring bisection and single-commit revert (#2065 -> #2088, run 32097916649).
Cross-link the RAG improvement programme's sequencing summary and verification
commands sections to this protocol and to two already-satisfied prerequisites
(#231 Phase 5.2, #316 Phase 1.2).
Closes ledger row #TYJ0XP.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
@chatgpt-codex-connector

Copy link
Copy Markdown

You have reached your Codex usage limits for code reviews. You can see your limits in the Codex usage dashboard.
To continue using code reviews, add credits to your account and enable them for code reviews in your settings.

@supabase

supabaseBot commented Aug 18, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

This pull request has been ignored for the connected project sjrfecxgysukkwxsowpy because there are no changes detected in supabase directory. You can change this behaviour in Project Integrations Settings ↗︎.


Preview Branches by Supabase.
Learn more about Supabase Branching ↗︎.

@coderabbitai

coderabbitaiBot commented Aug 18, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Warning

Review limit reached

You’ve reached a temporary PR review limit under our Fair Usage Limits Policy.

Your recent review volume is higher than typical usage, so adaptive limits are currently applied.

Next review available in:12 minutes

Limit details: You’ve used all 1 included review currently available under your plan. You completed 101 included PR reviews in the past 7 days; at that activity level, included reviews refill at 1 review per hour.

Your organization has reached its usage spending cap. Adjust your spending cap in the billing tab.

How can I continue?

After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the @coderabbitai review command as a PR comment. Alternatively, push new commits to this PR.

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 configuration

Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 81d9dc52-b42e-4d7c-965c-bd71142f0091

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 3bb34a5 and d871856.

📒 Files selected for processing (4)
  • docs/branch-review-records/65462d1d993e393eb03e0fc2cefc1b6b50174027a14f1831edb0d266829567aa.record.md
  • docs/outstanding-issues-inbox/5899581b-dc23-486d-a6da-e456c5c5f3bc.json
  • docs/rag-behaviour/safeguards.md
  • docs/rag-improvement/README.md

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

@BigSimmo
BigSimmo enabled auto-merge (squash) August 18, 2026 16:08
@BigSimmo
BigSimmo merged commit 3ec05bf into mainAug 18, 2026
23 checks passed
@BigSimmo
BigSimmo deleted the claude/eval-canary-protocol-docs-01bb49 branch August 18, 2026 16:10
Sign up for freeto 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

@BigSimmo