Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Guard OpenCode approval with commit check-runs - #271
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull request overview
This PR strengthens the OpenCode approval gate by augmenting PR statusCheckRollup evidence with a fallback query to the head commit’s check-runs API, ensuring approval fails closed (or waits) when current-head peer checks are still pending even if the PR rollup is lagging.
Changes:
- Add
collect_current_head_commit_check_runs()to queryrepos/:owner/:repo/commits/:sha/check-runsand surface failed/pending check-runs. - Merge commit check-run evidence with existing PR rollup and Strix workflow-run evidence before deciding whether to approve.
- Extend the Strix quick-gate contract test to assert the new fallback behavior is wired in.
Reviewed changes
Copilot reviewed 2 out of 2 changed files in this pull request and generated 1 comment.
| File | Description |
|---|---|
| scripts/ci/test_strix_quick_gate.sh | Adds contract assertions requiring the workflow to collect current-head commit check-runs evidence. |
| .github/workflows/opencode-review.yml | Implements commit check-runs collection and merges it into failed/pending peer-check gating evidence. |
💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
OpenCode Review Overview
Pull request overviewOpenCode reviewed the current-head bounded evidence and found no blocking issues. FindingsNo blocking findings. SummaryApproval sufficiency: bounded evidence supplied affirmative approval evidence for changed files, coverage/docstring posture, risk surfaces, and current-head verification; approval is not based merely on the absence of known blockers.
Changed-File Evidence Mapflowchart LR
PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
Evidence --> S1["Workflow: opencode-review.yml"]
S1 --> I1["GitHub Actions review job"]
I1 --> R1["Review risk: Workflow: opencode-review.yml"]
R1 --> V1["actionlint plus required checks"]
Evidence --> S2["CI script: test_strix_quick_gate.sh"]
S2 --> I2["review and security gate shell path"]
I2 --> R2["Review risk: CI script: test_strix_quick_gate.sh"]
R2 --> V2["bash -n plus Strix self-test"]
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull request overview
OpenCode reviewed the current-head bounded evidence and found no blocking issues.
Findings
No blocking findings.
Summary
Approval sufficiency: bounded evidence supplied affirmative approval evidence for changed files, coverage/docstring posture, risk surfaces, and current-head verification; approval is not based merely on the absence of known blockers.
Verification posture: CodeGraph evidence was initialized and bounded current-head evidence reviewed for changed-file evidence including .github/workflows/opencode-review.yml, scripts/ci/test_strix_quick_gate.sh.
Linter/static: workflow/static review evidence is bounded by the current-head GitHub Checks gate and changed-file evidence.
TDD/regression: coverage execution evidence and focused changed hunks were reviewed from bounded-review-evidence.md.
Coverage: coverage execution evidence reports test coverage as not applicable because no supported changed source files or package manifests were found.
Docstring coverage: coverage execution evidence reports docstring coverage as not applicable because no supported changed source files or package manifests were found.
DAG: CodeGraph/source-backed behavior map connects .github/workflows/opencode-review.yml to the affected review, runtime, or workflow path and required checks.
PoC/execution: coverage-evidence job executed on the current head and reported PASS.
DDD/domain: workflow and repository-governance invariants were reviewed against changed files in bounded evidence.
CDD/context: CodeGraph evidence, changed-file history, and focused hunks were reviewed from bounded-review-evidence.md.
Similar issues: changed-file history evidence was reviewed for comparable local precedents.
Claim/concept check: bounded evidence, repository source, current-head workflow evidence, and, where numeric, scientific, statistical, or literature-backed claims are affected, original-paper/formula evidence and parameter-recovery expectations were used for claims.
Standards search: standards and external-source checks are delegated to configured OpenCode web_search/Context7/DeepWiki sources when applicable; no evidence-backed standards blocker is present in bounded evidence.
Compatibility/convention: changed workflow/script conventions, object naming, and reserved-word safety for schema/API/config/code surfaces were checked in bounded evidence.
Breaking-change/backcompat: deployment evidence and changed-file history were checked for backward-compatibility risk.
Performance: changed surfaces were checked for performance risk in bounded evidence.
Developer experience: changed automation, review, test, setup, and maintenance surfaces were checked for helpful or obstructive DX impact in bounded evidence.
User experience: connected user, operator, API, CLI, documentation, review-comment, status-check, rendering, and workflow-reader behavior was checked for contradictions against code, docs, and tests in bounded evidence.
Visual/DOM: Playwright visual, DOM locator, ARIA snapshot, console, and responsive evidence were checked when a web UI surface was present; for non-web surfaces, API/CLI/log/docs/workflow interaction evidence was reviewed instead.
Accessibility/i18n: accessibility, localization, and human-readable text surfaces were checked where UI, CLI, API message, docs, logs, or review text changed.
Supply-chain/license: dependency, package, model, container, and external-tool changes were checked in bounded evidence.
Packaging: package, build, test, lint, and security contracts were checked in bounded evidence.
Security/privacy: workflow-token, review-gate, and repository-automation security/privacy boundaries were checked in bounded evidence.
- Result: APPROVE
- Reason: Workflow improvements with test coverage
- Head SHA:
fe2437feca8d7516fdaee2a666616aa7bc9b5e77 - Workflow run: 28499078689
- Workflow attempt: 1
Changed-File Evidence Map
flowchart LR
PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
Evidence --> S1["Workflow: opencode-review.yml"]
S1 --> I1["GitHub Actions review job"]
I1 --> R1["Review risk: Workflow: opencode-review.yml"]
R1 --> V1["actionlint plus required checks"]
Evidence --> S2["CI script: test_strix_quick_gate.sh"]
S2 --> I2["review and security gate shell path"]
I2 --> R2["Review risk: CI script: test_strix_quick_gate.sh"]
R2 --> V2["bash -n plus Strix self-test"]
Tried to create or update workflow without `workflows` permission
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Summary
Why
OpenCode produced an APPROVE overview for ContextualWisdomLab/scopeweave#204 while
strixwas still visible as in_progress on the head commit check-runs API, but no formal APPROVED review was created and the PR remained blocked. The approval gate should fail closed or wait whenever current-head peer checks are still pending, even if PR statusCheckRollup lags.Verification
py -m pytest tests/test_pr_review_merge_scheduler.py tests/test_opencode_agent_contract.py tests/test_opencode_review_normalize_output.pyC:\Program Files\Git\bin\bash.exe -n scripts/ci/test_strix_quick_gate.shNote: full
test_strix_quick_gate.shunder Git Bash on this Windows workstation still fails in an existing normalizer fixture before this new assertion path; Linux CI remains authoritative for that shell suite.