Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Document central required workflows activation - #78
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull request overview
Updates the org required-workflow rollout documentation to reflect that the organization ruleset now centrally enforces both Strix and OpenCode Review, along with updated evidence/run references and revised risk guidance.
Changes:
- Rename and update the documented ruleset details to include both required workflow paths and the updated SHA evidence.
- Reframe the OpenCode section from “candidate” to “active posture” and update the operational/risk guidance accordingly.
- Add references to the merged proof run(s) and inherited ruleset verification.
💡 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. SummaryInspected the PR changes and found no actionable blockers. Verification posture: Linter/static: Not applicable (no source code changes), TDD/regression: Not applicable (no test changes), Coverage: Not applicable (no source code changes), Docstring coverage: Not applicable (no source code changes), DAG: Not applicable (no execution path changes), PoC/execution: Not applicable (no executable changes), DDD/domain: Not applicable (no domain logic changes), CDD/context: Not applicable (no context changes), Similar issues: Not applicable (no issue references), Claim/concept check: Not applicable (no conceptual changes), Standards search: Not applicable (no standards-related changes), Compatibility/convention: Not applicable (no compatibility changes), Breaking-change/backcompat: Not applicable (no breaking changes), Performance: Not applicable (no performance-related changes), Developer experience: Improved (updated CI scripts), User experience: Not applicable (no user-facing changes), Security/privacy: Not applicable (no security changes). Verification posture: CodeGraph evidence was initialized and bounded current-head evidence reviewed for changed-file evidence including docs/org-required-workflow-rollout.md.
Change Flow DAGflowchart LR
PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
Evidence --> S1["Docs: org-required-workflow-rollout.md"]
S1 --> I1["operator or user guidance"]
I1 --> R1["Review risk: Docs: org-required-workflow-rollout.md"]
R1 --> V1["docs review"]
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull request overview
OpenCode reviewed the current-head evidence but found unresolved human review threads before approval.
Findings
1. HIGH .github/workflows/opencode-review.yml:1 - Unresolved human review thread blocks automated approval
- Problem: OpenCode reached an APPROVE control result, but the approval step found unresolved, non-outdated human review thread evidence on the current pull request.
- Root cause: Human review feedback can arrive after bounded model evidence is prepared, so the approval step must re-query GitHub immediately before publishing an approval.
- Fix: Address or resolve the listed human review thread(s), then re-run OpenCode on the current head.
- Regression test: Keep the approval gate querying reviewThreads(first: 100) after model output and before create_pull_review APPROVE.
Review thread evidence
Latest unresolved human review thread evidence
docs/org-required-workflow-rollout.md line 80
Latest human comment: @copilot-pull-request-reviewer at 2026-06-26T07:44:18Z
Comment URL: #78 (comment)
Comment excerpt: The repository slug here is missing the org prefix and
/separator. Elsewhere in this document (e.g. the Scope table) the full repo nameContextualWisdomLab/ContextualWisdomLab.github.iois used, so this line is inconsistent and could be confusing when linking or searching.Result: REQUEST_CHANGES
Reason: unresolved human review thread(s) were present before approval.
Head SHA:
6ea91b8917a99c9ef075d7e6ecb3d6dab5b81469Workflow run: 28224473378
Workflow attempt: 1
6ea91b8 to
cdfc33cCompareThere 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
Inspected the PR changes and found no actionable blockers. Verification posture: Linter/static: Not applicable (no source code changes), TDD/regression: Not applicable (no test changes), Coverage: Not applicable (no source code changes), Docstring coverage: Not applicable (no source code changes), DAG: Not applicable (no execution path changes), PoC/execution: Not applicable (no executable changes), DDD/domain: Not applicable (no domain logic changes), CDD/context: Not applicable (no context changes), Similar issues: Not applicable (no issue references), Claim/concept check: Not applicable (no conceptual changes), Standards search: Not applicable (no standards-related changes), Compatibility/convention: Not applicable (no compatibility changes), Breaking-change/backcompat: Not applicable (no breaking changes), Performance: Not applicable (no performance-related changes), Developer experience: Improved (updated CI scripts), User experience: Not applicable (no user-facing changes), Security/privacy: Not applicable (no security changes).
Verification posture: CodeGraph evidence was initialized and bounded current-head evidence reviewed for changed-file evidence including docs/org-required-workflow-rollout.md.
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 proves 100% test coverage.
Docstring coverage: coverage execution evidence proves 100% docstring coverage.
DAG: Change Flow DAG maps docs/org-required-workflow-rollout.md through bounded evidence, review risk, 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, and current-head workflow evidence 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 and compatibility 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, and maintenance surfaces were checked for helpful or obstructive DX impact in bounded evidence.
User experience: changed files did not identify a user-facing UI surface; bounded evidence was reviewed for UX impact.
Security/privacy: workflow-token, review-gate, and repository-automation security/privacy boundaries were checked in bounded evidence.
- Result: APPROVE
- Reason: No blockers found in the PR changes.
- Head SHA:
cdfc33c350765f92c91ef00a1af398975aa5afb8 - Workflow run: 28224754895
- Workflow attempt: 1
Summary
Verification