🐛 fix(ci): apply all 10 coderabbit findings from #29

[dianlight]

Summary

Implements all 10 findings from issue #29 (Coderabbit review), keeping changes minimal and preserving existing behavior.

Findings fixed

#	Finding	Fix
F1	PREV_BODY could inject newlines/:: into workflow commands	Sanitized with PREV_BODY_SAFE (tr '\n' ' ') before ::notice::
F2	Retry of a bare /oc (review) routed to process-2 instead of process-3	Else-branch now routes to process-3
F3	TIER precedence wrong when retrying (parse before retry-parse)	Swapped to retry-parse.TIER || parse.TIER
F4	pull_request.number unavailable on issue_comment events	PR number fallback issue.number || pull_request.number in prompts, gh pr checkout, and context
F5	Resolve step ran even when process-2 was not applicable	Guarded with if: is_bot_thread == 'true'
F6	Retry jq queries ignored author_association	Author filter (OWNER/MEMBER/COLLABORATOR) added to all 3 retry queries
F7	Resolve step ran for draft PRs despite review skip guard	Guarded with if: pr-check.skip != 'true'
F8	Non-atomic cache download could leave partial config	Download to .tmp + atomic mv (cleanup on failure)
F9	Config errors and missing entries were indistinguishable	Distinct sys.exit(4) + ::error:: for invalid/unreadable config; exit 3 for missing entry
F10	Failed model resolution produced no feedback	continue-on-error on resolve + "Resolve model failure feedback" step (comment + -1 reaction + exit 1) in all 5 process jobs

Validation

• mise run lint-yaml — passed
• mise run lint-shell — passed
• bash -n .github/scripts/auth.sh .github/scripts/resolve-model.sh — passed
• resolve-model.sh exercised end-to-end: valid / missing entry / broken config / unreachable config

Test plan

Manual runs of /oc, /ocf, /oc retry, /ocf retry, /oc implement, /ocf implement, /oc task in downstream repos to confirm routing, tier, and PR-number resolution behave as before.

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Bug Fixes

  • Improved model configuration handling to prevent incomplete or invalid values after download or parsing failures.
  • Retry handling now recognizes only authorized, human-issued commands and applies safer defaults.
  • Workflow notifications now sanitize multiline command text.

• User Experience

  • Failed model resolution now provides clear issue or pull request feedback, run details, and a negative reaction.
  • Draft pull requests skip model resolution.
  • Pull request comments are supported from both issue and review comment events.

[coderabbitai]

Warning

Review limit reached

@dianlight, you've reached your PR review limit, so we couldn't start this review.

Next review available in:32 minutes

You've used all free OSS reviews for now. Wait for the free limit to reset to keep reviewing this public repository.

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: defaults

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro Plus

Run ID: 61186680-af4d-48f6-9a65-959b7bd8078c

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 29c4571 and 26594a1.

📒 Files selected for processing (3)

• .github/scripts/resolve-model.sh
• .github/workflows/opencode-issue-handler.yml
• .github/workflows/opencode-pr-comment.yml

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

The changes harden remote model configuration downloads and lookup errors. Issue and PR workflows now restrict retry routing, support multiple event shapes, report model-resolution failures, and stop before OpenCode runs.

Changes

Model resolution and workflow failure handling

Layer / File(s)	Summary
Resolver cache and validation .github/scripts/resolve-model.sh	Configuration downloads use temporary files and atomic replacement. Missing or invalid mappings produce an error and exit status 4.
Issue handler retry and failure flow .github/workflows/opencode-issue-handler.yml	Retry lookup accepts authorized commands, excludes retry commands, sanitizes notices, and adds failure comments and negative reactions for Processes 4 and 5.
PR comment routing and failure flow .github/workflows/opencode-pr-comment.yml	Retry routing uses authorized human commands and selected tiers. Processes 2, 3, and 6 report resolution failures and support issue-comment and review-comment event data.
PR review draft and failure flow .github/workflows/opencode-pr-review.yml	Draft PRs skip model resolution. Resolution failures produce PR feedback and terminate the job before OpenCode runs.

Estimated code review effort: 3 (Moderate) | ~20 minutes

Possibly related issues

• Fixes from Coderabbit #29: The issue covers the same resolver and workflow failure-handling changes.

Possibly related PRs

• dianlight/opencode-actions#11: This PR modifies the same OpenCode workflows and extends their retry and model-resolution handling.

Sequence Diagram(s)

sequenceDiagram
participant Workflow
participant resolve-model.sh
participant GitHub
participant OpenCode
Workflow->>resolve-model.sh: resolve model configuration
resolve-model.sh-->>Workflow: model or status 4
Workflow->>GitHub: post failure comment and negative reaction
Workflow-->>OpenCode: stop before invocation

Loading

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5

✅ Passed checks (5 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Description Check	✅ Passed	Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check	✅ Passed	The title accurately identifies the CI fixes and links them to the ten findings addressed in issue #29.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.
Linked Issues check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Out of Scope Changes check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.

✨ Finishing Touches

📝 Generate docstrings

• Create stacked PR
• Commit on current branch

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Commit unit tests in branch opencode/issue29-coderabbit-fixes

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

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

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 2

🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents

Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
Inline comments:
In @.github/scripts/resolve-model.sh:
- Around line 75-82: Update the Python resolver around the workflow/job lookup
and entry output to validate that workflow and job mappings are objects, while
preserving an absent job mapping as an unresolved result. Within the existing
try block, also validate any present go and free values are strings; malformed
mappings or tier values must raise the existing configuration error path and
exit with status 4 before printing model outputs.
In @.github/workflows/opencode-issue-handler.yml:
- Around line 59-67: Paginate each retry-history query with gh api --paginate
and flatten the returned page arrays before applying the existing authorization,
retry-exclusion, and final-comment selection logic. Apply this to
.github/workflows/opencode-issue-handler.yml lines 59-67,
.github/workflows/opencode-pr-comment.yml lines 64-71, and
.github/workflows/opencode-pr-comment.yml lines 430-439; all three sites require
the same change.

🪄 Autofix

Fix all unresolved CodeRabbit comments on this PR:

• Push a commit to this branch (recommended)
• Create a new PR with the fixes

---

ℹ️ Review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: defaults

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro Plus

Run ID: 1b65f6fa-d302-4996-b9fb-0913b9e90abd

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 58ae2bb and 29c4571.

📒 Files selected for processing (4)

• .github/scripts/resolve-model.sh
• .github/workflows/opencode-issue-handler.yml
• .github/workflows/opencode-pr-comment.yml
• .github/workflows/opencode-pr-review.yml