sysadminandClaude Fable 5
45c5cac2bc
- Upgrade SKILL.md §K compact format to the issue #182 canonical field set (Task/Repo/Role/Identity/Issue-PR/Branch-SHA/Files/Validation/Mutations/ Current status/Blockers/Next/Safety) plus role-specific field lists for review/merge, author, and queue/inventory tasks. - Point the review-pr, merge-pr, and start-issue template handoff lines at the exactly-titled Controller Handoff section with their role fields. - Add review_proofs.assess_controller_handoff(): reports without the exact section are 'missing' (downgraded), present-but-partial are 'incomplete' with the absent fields listed, and role extras are enforced per role. - Add TestControllerHandoff (8 tests) including a SKILL.md doc-contract test so the documented requirement cannot silently rot. The handoff supplements the full report; full-report validation rules are unchanged. Closes #182 Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <[email protected]>
75 lines
4.3 KiB
Markdown
75 lines
4.3 KiB
Markdown
# Template: review a PR
|
|
|
|
Copy, fill the `<...>` fields, and paste as the task prompt.
|
|
|
|
```text
|
|
Task: review PR #<pr> for issue #<n>.
|
|
|
|
Repo name disambiguation (Gitea-Tools blind review hardening):
|
|
- "Gitea-Tools", "gitea tool", "MCP Gitea tool", "gitea MCP tool", "gitea-tools repo"
|
|
→ MUST resolve to `Scaled-Tech-Consulting/Gitea-Tools` (never treat as mcp-control-plane).
|
|
- "mcp-control-plane", "mcp control plane" → only `Scaled-Tech-Consulting/mcp-control-plane`.
|
|
- If user says "open PRs", "the queue", "MCP Gitea tooling" without explicit repo,
|
|
or reference is ambiguous: check BOTH configured repos:
|
|
`Scaled-Tech-Consulting/Gitea-Tools` and `Scaled-Tech-Consulting/mcp-control-plane`.
|
|
- In the final report, always state exactly which repo(s) were checked.
|
|
If only one was checked: explicitly say "Only <repo> was checked. Other
|
|
configured repos were not checked. This is not a complete queue inventory."
|
|
- A single-repo "no open PRs" result MUST NOT be reported as global "no open PRs"
|
|
if the other configured repo was not inventoried.
|
|
|
|
Rules (llm-project-workflow):
|
|
- Review in a SEPARATE detached review worktree, never the author's folder.
|
|
- You must NOT be the PR author. If the authenticated user == PR author, stop.
|
|
A different LLM-Agent-SHA does NOT make you a different actor — only a
|
|
different authenticated Gitea user does (docs/llm-agent-sha.md).
|
|
- Do not merge if any check fails.
|
|
|
|
Steps:
|
|
1. Identity Checklist: Before claiming/working on review, verify and state:
|
|
- Required identity/profile for this task: reviewer (allowed to review/approve/request_changes)
|
|
- Current authenticated identity (from whoami): <username>
|
|
- Target task role: reviewer identity (must NOT be the PR author)
|
|
*If the current identity does not match the required role (or is the PR author), STOP. Relaunch/switch to the correct profile first.*
|
|
2. Verify your authenticated identity (whoami) and the active profile.
|
|
3. Fetch the PR facts: PR author, head SHA, state (must be open), base branch.
|
|
Pin the head SHA in your notes; every later step validates THAT SHA.
|
|
4. If authenticated user == PR author → STOP (no self-review).
|
|
Session-contamination claims must be evidence-backed (#173): if you
|
|
cannot evidence whether this session authored/touched the PR branch,
|
|
report contamination as UNKNOWN (not contaminated, not clean) and choose
|
|
another PR or stop.
|
|
5. scripts/worktree-review <pr-head-branch> # detached, branches/review-*
|
|
cd branches/review-<pr-head-branch-slug>
|
|
6. Checkout proof (#173) — prove and state, before any diff review or
|
|
validation:
|
|
- pinned PR head SHA (from Gitea)
|
|
- local checkout SHA (git rev-parse HEAD)
|
|
- HEAD == pinned PR head SHA
|
|
- diff base == the PR base branch
|
|
If HEAD does not match the pinned head → STOP before review/merge.
|
|
7. Confirm the worktree is clean. Inspect the FULL diff; confirm scope matches
|
|
issue #<n>; flag any unrelated files, secrets, or formatting churn. Check that the PR body correctly uses Gitea-closing keywords (`Closes #N` or `Fixes #N`) instead of non-closing ones (`Implements #N`, `Refs #N`).
|
|
8. Run the test suite; report the exact command and exact results — pass/fail
|
|
plus passed/skipped/failed counts, any ignored paths and why they are safe
|
|
to ignore, and whether the command differs from the repository's canonical
|
|
validation command. Only claim a result after the output has been read.
|
|
9. Post the review verdict: approve only if scope is clean and checks pass;
|
|
otherwise request changes with specifics. Never merge from this review step.
|
|
Include a "Review Metadata" block (attribution only — docs/llm-agent-sha.md):
|
|
|
|
Review Metadata:
|
|
- LLM-Agent-SHA: llm-<12 lowercase hex, e.g. llm-41d0e7aa9f2c>
|
|
- LLM-Role: reviewer
|
|
- Authenticated-Gitea-User: <whoami result>
|
|
- MCP-Profile: <profile name>
|
|
- Eligibility: passed/failed
|
|
|
|
Handoff: end with a section titled exactly `Controller Handoff` per SKILL.md
|
|
§K (compact by default; long form if a merge happened or a gate blocked you),
|
|
including the review/merge role fields: Selected PR, Reviewer eligibility,
|
|
Pinned reviewed head, Review decision, Merge result, Linked issue status,
|
|
Cleanup status. If you could not merge, name the exact gate. Reports missing
|
|
the handoff are downgraded (review_proofs.assess_controller_handoff).
|
|
```
|