idd-all: direct-commit mode 加 passive warning (dirty tree / on default branch)

[kiki830621]

Problem

From verification of #1 (P2/P3 findings 9 + 19 — security+devils reviewers):
direct-commit mode 兩個 safety gap:

1. 跳過 clean-tree gate：Phase 0.5 在 direct-commit 路徑下不檢查 working tree clean。HITL user 若有 staged 的 .env / API key / .idea/ 等敏感檔案，會被下游 sub-skill 的 git add / git commit -a 連帶 commit 進 history。
2. direct-commit + main branch 缺顯眼 warning：commits 直接 land 主 branch，沒 PR review gate 保護；user 可能沒意識到自己當下在 main。

Spec rationale 認為 "user 自負其責" 是合理 trade-off，但完全 silent skip 的 UX 缺乏 hint。

Type

enhancement

Why P2/P3 not P1

不阻擋 #1 close — direct-commit + dirty tree 是有意設計選擇,只是缺 user-facing notice。但「常見足以該被防」的 sensitive-file scenario 值得 passive warning。

Recommendation

Phase 0.5 direct-commit 分支加 passive warning(不 abort,只 echo):

if [ "$PATH_AXIS" = "direct-commit" ]; then
  CURRENT_BRANCH=$(git -C "$CWD" branch --show-current)
  echo "→ direct-commit path: committing to ${CURRENT_BRANCH}, no PR will be opened"

  # Passive warning: dirty tree
  if [ -n "$(git -C "$CWD" status --porcelain)" ]; then
    echo "⚠ Working tree has uncommitted changes — these will be intermingled with idd-all commits."
    echo "  If sensitive (e.g. .env, secrets), abort now and commit/stash them first."
  fi

  # Passive warning: on default branch
  DEFAULT=$(gh repo view "$GITHUB_REPO" --json defaultBranchRef -q .defaultBranchRef.name)
  if [ "$CURRENT_BRANCH" = "$DEFAULT" ]; then
    echo "⚠ direct-commit on default branch '${DEFAULT}' — no PR review gate."
  fi
fi

Pure additive,不改 abort 行為,只 surface 風險給 user。

Source

• Verify FAIL on commit 98b7a71 (idd-all: 增加 HITL（attended）模式 — direct-commit + 允許 sub-skill AskUserQuestion #1)
• Security reviewer finding 1 (introduced)
• Devil's Advocate finding 8
• Codex risk 3 (scope creep)
• Master comment: idd-all: 增加 HITL（attended）模式 — direct-commit + 允許 sub-skill AskUserQuestion #1 (comment)

Related: #1

[kiki830621]

Closing Summary

Problem

direct-commit mode 兩個 safety gap (P2/P3 from #1 verify findings 9 + 19):

1. 跳過 clean-tree gate → HITL user 若有 staged .env / secrets,可能被 sub-skill git add / git commit -a 連帶 commit 進 history
2. direct-commit + main branch 缺顯眼 warning → user 可能沒意識到自己當下在 main、沒 PR review gate

Root Cause

Phase 0.5 direct-commit 分支設計上認為「user 自負其責」是合理 trade-off,但 silent skip 缺 user-facing hint。

Solution

Phase 0.5 direct-commit 分支加 passive warnings(echo,不 abort):

• Working tree 有 uncommitted changes → 警告「will be intermingled with idd-all commits」+「if sensitive (.env, secrets), abort now」
• Current branch == default branch → 警告「no PR review gate」

User 在 HITL session 看到 warnings,可主動 abort 或繼續(decision visible 而非 invisible)。

Verification

openspec/changes/idd-all-hitl-mode/smoke-test.sh — 28/28 assertions PASS post-fix。Phase 0.5 resolution chain 不變,只在 direct-commit 分支內加 defensive echo。

Changes

• a7a4e5e fix: idd-all/idd-issue P2/P3 follow-up batch (Refs idd-all: direct-commit mode 加 passive warning (dirty tree / on default branch) #2 idd-all SKILL.md: pseudocode quality (goto bash / branch-exists no-op / stale Failure Modes table) #3 idd-all Phase 4: ${MAX_ROUND} substitution missing in abort message #4 idd-all Phase 0.5: fork detection 改 fail-closed (gh repo view 失敗時預設 PR mode) #5 idd-all SLUG derivation: BSD/GNU sed alternation (\| not portable) #6 idd-all Phase 5: PR body heredoc 改 quoted (預防未來 RCE) #7 idd-all Phase 0.2: GITHUB_REPO post-derive shape assertion #8 idd-issue Step 2: 強制 sanitize incoming title (length cap / strip control chars) #9 idd-all Examples: 跨 repo invocation 段重複描述,合併 #10)