[detection-analysis] Detection Analysis Report — 2026-08-01 #49680
Closed
Replies: 1 comment
|
This discussion has been marked as outdated by Detection Analysis Report. A newer discussion is available at Discussion #49869. |
0 replies
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Summary
Warning
1 misconfigured workflow detected — see table below.
Comparison Chart
Detection-enabled runs had a higher success rate (97.2% vs 90.6%) and a much lower average token usage (38.6k vs 176.3k) than regular runs in this window.
Misconfigured Workflows
gh-aw-detection: trueis missinggh-aw-detection: trueto frontmatter, or document an explicit repository-level opt-out if this is intentional.View All Run Metrics
View Historical Trend
29 data points collected since 2026-06-27. Both regular and detection run volumes rose sharply after 2026-07-19 (workflow catalog growth), with detection-enabled runs briefly spiking above regular runs on 2026-07-30 before regular runs recovered today. Detection success rate has stayed in a stable 80–97% band throughout.
Recommendations
gh-aw-detection: truetoDaily Regulatory Report Generator's frontmatter, or document it alongside the existingDaily Agentic Workflow AIC Usage Auditopt-out if the omission is intentional.Changeset Generator,Duplicate Code Detectorruns in the 300k–500k+ range); consider whether those workflows would benefit from detection-mode scoping.gh-aw-detectionvalues across runs in this window, and no detection-tagged runs had a failingdetectionjob — configuration drift is currently low.All reactions