Repository navigation
[lockfile-stats] Lockfile Statistics Analysis — 2026-10-01 (301 workflows) #64836
Closed
Replies: 1 comment
|
This discussion has been marked as outdated by Lockfile Statistics Analysis Agent. A newer discussion is available at Discussion #65096. |
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.
Executive summary
.github/workflows/*.lock.ymlas of 2026-10-01 (+1 vs 2026-09-29 snapshot, 300 lockfiles)lockfile_stats_v4.py, reused from cache)File size distribution
Trigger analysis
Top triggers (count / % of 301):
workflow_dispatch293 (97.3%),schedule245 (81.4%),pull_request43 (14.3%),issues5,issue_comment3,workflow_call3; singletons:deployment_status,workflow_run,discussion,discussion_comment,push,pull_request_review_comment.Top trigger combinations:
schedule+workflow_dispatch212 (70.4%),workflow_dispatchonly 37,pull_request+schedule+workflow_dispatch29,pull_request+workflow_dispatch9.Most common cron:
0 0 */2 * *(every 2 days) — 44 workflows (was 43).Full cron frequency table
Safe outputs analysis
create_discussion_workflows= 92,discussion_category_detected= 92 (100% resolved, 0 fallback-regex parses,safe_outputs_config_missing= 0) — safe-output config extraction is fully reliable on this lockfile set.Top safe-output types:
create_issue147 (48.8%),create_discussion92 (30.6%),add_comment76 (25.2%),create_pull_request65 (21.6%),push_repo_memory35,add_labels32,upload_asset26,mentions23,create_pull_request_review_comment/submit_pull_request_review16 each.Discussion categories (of 92 discussion-creating workflows):
audits79 (85.9%),announcements5,artifacts2,dev2,research2,general1,daily-news1.Structural characteristics
Permission patterns (agent job, not top-level
permissions: {})permissions_unknown= 0 (resolved for all 301).Agent job (mirrors frontmatter) — notable scopes:
Every agent job runs with zero write scopes on
contents— all mutation is pushed into downstream safe-output jobs.Union across all jobs (where effective writes live):
union_any_write_workflows= 301 — every workflow grants a write scope somewhere (expected: safe-output infra jobs need it).Engine distribution (from
gh-aw-metadataagent_id)engine_unknown= 0 (fully resolved).Top models:
openai/gpt-5.3-codex37,copilot/gpt-5.3-codex35,copilot/auto29,openai/gpt-5.411,claude-sonnet-56.Tool & MCP patterns
mcp_fallback_used_count= 0 — all servers resolved viagh-aw-manifest, no legacy scraping needed.Most-used tools:
safeoutputs:missing_data/missing_tool/noop295 each,github:get_commit/get_file_contents/etc. 170 each,safeoutputs:create_issue147.Interesting findings
contents: readonly (0 writes); every effective write happens in downstream safe-output jobs — the safe-outputs isolation pattern has no exceptions in the current fleet.create_discussionworkflows resolved a category (or explicitdefault) with zero regex fallbacks — safe-outputs config parsing is robust.push_repo_memoryfell from 40 → 35 workflows (-12.5%) since 2026-09-29, while the oldledger_mutation(6) type is gone, replaced by two new typesledger_append(7) andledger_request_compaction(6) — consistent with an in-progress memory/ledger safe-output migration.Historical trends (2026-09-29 → 2026-10-01, 2 days)
Net change is consistent with a single new or updated workflow added to the fleet (github MCP + create_issue + copilot engine all up by exactly 1), plus a separate, multi-workflow ledger safe-output schema migration (
push_repo_memorydown,ledger_append/ledger_request_compactionup).Recommendations
engine_unknown=0,permissions_unknown=0,safe_outputs_config_missing=0, discussion-category detection 100%).push_repo_memory→ledger_append/ledger_request_compactionshift is an intentional schema migration; if unintentional, several workflows may be silently losing memory-persistence capability.References:
All reactions