Repository navigation
[detection-analysis] Detection Analysis Report — 2026-10-30 (last 24h) #73308
Closed
Replies: 1 comment
|
This discussion has been marked as outdated by Detection Analysis Report. A newer discussion is available at Discussion #73579. |
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
aw_info.json/run_summary.json) and were excluded from detection classification — coverage of those runs is incompletegh-aw-detection: false): 19 (3.9%)Note
No
gh-aw-detection-related misconfigurations were found in this window. All 19 regular (detection-disabled) runs come from one-off "Smoke ..." test workflows with a single run each — none crossed the >3-runs-in-the-window threshold used as a proxy for rule 1, and nodetectionjob itself failed (rule 2: 448/454 detection jobs present succeeded, 6 skipped, 0 failed). No workflow alternated between enabled/disabled (rule 3).Comparison Chart
The lower success rate on detection-enabled runs is not evidence the feature itself causes failures — the "regular" bucket is entirely single-shot smoke tests (simple, low-token, high-pass-rate by design), while the detection-enabled bucket is the full population of production/scheduled workflows with naturally more complex tasks and higher token usage. No detection-job failure was observed anywhere in the data (see Misconfigured Workflows).
Misconfigured Workflows
No misconfigured workflows detected in this window.
View All Run Metrics
Workflows with more than one run in the window (18 workflows, 331 of 490 classified runs; the remaining 159 workflows each had exactly 1 run, mostly one-off "Smoke ..." engine tests):
All 19 explicitly-disabled (
gh-aw-detection: false) runs belong to distinct single-run "Smoke ..." engine-validation workflows (e.g. Smoke Claude, Smoke Codex, Smoke Pi, Smoke Copilot and its variants, Smoke Agy, Smoke OTEL) — a deliberate, low-volume configuration, not a misconfiguration.View Historical Trend
31 days of history are available (2026-08-25 → 2026-10-30, 32 recorded data points):
Recommendations
gh-aw-detectionflag is configured correctly across all observed workflows this window; keep monitoring as new workflows are added.detectionjob succeeded every time and theagentjob itself mostly succeeded (112/114) — the failure boundary is thesafe_outputs/ "Process Safe Outputs" step, i.e. an agent-logic/safe-outputs issue, not a detection misconfiguration. Worth a separate investigation (example: §40972856581).aw_info.json), so their detection status is unknown and they were excluded from these metrics. If precise 100% coverage is required, re-run collection with a highermax_storage/max_github_api_rate_limitbudget.gh-aw-detection: falsewith >3 runs") was evaluated against this 24h window as a proxy for the intended 7-day lookback; re-validate over a full 7-day window before drawing long-term conclusions about any workflow's opt-out status.References:
All reactions