Skip to content

fix: baseline issue optimizer template drift - #2732

Merged
stranske merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
codex/fix-sync-llm-installs
Jul 7, 2026
Merged

fix: baseline issue optimizer template drift#2732
stranske merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
codex/fix-sync-llm-installs

Conversation

@stranske

@stranske stranske commented Jul 7, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

Summary

  • refresh the reviewed template drift baseline for agents-issue-optimizer after the consumer template LLM install path changed
  • clarify that the consumer template installs from checked-out workflows-scripts/tools/requirements-llm.txt

Validation

  • python3 scripts/check_template_drift.py --allowlist config/template-drift-allowlist.txt
  • python3 scripts/validate_template_sync.py
  • python3 scripts/validate_template_completeness.py
  • python3 -m pytest tests/docs/test_workflow_snippets_yaml.py tests/scripts/test_generate_llm_workflow_update_comment.py tests/workflows/test_workflow_llm_installs.py -q
  • git diff --check

Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings July 7, 2026 06:38
@stranske stranske added automation Automation and workflow automation maintenance Maintenance tasks sync codex codex-automation labels Jul 7, 2026
@coderabbitai

coderabbitai Bot commented Jul 7, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Warning

Review limit reached

You’ve reached a temporary PR review limit under our Fair Usage Limits Policy.

Your recent review volume is higher than typical usage, so adaptive limits are currently applied.

Next review available in: 52 minutes

Your organization has reached its usage spending cap. Adjust your spending cap in the billing tab.

How can I continue?

After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the @coderabbitai review command as a PR comment. Alternatively, push new commits to this PR.

To avoid repeated limits, reduce automatic review volume by pausing incremental auto-reviews earlier, using label-based review opt-in, excluding WIP or generated PR titles, or requesting reviews manually when the PR is ready. If your team needs uninterrupted high-volume reviews, an organization admin can enable usage-based reviews.

How do review limits work?

CodeRabbit enforces per-developer PR review limits for each organization. Most developers receive the normal plan review availability.

For paid Pro and Pro+ PR reviews, CodeRabbit uses adaptive limits for sustained high-volume activity. When a developer's recent PR review activity reaches the 95th percentile or higher among CodeRabbit users, additional reviews become available more gradually as earlier reviews age out of the rolling window.

Please refer docs for additional details.

Review details
⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml

Review profile: ASSERTIVE

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 88b63c11-ada8-4961-ae40-39072210cce3

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 87a5587 and 22cb236.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • config/template-drift-allowlist.txt
✨ Finishing Touches
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
  • Create PR with unit tests
  • Commit unit tests in branch codex/fix-sync-llm-installs

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.

@stranske
stranske force-pushed the codex/fix-sync-llm-installs branch from ad64bbf to 22cb236 Compare July 7, 2026 06:39
@stranske
stranske enabled auto-merge (squash) July 7, 2026 06:39
@stranske
stranske temporarily deployed to agent-standard July 7, 2026 06:39 — with GitHub Actions Inactive
@stranske-keepalive

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Workflow source needed

PR #2732 needs either a linked GitHub issue or one valid non-issue Workflow Source before PR metadata automation can manage it safely.

Please do one of:

  • Add <!-- meta:issue:123 --> or a normal Closes #123 / Related to #123 line.
  • Check one Workflow Source option in the PR body.
  • Add a hidden marker such as <!-- workflow-source:local_request -->, <!-- workflow-source:manual_remote -->, <!-- workflow-source:review_followup -->, <!-- workflow-source:sync_campaign -->, or <!-- workflow-source:dependabot -->.
  • Add a workflow source label such as workflow:source-direct-pr, workflow:source-local-request, workflow:source-review-followup, workflow:source-sync, or workflow:no-automation.

Once a valid source is present, this warning will not be reposted.

Copilot AI left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Pull request overview

Refreshes the template-drift allowlist baseline for the agents-issue-optimizer workflow pair to reflect the updated consumer-template install behavior, keeping the drift check aligned with the current, intentional divergence between root and consumer workflows.

Changes:

  • Updated the allowlisted template_sha256 for the agents-issue-optimizer workflow pair.
  • Clarified the allowlist “reason” to document that the consumer template installs LLM dependencies from the checked-out workflows-scripts/tools/requirements-llm.txt path via python -m pip.

@stranske-keepalive

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Automated Status Summary

Head SHA: 89bb36c
Latest Runs: ⏳ pending — Gate
Required contexts: Gate / gate, Health 45 Agents Guard / guard
Required: core tests (3.12): ⏳ pending, core tests (3.13): ⏳ pending, docker smoke: ⏳ pending, gate: ⏳ pending

Workflow / Job Result Logs
(no jobs reported) ⏳ pending

Updated automatically; will refresh on subsequent CI/Docker completions.


Keepalive checklist

Scope

No scope information available

Tasks

  • No tasks defined

Acceptance criteria

  • No acceptance criteria defined

@stranske
stranske merged commit 8b528fc into main Jul 7, 2026
38 checks passed
@stranske
stranske deleted the codex/fix-sync-llm-installs branch July 7, 2026 06:42
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

automation Automation and workflow automation codex codex-automation maintenance Maintenance tasks sync

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants