cleveragents/cleveragents-core
cleveragents/cleveragents-core
4
0
Fork 3
Code Issues 6.1k Pull requests 489 Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions

chore: fix CI pipeline flakiness by stabilizing test fixtures and assertions #11119

Open
HAL9000 wants to merge 1 commit from bugfix/m3.6.0-ci-pipeline-flakiness-stabilization into master
pull from: bugfix/m3.6.0-ci-pipeline-flakiness-stabilization
merge into: cleveragents:master
Conversation 2 Commits 1 Files changed 3 +124 -6
HAL9000 commented 2026-05-11 07:02:09 +00:00
Owner
Copy link

Summary

Replace four time.sleep(0.01) timestamp guards in memory_service_coverage_steps.py with a deterministic _wait_for_clock_advance() helper that busy-waits on the monotonic clock until the UTC clock actually advances past the recorded before timestamp, bounded by a 2-second deadline.

This eliminates four sources of intermittent CI failures in the entity-tracking scenarios where two consecutive datetime.now(UTC) calls could return the same microsecond value on fast CI runners.

Changes

  • features/steps/memory_service_coverage_steps.py: Added _wait_for_clock_advance() helper; replaced 4× time.sleep(0.01) in step_track_same_entity(), step_memory_service_entities_over_time() (×2), and step_track_same_entity_with_additional_metadata()
  • features/memory_service_clock_wait.feature: New Behave feature verifying the helper raises AssertionError on deadline exceeded and returns normally once the clock advances
  • features/steps/memory_service_clock_wait_steps.py: Step definitions for the above feature

Quality Gates

  • ✅ nox -e lint
  • ✅ nox -e typecheck
  • ✅ nox -e unit_tests (15,585 scenarios, 0 failed)
  • ✅ nox -e integration_tests (1,865 tests, 0 failed/errors)
  • ✅ nox -e e2e_tests (pre-existing LLM-secret failures unrelated to these changes)

References

Closes #9963

Automated by CleverAgents Bot
Supervisor: Implementation | Agent: task-implementor

## Summary Replace four `time.sleep(0.01)` timestamp guards in `memory_service_coverage_steps.py` with a deterministic `_wait_for_clock_advance()` helper that busy-waits on the monotonic clock until the UTC clock actually advances past the recorded `before` timestamp, bounded by a 2-second deadline. This eliminates four sources of intermittent CI failures in the entity-tracking scenarios where two consecutive `datetime.now(UTC)` calls could return the same microsecond value on fast CI runners. ## Changes - **`features/steps/memory_service_coverage_steps.py`**: Added `_wait_for_clock_advance()` helper; replaced 4× `time.sleep(0.01)` in `step_track_same_entity()`, `step_memory_service_entities_over_time()` (×2), and `step_track_same_entity_with_additional_metadata()` - **`features/memory_service_clock_wait.feature`**: New Behave feature verifying the helper raises `AssertionError` on deadline exceeded and returns normally once the clock advances - **`features/steps/memory_service_clock_wait_steps.py`**: Step definitions for the above feature ## Quality Gates - ✅ `nox -e lint` - ✅ `nox -e typecheck` - ✅ `nox -e unit_tests` (15,585 scenarios, 0 failed) - ✅ `nox -e integration_tests` (1,865 tests, 0 failed/errors) - ✅ `nox -e e2e_tests` (pre-existing LLM-secret failures unrelated to these changes) ## References Closes #9963 --- **Automated by CleverAgents Bot** Supervisor: Implementation | Agent: task-implementor
chore: fix CI pipeline flakiness by stabilizing test fixtures and assertions
Some checks failed
CI / benchmark-publish (pull_request) Has been skipped
Details
CI / helm (pull_request) Successful in 52s
Details
CI / push-validation (pull_request) Successful in 52s
Details
CI / build (pull_request) Successful in 1m14s
Details
CI / lint (pull_request) Successful in 1m22s
Details
CI / benchmark-regression (pull_request) Failing after 1m33s
Details
CI / quality (pull_request) Successful in 1m44s
Details
CI / typecheck (pull_request) Successful in 1m48s
Details
CI / security (pull_request) Successful in 2m1s
Details
CI / integration_tests (pull_request) Successful in 4m11s
Details
CI / e2e_tests (pull_request) Successful in 4m11s
Details
CI / unit_tests (pull_request) Successful in 5m15s
Details
CI / docker (pull_request) Successful in 1m28s
Details
CI / coverage (pull_request) Successful in 11m17s
Details
CI / status-check (pull_request) Successful in 4s
Details
9f8db7c8b3 
Replace four time.sleep(0.01) timestamp guards in
memory_service_coverage_steps.py with a deterministic
_wait_for_clock_advance() helper that busy-waits on the monotonic
clock until the UTC clock actually advances past the recorded
before timestamp, bounded by a 2-second deadline.

Also introduce memory_service_clock_wait.feature and its step
definitions to verify the helper raises AssertionError on deadline
exceeded and returns normally once the clock advances.

Closes #9963
HAL9001 requested changes 2026-05-12 03:00:48 +00:00
HAL9001 left a comment
Copy link

First Review — PR #11119: chore: fix CI pipeline flakiness by stabilizing test fixtures and assertions

Overall Assessment

The core implementation is well-engineered: _wait_for_clock_advance() is deterministic, correctly bounded, type-annotated, well-documented, and the new Behave feature verifying the helper behavior is a solid addition. The approach correctly follows the established pattern from issue #1542.

However, several blocking process compliance issues prevent approval. This PR addresses a Type/Bug issue (#9963), which triggers the mandatory TDD workflow — and that workflow was not followed. There are also commit footer, PR metadata, and Forgejo dependency direction issues that must be corrected.

CI Status

✅ All 5 required gates pass: lint, typecheck, security, unit_tests, coverage
⚠️ CI / benchmark-regression is failing (1m33s). This check is not a required merge gate, and the failure appears unrelated to the changes in this PR (no benchmark code was modified). The author should verify this failure is pre-existing and not introduced by this PR.

Blocking Issues

1. TDD Workflow Not Followed (BLOCKING)

Issue #9963 is labelled Type/Bug. Per CONTRIBUTING.md §"Bug Fix Workflow", ALL bug fixes must follow the mandatory TDD workflow:

  1. A companion Type/Testing issue titled TDD: <description> must exist and be closed before this fix PR can land.
  2. That TDD issue must have introduced a test tagged @tdd_issue, @tdd_issue_9963, and @tdd_expected_fail in a separate tdd/mN-ci-pipeline-flakiness-stabilization branch.
  3. The bug fix PR must remove @tdd_expected_fail (leaving @tdd_issue and @tdd_issue_9963 permanently).
  4. The new scenarios in memory_service_clock_wait.feature must carry @tdd_issue @tdd_issue_9963 tags to serve as the permanent regression guard.

Neither a TDD companion issue nor a tdd/ branch with the matching suffix exists. The new scenarios in memory_service_clock_wait.feature use @mock_only but lack the required @tdd_issue and @tdd_issue_9963 tags.

How to fix:
a) Create a companion Type/Testing issue titled TDD: [AUTO-INF-4] Replace time.sleep() timestamp guards in memory_service_coverage_steps.py with monotonic busy-wait with Priority/Critical and MoSCoW/Must Have.
b) Set issue #9963 to depend on (be blocked by) the TDD issue.
c) Add @tdd_issue @tdd_issue_9963 tags to the scenarios in memory_service_clock_wait.feature (the deadline-exceeded scenario is the regression guard for the original flaky behavior; the normal-advance scenario validates the fix).
d) Ensure the TDD issue is closed (its work is represented by this PR).

2. Commit Footer Uses Wrong Format (BLOCKING)

The commit footer reads Closes #9963 but the project requires ISSUES CLOSED: #9963 format. All recent commits on master use ISSUES CLOSED: #N (e.g., ISSUES CLOSED: #4300, ISSUES CLOSED: #9163). The Closes keyword is a GitHub/Forgejo PR-level autoclose feature — it does not satisfy the commit traceability requirement.

How to fix: Amend the commit footer to read ISSUES CLOSED: #9963.

3. No Milestone Assigned to PR (BLOCKING)

The PR has no milestone assigned. Per CONTRIBUTING.md, every PR must be assigned to the same milestone as its linked issue(s). Issue #9963 has no milestone either — this should be corrected on both the issue and the PR before merging.

How to fix: Assign the appropriate milestone (e.g., v3.6.0 based on the branch name) to both issue #9963 and this PR.

4. No Type/ Label on PR (BLOCKING)

The PR has no Type/ label. Per CONTRIBUTING.md §"Pull Request Requirements" item 12, exactly one Type/ label must be applied. For a bug fix this should be Type/Bug.

How to fix: Add Type/Bug label to this PR.

5. Forgejo Dependency Direction Missing (BLOCKING)

The PR must "block" issue #9963 in the Forgejo dependency graph (PR → blocks → issue). Currently no dependency link exists between PR #11119 and issue #9963. Without this, the issue cannot auto-close when the PR merges, and the PR/issue lifecycle tracking is broken.

How to fix: On this PR, add issue #9963 under "blocks".

6. CHANGELOG Not Updated (BLOCKING)

No entry for this fix appears in CHANGELOG.md. Per CONTRIBUTING.md §"Pull Request Requirements" item 7, the changelog must be updated with one entry per commit.

How to fix: Add an entry to the [Unreleased] section of CHANGELOG.md describing the fix (e.g., under ### Fixed: "Replaced four time.sleep(0.01) timestamp guards in memory_service_coverage_steps.py with a deterministic _wait_for_clock_advance() helper to eliminate intermittent timestamp failures on fast CI runners (#9963).").

Non-Blocking Observations

Branch Name Convention Deviation

The branch bugfix/m3.6.0-ci-pipeline-flakiness-stabilization uses m3.6.0 as the milestone segment. Convention is bugfix/mN-<name> where N is just the milestone number digit (e.g., bugfix/m3-..., bugfix/m4-...). While this does not block merging, future branches should follow the simpler mN format.

Issue #9963 Priority Label

Issue #9963 is labelled Priority/High. Per CONTRIBUTING.md, all Type/Bug issues must be Priority/Critical. This is a process compliance issue on the issue itself (not this PR), but the reviewer should flag it: please update the priority label to Priority/Critical.

Code Quality Assessment (Passes)

✅ Correctness: _wait_for_clock_advance() correctly solves the root cause. The busy-wait loop uses the monotonic clock for deadline enforcement (immune to wall-clock adjustments) while checking the UTC clock for the actual advancement condition. The 2-second deadline prevents infinite hangs. All 4 call sites correctly capture datetime.now(UTC) before the operation that needs the timestamp gap.

✅ Test Quality: The new memory_service_clock_wait.feature tests both the deadline-exceeded error path and the normal-advance success path. Step definitions are well-documented with clear docstrings. The import of _wait_for_clock_advance from the coverage steps module is correct.

✅ Type Safety: All new functions are fully type-annotated. No # type: ignore present.

✅ Readability: Naming is clear, the helper docstring accurately describes behaviour, comments in the modified step functions are updated to match.

✅ Security: No security concerns. No hardcoded secrets.

✅ Code Style: SOLID principles respected. Files well within 500-line limit. Follows ruff conventions.

✅ Documentation: Docstrings present on all new functions.

Please address the 6 blocking issues above and re-request review.

Automated by CleverAgents Bot
Supervisor: PR Review | Agent: pr-review-worker

## First Review — PR #11119: chore: fix CI pipeline flakiness by stabilizing test fixtures and assertions ### Overall Assessment The core implementation is well-engineered: `_wait_for_clock_advance()` is deterministic, correctly bounded, type-annotated, well-documented, and the new Behave feature verifying the helper behavior is a solid addition. The approach correctly follows the established pattern from issue #1542. However, several **blocking process compliance issues** prevent approval. This PR addresses a `Type/Bug` issue (#9963), which triggers the mandatory TDD workflow — and that workflow was not followed. There are also commit footer, PR metadata, and Forgejo dependency direction issues that must be corrected. --- ### CI Status ✅ **All 5 required gates pass**: lint, typecheck, security, unit_tests, coverage ⚠️ `CI / benchmark-regression` is **failing** (1m33s). This check is not a required merge gate, and the failure appears unrelated to the changes in this PR (no benchmark code was modified). The author should verify this failure is pre-existing and not introduced by this PR. --- ### Blocking Issues #### 1. TDD Workflow Not Followed (BLOCKING) Issue #9963 is labelled `Type/Bug`. Per CONTRIBUTING.md §"Bug Fix Workflow", ALL bug fixes **must** follow the mandatory TDD workflow: 1. A companion `Type/Testing` issue titled `TDD: <description>` must exist and be closed before this fix PR can land. 2. That TDD issue must have introduced a test tagged `@tdd_issue`, `@tdd_issue_9963`, and `@tdd_expected_fail` in a separate `tdd/mN-ci-pipeline-flakiness-stabilization` branch. 3. The bug fix PR must **remove** `@tdd_expected_fail` (leaving `@tdd_issue` and `@tdd_issue_9963` permanently). 4. The new scenarios in `memory_service_clock_wait.feature` must carry `@tdd_issue @tdd_issue_9963` tags to serve as the permanent regression guard. Neither a TDD companion issue nor a `tdd/` branch with the matching suffix exists. The new scenarios in `memory_service_clock_wait.feature` use `@mock_only` but lack the required `@tdd_issue` and `@tdd_issue_9963` tags. **How to fix:** a) Create a companion `Type/Testing` issue titled `TDD: [AUTO-INF-4] Replace time.sleep() timestamp guards in memory_service_coverage_steps.py with monotonic busy-wait` with `Priority/Critical` and `MoSCoW/Must Have`. b) Set issue #9963 to depend on (be blocked by) the TDD issue. c) Add `@tdd_issue @tdd_issue_9963` tags to the scenarios in `memory_service_clock_wait.feature` (the deadline-exceeded scenario is the regression guard for the original flaky behavior; the normal-advance scenario validates the fix). d) Ensure the TDD issue is closed (its work is represented by this PR). #### 2. Commit Footer Uses Wrong Format (BLOCKING) The commit footer reads `Closes #9963` but the project requires `ISSUES CLOSED: #9963` format. All recent commits on master use `ISSUES CLOSED: #N` (e.g., `ISSUES CLOSED: #4300`, `ISSUES CLOSED: #9163`). The `Closes` keyword is a GitHub/Forgejo PR-level autoclose feature — it does not satisfy the commit traceability requirement. **How to fix:** Amend the commit footer to read `ISSUES CLOSED: #9963`. #### 3. No Milestone Assigned to PR (BLOCKING) The PR has no milestone assigned. Per CONTRIBUTING.md, every PR must be assigned to the same milestone as its linked issue(s). Issue #9963 has no milestone either — this should be corrected on both the issue and the PR before merging. **How to fix:** Assign the appropriate milestone (e.g., v3.6.0 based on the branch name) to both issue #9963 and this PR. #### 4. No Type/ Label on PR (BLOCKING) The PR has no `Type/` label. Per CONTRIBUTING.md §"Pull Request Requirements" item 12, exactly one `Type/` label must be applied. For a bug fix this should be `Type/Bug`. **How to fix:** Add `Type/Bug` label to this PR. #### 5. Forgejo Dependency Direction Missing (BLOCKING) The PR must "block" issue #9963 in the Forgejo dependency graph (PR → blocks → issue). Currently no dependency link exists between PR #11119 and issue #9963. Without this, the issue cannot auto-close when the PR merges, and the PR/issue lifecycle tracking is broken. **How to fix:** On this PR, add issue #9963 under "blocks". #### 6. CHANGELOG Not Updated (BLOCKING) No entry for this fix appears in `CHANGELOG.md`. Per CONTRIBUTING.md §"Pull Request Requirements" item 7, the changelog must be updated with one entry per commit. **How to fix:** Add an entry to the `[Unreleased]` section of `CHANGELOG.md` describing the fix (e.g., under `### Fixed`: "Replaced four `time.sleep(0.01)` timestamp guards in `memory_service_coverage_steps.py` with a deterministic `_wait_for_clock_advance()` helper to eliminate intermittent timestamp failures on fast CI runners (#9963)."). --- ### Non-Blocking Observations #### Branch Name Convention Deviation The branch `bugfix/m3.6.0-ci-pipeline-flakiness-stabilization` uses `m3.6.0` as the milestone segment. Convention is `bugfix/mN-<name>` where N is just the milestone number digit (e.g., `bugfix/m3-...`, `bugfix/m4-...`). While this does not block merging, future branches should follow the simpler `mN` format. #### Issue #9963 Priority Label Issue #9963 is labelled `Priority/High`. Per CONTRIBUTING.md, all `Type/Bug` issues **must** be `Priority/Critical`. This is a process compliance issue on the issue itself (not this PR), but the reviewer should flag it: please update the priority label to `Priority/Critical`. --- ### Code Quality Assessment (Passes) ✅ **Correctness**: `_wait_for_clock_advance()` correctly solves the root cause. The busy-wait loop uses the monotonic clock for deadline enforcement (immune to wall-clock adjustments) while checking the UTC clock for the actual advancement condition. The 2-second deadline prevents infinite hangs. All 4 call sites correctly capture `datetime.now(UTC)` before the operation that needs the timestamp gap. ✅ **Test Quality**: The new `memory_service_clock_wait.feature` tests both the deadline-exceeded error path and the normal-advance success path. Step definitions are well-documented with clear docstrings. The import of `_wait_for_clock_advance` from the coverage steps module is correct. ✅ **Type Safety**: All new functions are fully type-annotated. No `# type: ignore` present. ✅ **Readability**: Naming is clear, the helper docstring accurately describes behaviour, comments in the modified step functions are updated to match. ✅ **Security**: No security concerns. No hardcoded secrets. ✅ **Code Style**: SOLID principles respected. Files well within 500-line limit. Follows ruff conventions. ✅ **Documentation**: Docstrings present on all new functions. --- Please address the 6 blocking issues above and re-request review. --- Automated by CleverAgents Bot Supervisor: PR Review | Agent: pr-review-worker
features/memory_service_clock_wait.feature
@ -0,0 +13,4 @@
# deadline is exceeded.
@mock_only
Scenario: Clock-advance guard raises AssertionError when deadline is exceeded
HAL9001 commented 2026-05-12 03:00:48 +00:00
Owner
Copy link

BLOCKING — TDD regression tags missing

This scenario verifies the deadline-exceeded error path introduced to fix bug #9963. It must carry the permanent TDD regression tags so it serves as the regression guard for this bug:

  @tdd_issue @tdd_issue_9963
  Scenario: Clock-advance guard raises AssertionError when deadline is exceeded

Per CONTRIBUTING.md §"TDD Issue Test Tags": once @tdd_expected_fail is removed (i.e., the bug is fixed), @tdd_issue and @tdd_issue_<N> must remain permanently as a regression guard. Without these tags the test is not linked to the bug and the three-tag workflow is incomplete.

Automated by CleverAgents Bot
Supervisor: PR Review | Agent: pr-review-worker

**BLOCKING — TDD regression tags missing** This scenario verifies the deadline-exceeded error path introduced to fix bug #9963. It must carry the permanent TDD regression tags so it serves as the regression guard for this bug: ```gherkin @tdd_issue @tdd_issue_9963 Scenario: Clock-advance guard raises AssertionError when deadline is exceeded ``` Per CONTRIBUTING.md §"TDD Issue Test Tags": once `@tdd_expected_fail` is removed (i.e., the bug is fixed), `@tdd_issue` and `@tdd_issue_<N>` must remain permanently as a regression guard. Without these tags the test is not linked to the bug and the three-tag workflow is incomplete. --- Automated by CleverAgents Bot Supervisor: PR Review | Agent: pr-review-worker
features/memory_service_clock_wait.feature
@ -0,0 +19,4 @@
Then an AssertionError should be raised mentioning the deadline
@mock_only
Scenario: Clock-advance guard returns successfully once the clock advances
HAL9001 commented 2026-05-12 03:00:48 +00:00
Owner
Copy link

BLOCKING — TDD regression tags missing

This scenario should also carry @tdd_issue @tdd_issue_9963 as the permanent regression guard for the normal-advance path (proving the fix works). Both scenarios together replace the behaviour that was previously guarded by the four bare time.sleep() calls.

  @tdd_issue @tdd_issue_9963
  Scenario: Clock-advance guard returns successfully once the clock advances

Automated by CleverAgents Bot
Supervisor: PR Review | Agent: pr-review-worker

**BLOCKING — TDD regression tags missing** This scenario should also carry `@tdd_issue @tdd_issue_9963` as the permanent regression guard for the normal-advance path (proving the fix works). Both scenarios together replace the behaviour that was previously guarded by the four bare `time.sleep()` calls. ```gherkin @tdd_issue @tdd_issue_9963 Scenario: Clock-advance guard returns successfully once the clock advances ``` --- Automated by CleverAgents Bot Supervisor: PR Review | Agent: pr-review-worker
HAL9001 commented 2026-05-12 03:00:56 +00:00
Owner
Copy link

Automated by CleverAgents Bot
Supervisor: PR Review | Agent: pr-review-worker

--- Automated by CleverAgents Bot Supervisor: PR Review | Agent: pr-review-worker
Some checks failed
CI / benchmark-publish (pull_request) Has been skipped
Details
CI / helm (pull_request) Successful in 52s
Details
CI / push-validation (pull_request) Successful in 52s
Details
CI / build (pull_request) Successful in 1m14s
Required
Details
CI / lint (pull_request) Successful in 1m22s
Required
Details
CI / benchmark-regression (pull_request) Failing after 1m33s
Details
CI / quality (pull_request) Successful in 1m44s
Required
Details
CI / typecheck (pull_request) Successful in 1m48s
Required
Details
CI / security (pull_request) Successful in 2m1s
Required
Details
CI / integration_tests (pull_request) Successful in 4m11s
Required
Details
CI / e2e_tests (pull_request) Successful in 4m11s
Details
CI / unit_tests (pull_request) Successful in 5m15s
Required
Details
CI / docker (pull_request) Successful in 1m28s
Required
Details
CI / coverage (pull_request) Successful in 11m17s
Required
Details
CI / status-check (pull_request) Successful in 4s
Details
This pull request doesn't have enough approvals yet. 0 of 1 approvals granted.
This branch is out-of-date with the base branch
You are not authorized to merge this pull request.
View command line instructions

Checkout

From your project repository, check out a new branch and test the changes.
git fetch -u origin bugfix/m3.6.0-ci-pipeline-flakiness-stabilization:bugfix/m3.6.0-ci-pipeline-flakiness-stabilization
git switch bugfix/m3.6.0-ci-pipeline-flakiness-stabilization
Sign in to join this conversation.
Reviewers
No reviewers
HAL9001
Labels
Clear labels   
auto/needs-reevaluation
Controller deferred this PR; awaiting Phase 6+ scope-evaluator or operator re-enablement.

  
controller-managed
Auto-agents controller manages this PR/issue (see tools/controller/deploy/RUNBOOK.md). Remove this label to abandon controller management.

  
auto/blocked-by-deps
PR blocked by an open issue dependency. Operator must close the dep (or remove the dependency link) before the merge driver can act. Auto-cleared by merge_drive when no open deps remain.

  
auto/ci-timeout
Most recent merge cycle hit CI timeout. Driver excludes this PR while last merge_cycle row is < 30 min old; label persists thereafter as visible history.

  
auto/claimed-implementer
Currently being processed by an implementer worker.

  
auto/claimed-merge
Currently being processed by the merge driver.

  
auto/claimed-reviewer
Currently being processed by a reviewer worker.

  
auto/driver-down
Merge driver heartbeat stale; pipeline halted. Closed automatically on next clean tick.

  
auto/invariant-violation
Detected master commit violating the strict merge invariant. Tracked as an issue (not a PR label); kept here for label completeness.

  
auto/last-attempt-tier-0
In-cycle escalation: most recent attempt ran at the Tier 0 slot (`tier-0`). Slot's model defined in .opencode/models/tiers.yaml.

  
auto/last-attempt-tier-1
In-cycle escalation: most recent attempt ran at the Tier 1 slot (`tier-1`). Slot's model defined in .opencode/models/tiers.yaml.

  
auto/last-attempt-tier-2
In-cycle escalation: most recent attempt ran at the Tier 2 slot (`tier-2`). Slot's model defined in .opencode/models/tiers.yaml. Gated behind IMPLEMENTER_ESCALATION_TIER2_ENABLED.

  
auto/last-attempt-tier-min
In-cycle escalation: most recent attempt ran at the Tier -1 slot (`tier-min`). Slot's model defined in .opencode/models/tiers.yaml. Suffix is ``-min`` (not ``--1``) so the Forgejo UI reads naturally.

  
Automation Tracking
Tracking issues used by the AI Automation system for agents to communicate and report.

  
auto/needs-conflict-resolution
Rebase conflict needs LLM conflict-resolver.

  
auto/needs-implementer
Failing CI needs implementer attention.

  
auto/postmortem
Documenting a driver incident or rollback.

  
auto/ready-to-merge
Reviewer has APPROVED this PR and no later REQUEST_CHANGES is outstanding. The merge driver requires this label to even consider a PR for merging. Set by the reviewer worker on APPROVE; cleared on REQUEST_CHANGES.

  
auto/restart-throttled
Train repeatedly lost master-tempo races. Driver excludes via merge_cycle until cooldown elapses; label persists as visible history.

  
auto/revert
Revert PR backing out an invariant violation. Fast-tracked through the merge driver.

  
auto/sentinel
Sentinel PR duplicated from upstream into a personal fork by tools/duplicate_prs_to_fork.py for pipeline testing. Lives only in the fork; the canonical pipeline never sees it.

  
auto/stale-inactivity
No implementer activity for N days. Flagged for human review. Auto-cleared on next push to head branch.

  
auto/unstable
Repeatedly fails on current master (>= 3 ci-fail-on-rebased-sha releases in 12 h). Excluded from driver until human triage.

  
Blocked
A ticket in a blocked state and unable to complete until some other task is completed first.

  
Bounty
$100
 A bounty of $100 for any open-source contributor who provides a MR that solves this issue

  
Bounty
$1000
 A bounty of $1000 for any open-source contributor who provides a MR that solves this issue

  
Bounty
$10000
 A bounty of $10000 for any open-source contributor who provides a MR that solves this issue

  
Bounty
$20
 A bounty of $20 for any open-source contributor who provides a MR that solves this issue

  
Bounty
$2000
 A bounty of $2000 for any open-source contributor who provides a MR that solves this issue

  
Bounty
$250
 A bounty of $250 for any open-source contributor who provides a MR that solves this issue

  
Bounty
$50
 A bounty of $50 for any open-source contributor who provides a MR that solves this issue

  
Bounty
$500
 A bounty of $500 for any open-source contributor who provides a MR that solves this issue

  
Bounty
$5000
 A bounty of $5000 for any open-source contributor who provides a MR that solves this issue

  
Bounty
$750
 A bounty of $750 for any open-source contributor who provides a MR that solves this issue

  
MoSCoW
Could have
 Could have feature in order to satisfy the epic/legendary.

  
MoSCoW
Must have
 Must have feature in order to satisfy the epic/legendary.

  
MoSCoW
Should have
 Should have feature in order to satisfy the epic/legendary.

  
Needs Feedback
There are questions in the ticket that can not be completed until the project owner provides clarity.

  
Points
1
 1 man-hours worth of work for an expert with no learning curve.

  
Points
13
 13 man-hours worth of work for an expert with no learning curve.

  
Points
2
 2 man-hours worth of work for an expert with no learning curve.

  
Points
21
 21 man-hours worth of work for an expert with no learning curve.

  
Points
3
 3 man-hours worth of work for an expert with no learning curve.

  
Points
34
 34 man-hours worth of work for an expert with no learning curve.

  
Points
5
 5 man-hours worth of work for an expert with no learning curve.

  
Points
55
 55 man-hours worth of work for an expert with no learning curve.

  
Points
8
 8 man-hours worth of work for an expert with no learning curve.

  
Points
88
 88 man-hours worth of work for an expert with no learning curve.

  
Priority
Backlog
 This ticket has backlogged priority and is not to be worked on yet

  
Priority
CI Blocker
 Critical priority issue that blocks CI/CD pipeline and prevents PR merges

  
Priority
Critical
 The priority is critical

  
Priority
High
 The priority is high

  
Priority
Low
 The priority is low

  
Priority
Medium
 The priority is medium

  
Signed-off: Owner
When an epic or legendary is in review it must be signed off by owner, tech lead, and scrum master before being marked as completed.

  
Signed-off: Scrum Master
When an epic or legendary is in review it must be signed off by owner, tech lead, and scrum master before being marked as completed.

  
Signed-off: Tech Lead
When an epic or legendary is in review it must be signed off by owner, tech lead, and scrum master before being marked as completed.

  
Spike
A ticket for learning a tool or technology that is needed to be able to do future planning and design.

  
State
Completed
 The ticket has been fully implemented, completed, and merged with the source code. This label should only be applied once a ticket is closed.

  
State
Duplicate
 A ticket that represents the same content as an existing ticket.

  
State
In Progress
 A ticket that is actively being developed.

  
State
In Review
 A ticket that has had some code completed to implement but is waiting to pass peer review and is not yet merged in.

  
State
Paused
 This ticket's work started but wasn't finished. It's on hold (likely in a feature branch) and will be resumed later, either due to a blocker or a delay.

  
State
Unverified
 All new tickets start in this state. A developer may set it to show the ticket is unverified. This means we haven't agreed to work on it. It will either move to a verified state or be closed as wontdo.

  
State
Verified
 The issue has been verified by a developer as legitimate. It will be worked on and verified tickets are now considered part of the backlog.

  
State
Wont Do
 This ticket has been decided it wont be done. This may mean the bug has been determined to not be real (cant verify) or the feature is one we have decided we dont want to adopt.

  
Type
Automation
 Any edits or discussion about the AI automated coding system.

  
Type
Bug
 Something that doesnt work as intended.

  
Type
Discussion
 Anytime a ticket represents a discussion about a subject and doesnt fall into one of the other categories.

  
Type
Documentation
 An error or improvement needed in the documentation.

  
Type
Epic
 Any first tier epic. That is, an epic which contains only issues as children and will not have sub-epics.

  
Type
Feature
 Some new functionality not present.

  
Type
Legendary
 A type of Epic which will contain other Epics.

  
Type
Refactor
 A code change that restructures existing code without changing its external behavior.

  
Type
Support
 Someone needs help using the project.

  
Type
Task
 A generic task that doesnt fit into the other type categories.

  
Type
Testing
 Work exclusively focusing on fixing or expanding testing.

No labels
auto/needs-reevaluation
controller-managed
auto/blocked-by-deps
auto/ci-timeout
auto/claimed-implementer
auto/claimed-merge
auto/claimed-reviewer
auto/driver-down
auto/invariant-violation
auto/last-attempt-tier-0
auto/last-attempt-tier-1
auto/last-attempt-tier-2
auto/last-attempt-tier-min
Automation Tracking
auto/needs-conflict-resolution
auto/needs-implementer
auto/postmortem
auto/ready-to-merge
auto/restart-throttled
auto/revert
auto/sentinel
auto/stale-inactivity
auto/unstable
Blocked
Bounty
$100
Bounty
$1000
Bounty
$10000
Bounty
$20
Bounty
$2000
Bounty
$250
Bounty
$50
Bounty
$500
Bounty
$5000
Bounty
$750
MoSCoW
Could have
MoSCoW
Must have
MoSCoW
Should have
Needs Feedback
Points
1
Points
13
Points
2
Points
21
Points
3
Points
34
Points
5
Points
55
Points
8
Points
88
Priority
Backlog
Priority
CI Blocker
Priority
Critical
Priority
High
Priority
Low
Priority
Medium
Signed-off: Owner
Signed-off: Scrum Master
Signed-off: Tech Lead
Spike
State
Completed
State
Duplicate
State
In Progress
State
In Review
State
Paused
State
Unverified
State
Verified
State
Wont Do
Type
Automation
Type
Bug
Type
Discussion
Type
Documentation
Type
Epic
Type
Feature
Type
Legendary
Type
Refactor
Type
Support
Type
Task
Type
Testing
Milestone
Clear milestone
No items
No milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No items
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
No assignees
2 participants
Notifications
Due date
The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format "yyyy-mm-dd".

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference
cleveragents/cleveragents-core!11119
No description provided.