feat(examples/actors/code_review.yaml): add a new code review tool #458
Merged
brent.edwards
merged 2 commits from 2026-03-19 22:42:16 +00:00
feature/code-reviewer into master
Labels
Clear labels
auto/needs-reevaluation
controller-managed
overdue
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
Needs Feedback
Signed-off: Owner
Signed-off: Scrum Master
Signed-off: Tech Lead
Spike
Controller deferred this PR; awaiting Phase 6+ scope-evaluator or operator re-enablement.
Auto-agents controller manages this PR/issue (see tools/controller/deploy/RUNBOOK.md). Remove this label to abandon controller management.
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.
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.
Currently being processed by an implementer worker.
Currently being processed by the merge driver.
Currently being processed by a reviewer worker.
Merge driver heartbeat stale; pipeline halted. Closed automatically on next clean tick.
Detected master commit violating the strict merge invariant. Tracked as an issue (not a PR label); kept here for label completeness.
In-cycle escalation: most recent attempt ran at the Tier 0 slot (`tier-0`). Slot's model defined in .opencode/models/tiers.yaml.
In-cycle escalation: most recent attempt ran at the Tier 1 slot (`tier-1`). Slot's model defined in .opencode/models/tiers.yaml.
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.
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.
Tracking issues used by the AI Automation system for agents to communicate and report.
Rebase conflict needs LLM conflict-resolver.
Failing CI needs implementer attention.
Documenting a driver incident or rollback.
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.
Train repeatedly lost master-tempo races. Driver excludes via merge_cycle until cooldown elapses; label persists as visible history.
Revert PR backing out an invariant violation. Fast-tracked through the merge driver.
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.
No implementer activity for N days. Flagged for human review. Auto-cleared on next push to head branch.
Repeatedly fails on current master (>= 3 ci-fail-on-rebased-sha releases in 12 h). Excluded from driver until human triage.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
Projects
Clear projects
No project
Assignees
aditya (Aditya Chhabra)
aleenaumair (Aleena Umair)
brent.edwards (Brent Edwards)
CoreRasurae (Luis Mendes)
drew (Drew Morris)
eugen.thaci (Eugen Thaci)
freemo (Jeffrey Phillips Freeman)
HAL9000 (HAL 9000)
HAL9001 (HAL9001)
hamza.khyari (Hamza Khyari)
hurui200320 (Rui Hu)
justin.morris
khird (Kyle Hird)
org.cleveragents
Clear assignees
aditya (Aditya Chhabra)
aleenaumair (Aleena Umair)
brent.edwards (Brent Edwards)
CoreRasurae (Luis Mendes)
drew (Drew Morris)
eugen.thaci (Eugen Thaci)
freemo (Jeffrey Phillips Freeman)
HAL9000 (HAL 9000)
HAL9001 (HAL9001)
hamza.khyari (Hamza Khyari)
hurui200320 (Rui Hu)
justin.morris
khird (Kyle Hird)
org.cleveragents
No Assignees
brent.edwards
brent.edwards
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies
No dependencies set.
Reference: cleveragents/cleveragents-core#458
Reference in New Issue
Block a user
Blocking a user prevents them from interacting with repositories, such as opening or commenting on pull requests or issues. Learn more about blocking a user.
Delete Branch "feature/code-reviewer"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
Summary
Add a
code_review.yamlactor example that uses Claude Opus 4 with file and git tools to perform automated code reviews against the project's review playbook.Changes
examples/actors/code_review.yaml— LLM actor configured withfiles/read_file,files/list_directory, andbuiltin/git-*tools, with a system prompt that readsdocs/development/review-playbook.mdand diffs againstmasterfeatures/actor_examples.feature— bumped example count from 7 to 8 and addedcode_review.yamlto the file listing assertionVerification
nox -e lint— passednox -e typecheck— 0 errorsnox -e format -- --check— all files formattednox -s unit_tests -- features/actor_examples.feature— 25 scenarios passedRebase Notes
4d3499dc)actor_examples.feature: master addedstrategy_with_subplan.yaml(count 7), our branch addscode_review.yaml(count now 8)PM Review — Day 25
Status
Action Items
Priority
Very low — v3.6.0, MoSCoW/Could have. No action needed until current milestone work is resolved.
PM Note (Day 26 — Stale PR Triage):
This PR has been open 8+ days, has a merge conflict, and is tagged v3.6.0/Could Have/Points 1. The PR body has not been filled in beyond the template.
Observations:
feature/code-reviewerhas a merge conflict with masterRelated Issuessection is empty)Recommendation: @brent.edwards @freemo — This PR should be closed until it's ready to be properly submitted. When the time comes (v3.6.0 scope), it should be rebased, linked to a proper issue per CONTRIBUTING.md, and the PR body filled out completely. The feature/code-reviewer branch can be kept for future use.
Please confirm closure or provide a plan to update this PR within 48 hours.
Closing.
@brent.edwards this looks like a great tool. Just test it to make sure it works of course, and if it does it has my approval!
PM Status (Day 31):
This PR is APPROVED by @freemo but has a merge conflict.
Action required: @brent.edwards — rebase and push. Once conflict resolved, this can merge.
Priority: LOW —
Priority/Low,MoSCoW/Could have. Focus on bugs #554/#570 first (see escalation comments on those issues).cd79cebc0cto312b21dcccNew commits pushed, approval review dismissed automatically according to repository settings
Rebased onto master (
4d3499dc), squashed 2 commits + 3 merge commits into a single clean commit (312b21dc).Conflict resolved:
features/actor_examples.feature— master addedstrategy_with_subplan.yaml(count went from 6→7), our branch addscode_review.yaml(count now 8). Both entries preserved.Local checks passed: lint, typecheck, format, unit_tests (25 scenarios in
actor_examples.feature).Ready for merge per @freemo's approval.
PM Review — Day 31 (Specification Update)
Merge conflict detected. This conflict is due to significant specification changes made today (ACP→A2A protocol adoption, TUI overhaul, server architecture redesign — see ADR-047, ADR-048).
Status
Action Required
@brent.edwards — Rebase against
masterwhen ready. This is LOW priority — focus on bugs #554/#570 and TDD work first.Milestone: Remains v3.6.0 (M7 — Advanced Concepts).
PM Review Update — Day 32
Status: Updated since Day 25 stale review
Changes Since Last Review
This PR has been significantly improved since the Day 25 stale review:
4d3499dc), squashed to 1 clean commit.actor_examples.feature(count 7 → 8).Current State
Recommendation
This is a low-priority, low-risk PR (1 story point, Could have). The previous approval was dismissed by the rebase. @freemo: Since you approved the previous commit and you're already the assignee, a quick re-approval of the rebased commit would unblock the merge. No urgency — M7 due Mar 28.
PM Day 36: Code review actor YAML example. Closes related example issue. M7 scope. Low priority. @aditya author.
@brent.edwards Why assigned to me. I approve, just get it working ont he integration tests and then your good. I re-assigned it back to you
PM Status — Day 37 (2026-03-17)
Status: APPROVED by @freemo, but has merge conflicts (again). Reassigned back to @brent.edwards. v3.6.0, Could Have, 1 point — lowest priority.
Blocker: Merge conflict with master. Needs rebase + integration test verification.
Action required:
PM status — Day 37
312b21dcccto907ec6ee5fNew commits pushed, approval review dismissed automatically according to repository settings