fix(tdd): replace non-standard @tdd_bug tags with @tdd_issue per CONTRIBUTING.md #3292

Merged

freemo merged 1 commit from fix/tdd-bug-tag-compliance-audit into master 2026-04-05 21:12:21 +00:00

Conversation 3 Commits 1 Files changed 3 +3 -3

freemo commented 2026-04-05 09:13:01 +00:00

Owner

Copy link

Summary

Audits all feature files for non-compliant @tdd_bug tag usage and replaces them with the CONTRIBUTING.md-specified @tdd_issue / @tdd_issue_<N> tags.

Problem

Three feature files contained non-standard @tdd_bug and @tdd_bug_<N> tags that violate the CONTRIBUTING.md TDD tag specification. The specification mandates the use of @tdd_issue and @tdd_issue_<N> as the permanent regression reference tags for TDD bug-capture tests.

Changes

File	Before	After
features/tdd_actor_list_no_db_update.feature	@tdd_bug @tdd_bug_797	@tdd_issue @tdd_issue_797
features/tdd_exec_env_resolution_precedence.feature	@tdd_issue @tdd_issue_1080 @tdd_bug @tdd_bug_1080 @mock_only	@tdd_issue @tdd_issue_1080 @mock_only
features/tdd_use_action_automation_profile.feature	@tdd_bug @tdd_bug_1076	@tdd_issue @tdd_issue_1076

Verification

• Zero occurrences of @tdd_bug or @tdd_bug_<N> remain in features/
• validate_tdd_tags() in features/environment.py correctly recognises the updated tags
• nox -s lint ✅ — all checks passed
• nox -s unit_tests ✅ — 14426 scenarios passed, 0 failed

Notes

• tdd_actor_list_no_db_update.feature: Bug #797 is fixed; these are permanent regression guards. No @tdd_expected_fail needed.
• tdd_exec_env_resolution_precedence.feature: Already had correct @tdd_issue tags; only the duplicate @tdd_bug tags were removed. The @tdd_expected_fail on the bug-capturing scenario is preserved.
• tdd_use_action_automation_profile.feature: Bug #1076 (use_action() not propagating automation_profile) is already fixed in the codebase. No @tdd_expected_fail needed.

Closes #2779

---

Automated by CleverAgents Bot
Supervisor: Implementation | Agent: ca-issue-worker

## Summary Audits all feature files for non-compliant `@tdd_bug` tag usage and replaces them with the CONTRIBUTING.md-specified `@tdd_issue` / `@tdd_issue_<N>` tags. ## Problem Three feature files contained non-standard `@tdd_bug` and `@tdd_bug_<N>` tags that violate the CONTRIBUTING.md TDD tag specification. The specification mandates the use of `@tdd_issue` and `@tdd_issue_<N>` as the permanent regression reference tags for TDD bug-capture tests. ## Changes | File | Before | After | |------|--------|-------| | `features/tdd_actor_list_no_db_update.feature` | `@tdd_bug @tdd_bug_797` | `@tdd_issue @tdd_issue_797` | | `features/tdd_exec_env_resolution_precedence.feature` | `@tdd_issue @tdd_issue_1080 @tdd_bug @tdd_bug_1080 @mock_only` | `@tdd_issue @tdd_issue_1080 @mock_only` | | `features/tdd_use_action_automation_profile.feature` | `@tdd_bug @tdd_bug_1076` | `@tdd_issue @tdd_issue_1076` | ## Verification - Zero occurrences of `@tdd_bug` or `@tdd_bug_<N>` remain in `features/` - `validate_tdd_tags()` in `features/environment.py` correctly recognises the updated tags - `nox -s lint` ✅ — all checks passed - `nox -s unit_tests` ✅ — 14426 scenarios passed, 0 failed ## Notes - `tdd_actor_list_no_db_update.feature`: Bug #797 is fixed; these are permanent regression guards. No `@tdd_expected_fail` needed. - `tdd_exec_env_resolution_precedence.feature`: Already had correct `@tdd_issue` tags; only the duplicate `@tdd_bug` tags were removed. The `@tdd_expected_fail` on the bug-capturing scenario is preserved. - `tdd_use_action_automation_profile.feature`: Bug #1076 (`use_action()` not propagating `automation_profile`) is already fixed in the codebase. No `@tdd_expected_fail` needed. Closes #2779 --- **Automated by CleverAgents Bot** Supervisor: Implementation | Agent: ca-issue-worker

freemo added 1 commit 2026-04-05 09:13:01 +00:00

fix(tdd): replace non-standard @tdd_bug tags with @tdd_issue per CONTRIBUTING.md ... 56f424714c

Audit all feature files for non-compliant @tdd_bug tag usage and replace
with the CONTRIBUTING.md-specified @tdd_issue / @tdd_issue_<N> tags.

Three files were affected:

- features/tdd_actor_list_no_db_update.feature:
  @tdd_bug @tdd_bug_797 → @tdd_issue @tdd_issue_797
  (bug #797 is fixed; permanent regression guard, no @tdd_expected_fail)

- features/tdd_exec_env_resolution_precedence.feature:
  Removed duplicate @tdd_bug @tdd_bug_1080 tags; file already had the
  correct @tdd_issue @tdd_issue_1080 tags.

- features/tdd_use_action_automation_profile.feature:
  @tdd_bug @tdd_bug_1076 → @tdd_issue @tdd_issue_1076
  (bug #1076 is fixed in upstream; @tdd_expected_fail not needed)

Zero occurrences of @tdd_bug or @tdd_bug_<N> remain in features/.
All nox quality gates pass: lint ✅  unit_tests ✅ (14426 scenarios passed).

ISSUES CLOSED: #2779

freemo added this to the v3.7.0 milestone 2026-04-05 09:22:32 +00:00

freemo referenced this pull request 2026-04-05 09:29:30 +00:00

UAT: Pre-existing @tdd_bug tags in TDD feature files violate CONTRIBUTING.md TDD tag specification #2779

freemo reviewed 2026-04-05 16:28:42 +00:00

freemo left a comment

Copy link

Review Summary — ca-pr-self-reviewer (APPROVED)

Reviewed PR #3292 with focus on test-coverage-quality, test-scenario-completeness, and test-maintainability.

This is a clean, minimal tag compliance fix that replaces non-standard @tdd_bug / @tdd_bug_<N> tags with the CONTRIBUTING.md-specified @tdd_issue / @tdd_issue_<N> tags across three feature files.

Changes Verified

File	Change	Correct?
features/tdd_actor_list_no_db_update.feature	@tdd_bug @tdd_bug_797 → @tdd_issue @tdd_issue_797	✅ Bug #797 fixed; permanent regression guard
features/tdd_exec_env_resolution_precedence.feature	Removed duplicate @tdd_bug @tdd_bug_1080; kept existing @tdd_issue @tdd_issue_1080 @mock_only	✅ @tdd_expected_fail on scenario preserved (bug #1080 still unfixed)
features/tdd_use_action_automation_profile.feature	@tdd_bug @tdd_bug_1076 → @tdd_issue @tdd_issue_1076	✅ Bug #1076 fixed; no @tdd_expected_fail needed

Standard Criteria

✅ Commit Message: Follows Conventional Changelog format (fix(tdd): ...), includes detailed body and ISSUES CLOSED: #2779 footer
✅ Atomic Commit: Single commit with all related changes
✅ PR Description: Detailed summary with change table, verification steps, and Closes #2779
✅ Labels: Has Type/Bug label
✅ Specification Alignment: Changes align with CONTRIBUTING.md § TDD Issue Test Tags three-tag system
✅ No Forbidden Patterns: No # type: ignore, no code changes, tags-only fix

Deep Dive: Test Coverage Quality

• Tag validation now works correctly: The validate_tdd_tags() function in features/environment.py only recognizes @tdd_issue, @tdd_issue_<N>, and @tdd_expected_fail. The old @tdd_bug tags were invisible to this validation system, meaning tag rule enforcement was silently bypassed for these files. After this fix, all three files are properly recognized and validated.
• No test logic changes: Only metadata tags are modified — scenario definitions, step definitions, and assertions are untouched. Test coverage is unaffected.
• CI verification: PR reports 14,426 scenarios passed with all nox quality gates green.

Deep Dive: Test Scenario Completeness

• tdd_exec_env_resolution_precedence.feature: Correctly preserves the @tdd_expected_fail tag on the bug-capturing scenario (bug #1080 is still unfixed). The @mock_only tag is also preserved. Only the redundant @tdd_bug tags were removed — this is the correct surgical change.
• tdd_use_action_automation_profile.feature: The feature narrative mentions @tdd_expected_fail in descriptive text, but no scenarios actually carry the tag. This is consistent with the PR's claim that bug #1076 is already fixed — the scenarios run as normal regression guards.
• tdd_actor_list_no_db_update.feature: Two scenarios serve as permanent regression guards for bug #797. No @tdd_expected_fail needed since the bug is fixed.

Deep Dive: Test Maintainability

• ✅ Standardization: All TDD test files now use the documented tag convention, making @tdd_issue a reliable filter for all TDD tests across the codebase.
• ✅ Discoverability: grep -r "@tdd_issue" features/ will now correctly find all TDD regression tests.
• ✅ Validation enforcement: validate_tdd_tags() can now properly enforce tag rules (e.g., @tdd_issue_<N> requires @tdd_issue) on these files.

Minor Note (Non-blocking)

⚠️ Milestone mismatch: The linked issue #2779 is assigned to milestone v3.2.0, but this PR is assigned to milestone v3.7.0. Per CONTRIBUTING.md, PRs must be assigned to the same milestone as their linked issue. This should be corrected but does not block the code change itself.

Decision: APPROVED ✅

---

Automated by CleverAgents Bot
Supervisor: PR Review | Agent: ca-pr-self-reviewer

## Review Summary — ca-pr-self-reviewer (APPROVED) Reviewed PR #3292 with focus on **test-coverage-quality**, **test-scenario-completeness**, and **test-maintainability**. This is a clean, minimal tag compliance fix that replaces non-standard `@tdd_bug` / `@tdd_bug_<N>` tags with the CONTRIBUTING.md-specified `@tdd_issue` / `@tdd_issue_<N>` tags across three feature files. ### Changes Verified | File | Change | Correct? | |------|--------|----------| | `features/tdd_actor_list_no_db_update.feature` | `@tdd_bug @tdd_bug_797` → `@tdd_issue @tdd_issue_797` | ✅ Bug #797 fixed; permanent regression guard | | `features/tdd_exec_env_resolution_precedence.feature` | Removed duplicate `@tdd_bug @tdd_bug_1080`; kept existing `@tdd_issue @tdd_issue_1080 @mock_only` | ✅ `@tdd_expected_fail` on scenario preserved (bug #1080 still unfixed) | | `features/tdd_use_action_automation_profile.feature` | `@tdd_bug @tdd_bug_1076` → `@tdd_issue @tdd_issue_1076` | ✅ Bug #1076 fixed; no `@tdd_expected_fail` needed | ### Standard Criteria ✅ **Commit Message**: Follows Conventional Changelog format (`fix(tdd): ...`), includes detailed body and `ISSUES CLOSED: #2779` footer ✅ **Atomic Commit**: Single commit with all related changes ✅ **PR Description**: Detailed summary with change table, verification steps, and `Closes #2779` ✅ **Labels**: Has `Type/Bug` label ✅ **Specification Alignment**: Changes align with CONTRIBUTING.md § TDD Issue Test Tags three-tag system ✅ **No Forbidden Patterns**: No `# type: ignore`, no code changes, tags-only fix ### Deep Dive: Test Coverage Quality - **Tag validation now works correctly**: The `validate_tdd_tags()` function in `features/environment.py` only recognizes `@tdd_issue`, `@tdd_issue_<N>`, and `@tdd_expected_fail`. The old `@tdd_bug` tags were invisible to this validation system, meaning tag rule enforcement was silently bypassed for these files. After this fix, all three files are properly recognized and validated. - **No test logic changes**: Only metadata tags are modified — scenario definitions, step definitions, and assertions are untouched. Test coverage is unaffected. - **CI verification**: PR reports 14,426 scenarios passed with all nox quality gates green. ### Deep Dive: Test Scenario Completeness - **`tdd_exec_env_resolution_precedence.feature`**: Correctly preserves the `@tdd_expected_fail` tag on the bug-capturing scenario (bug #1080 is still unfixed). The `@mock_only` tag is also preserved. Only the redundant `@tdd_bug` tags were removed — this is the correct surgical change. - **`tdd_use_action_automation_profile.feature`**: The feature narrative mentions `@tdd_expected_fail` in descriptive text, but no scenarios actually carry the tag. This is consistent with the PR's claim that bug #1076 is already fixed — the scenarios run as normal regression guards. - **`tdd_actor_list_no_db_update.feature`**: Two scenarios serve as permanent regression guards for bug #797. No `@tdd_expected_fail` needed since the bug is fixed. ### Deep Dive: Test Maintainability - ✅ **Standardization**: All TDD test files now use the documented tag convention, making `@tdd_issue` a reliable filter for all TDD tests across the codebase. - ✅ **Discoverability**: `grep -r "@tdd_issue" features/` will now correctly find all TDD regression tests. - ✅ **Validation enforcement**: `validate_tdd_tags()` can now properly enforce tag rules (e.g., `@tdd_issue_<N>` requires `@tdd_issue`) on these files. ### Minor Note (Non-blocking) ⚠️ **Milestone mismatch**: The linked issue #2779 is assigned to milestone `v3.2.0`, but this PR is assigned to milestone `v3.7.0`. Per CONTRIBUTING.md, PRs must be assigned to the same milestone as their linked issue. This should be corrected but does not block the code change itself. **Decision: APPROVED** ✅ --- **Automated by CleverAgents Bot** Supervisor: PR Review | Agent: ca-pr-self-reviewer

freemo referenced this pull request 2026-04-05 17:51:28 +00:00

[Automated] CleverAgents Build Session - 2026-04-05 #3377

freemo modified the milestone from v3.7.0 to v3.2.0 2026-04-05 17:53:07 +00:00

freemo requested reviews from CoreRasurae, khird 2026-04-05 17:54:07 +00:00

freemo commented 2026-04-05 17:54:18 +00:00

Author

Owner

Copy link

PR Status Update

This PR is ready for review. The following items have been addressed:

✅ Completed Actions

• Milestone corrected: Updated from v3.7.0 → v3.2.0 to match linked issue #2779 (as flagged in the self-review)
• PR body restored: Full description with change table and verification steps is in place
• Review requests sent: @CoreRasurae and @khird have been requested as reviewers

📊 Current CI Status

All 12 substantive checks are passing:

• lint ✅ | typecheck ✅ | unit_tests ✅ | coverage ✅
• integration_tests ✅ | e2e_tests ✅ | build ✅ | docker ✅
• helm ✅ | quality ✅ | security ✅ | status-check ✅
• benchmark-regression ⏳ (non-blocking, still running)
• benchmark-publish ⏳ (non-blocking, still running)

🔍 What This PR Does

Replaces non-standard @tdd_bug / @tdd_bug_<N> tags with the CONTRIBUTING.md-specified @tdd_issue / @tdd_issue_<N> tags across 3 feature files. No logic changes — tags only.

⏳ Awaiting

2 approving reviews required per CONTRIBUTING.md before merge.

---

Automated by CleverAgents Bot
Supervisor: Implementation | Agent: ca-issue-worker

## PR Status Update This PR is ready for review. The following items have been addressed: ### ✅ Completed Actions - **Milestone corrected**: Updated from `v3.7.0` → `v3.2.0` to match linked issue #2779 (as flagged in the self-review) - **PR body restored**: Full description with change table and verification steps is in place - **Review requests sent**: @CoreRasurae and @khird have been requested as reviewers ### 📊 Current CI Status All 12 substantive checks are passing: - lint ✅ | typecheck ✅ | unit_tests ✅ | coverage ✅ - integration_tests ✅ | e2e_tests ✅ | build ✅ | docker ✅ - helm ✅ | quality ✅ | security ✅ | status-check ✅ - benchmark-regression ⏳ (non-blocking, still running) - benchmark-publish ⏳ (non-blocking, still running) ### 🔍 What This PR Does Replaces non-standard `@tdd_bug` / `@tdd_bug_<N>` tags with the CONTRIBUTING.md-specified `@tdd_issue` / `@tdd_issue_<N>` tags across 3 feature files. No logic changes — tags only. ### ⏳ Awaiting 2 approving reviews required per CONTRIBUTING.md before merge. --- **Automated by CleverAgents Bot** Supervisor: Implementation | Agent: ca-issue-worker

freemo added a new dependency 2026-04-05 18:12:40 +00:00

#2779 UAT: Pre-existing @tdd_bug tags in TDD feature files violate CONTRIBUTING.md TDD tag specification

freemo referenced this pull request 2026-04-05 18:13:11 +00:00

[Automated] CleverAgents Build Session - 2026-04-05 #3377

freemo referenced this pull request 2026-04-05 18:19:29 +00:00

[Automated] CleverAgents Build Session - 2026-04-05 #3377

freemo reviewed 2026-04-05 19:44:12 +00:00

freemo left a comment

Copy link

Independent Review — ca-pr-self-reviewer (APPROVED)

⚠️ Posted as COMMENT because Forgejo prevents self-approval. This review recommends APPROVED status for external reviewers.

Reviewed PR #3292 with focus on test-coverage-quality, test-scenario-completeness, and test-maintainability.

This PR performs a targeted audit and fix of non-standard @tdd_bug / @tdd_bug_<N> tags, replacing them with the CONTRIBUTING.md-specified @tdd_issue / @tdd_issue_<N> tags across three feature files. The change is tags-only — no test logic, step definitions, or assertions are modified.

---

Standard Criteria

✅ Commit Message: Follows Conventional Changelog format (fix(tdd): replace non-standard @tdd_bug tags with @tdd_issue per CONTRIBUTING.md). Detailed body explains each file change. Footer has ISSUES CLOSED: #2779.
✅ Atomic Commit: Single commit containing all related changes — no fix-up commits.
✅ PR Description: Detailed summary with change table, verification steps, and Closes #2779.
✅ Labels: Has Type/Bug label.
✅ Milestone: v3.2.0 — matches linked issue #2779.
✅ Specification Alignment: Changes align with CONTRIBUTING.md § TDD Issue Test Tags three-tag system (@tdd_issue, @tdd_issue_<N>, @tdd_expected_fail).
✅ No Forbidden Patterns: No # type: ignore, no code changes.
✅ CI: All quality gates reported passing (lint, typecheck, unit_tests, coverage, integration_tests, etc.).

Changes Verified (master → branch)

File	Master Tags	Branch Tags	Correct?
features/tdd_actor_list_no_db_update.feature	@tdd_bug @tdd_bug_797	@tdd_issue @tdd_issue_797	✅ Bug #797 fixed; permanent regression guard
features/tdd_exec_env_resolution_precedence.feature	@tdd_issue @tdd_issue_1080 @tdd_bug @tdd_bug_1080 @mock_only	@tdd_issue @tdd_issue_1080 @mock_only	✅ Removed duplicate @tdd_bug tags; @tdd_expected_fail on scenario preserved
features/tdd_use_action_automation_profile.feature	@tdd_bug @tdd_bug_1076	@tdd_issue @tdd_issue_1076	✅ Bug #1076 fixed; no @tdd_expected_fail needed

---

Deep Dive: Test Coverage Quality

• Tag validation now functional for these files: The validate_tdd_tags() function in features/environment.py (lines 75–115) only recognizes tdd_issue, tdd_issue_<N> (via _TDD_ISSUE_N_RE), and tdd_expected_fail. The old @tdd_bug tags were completely invisible to this validation system — these files were silently bypassing all TDD tag rule enforcement. After this fix, all three files are properly recognized and validated by the framework.
• No test logic changes: Scenario definitions, step implementations, and assertions are untouched. Test coverage numbers are unaffected.
• CI verification: 14,426 scenarios passed, 0 failed. All nox quality gates green.

Deep Dive: Test Scenario Completeness

• tdd_actor_list_no_db_update.feature (2 scenarios): Permanent regression guards for bug #797 — verifies actor list doesn't call upsert_actor() or set_default_actor(). Bug is fixed; scenarios run as normal passing tests. No @tdd_expected_fail needed. ✅
• tdd_exec_env_resolution_precedence.feature (3 scenarios): One bug-capturing scenario with @tdd_expected_fail (bug #1080 still unfixed), plus two regression guard scenarios. The @mock_only tag is preserved. Only the redundant @tdd_bug tags were removed — correct surgical change. ✅
• tdd_use_action_automation_profile.feature (5 scenarios): Comprehensive coverage of automation profile propagation (action-level, project-scoped, global default, error fallback, plan-level override). No scenarios carry @tdd_expected_fail, consistent with the claim that bug #1076 is fixed. ✅

Deep Dive: Test Maintainability

• ✅ Standardization: All TDD test files now use the documented tag convention, making @tdd_issue a reliable filter for all TDD tests across the codebase.
• ✅ Discoverability: grep -r "@tdd_issue" features/ will now correctly find all TDD regression tests — no more invisible @tdd_bug variants.
• ✅ Validation enforcement: validate_tdd_tags() can now properly enforce tag rules (e.g., @tdd_issue_<N> requires @tdd_issue) on these files, catching future tag misconfigurations.
• ✅ Filtering reliability: Behave tag expressions like @tdd_issue will now correctly include these files when running targeted TDD test suites.

Minor Observations (Non-blocking)

1. Stale feature description in tdd_use_action_automation_profile.feature: The feature narrative still says "These tests assert the expected behavior and will FAIL until the bug is fixed. The @tdd_expected_fail tag inverts the result so CI passes." — but no scenarios carry @tdd_expected_fail and the bug is reportedly fixed. This stale text is pre-existing (present on master before this PR) and outside the scope of this tag-compliance fix, but could be cleaned up in a future housekeeping pass.

Decision: APPROVED ✅

---

Automated by CleverAgents Bot
Supervisor: PR Review | Agent: ca-pr-self-reviewer

## Independent Review — ca-pr-self-reviewer (APPROVED) > ⚠️ Posted as COMMENT because Forgejo prevents self-approval. This review recommends **APPROVED** status for external reviewers. Reviewed PR #3292 with focus on **test-coverage-quality**, **test-scenario-completeness**, and **test-maintainability**. This PR performs a targeted audit and fix of non-standard `@tdd_bug` / `@tdd_bug_<N>` tags, replacing them with the CONTRIBUTING.md-specified `@tdd_issue` / `@tdd_issue_<N>` tags across three feature files. The change is tags-only — no test logic, step definitions, or assertions are modified. --- ### Standard Criteria ✅ **Commit Message**: Follows Conventional Changelog format (`fix(tdd): replace non-standard @tdd_bug tags with @tdd_issue per CONTRIBUTING.md`). Detailed body explains each file change. Footer has `ISSUES CLOSED: #2779`. ✅ **Atomic Commit**: Single commit containing all related changes — no fix-up commits. ✅ **PR Description**: Detailed summary with change table, verification steps, and `Closes #2779`. ✅ **Labels**: Has `Type/Bug` label. ✅ **Milestone**: `v3.2.0` — matches linked issue #2779. ✅ **Specification Alignment**: Changes align with CONTRIBUTING.md § TDD Issue Test Tags three-tag system (`@tdd_issue`, `@tdd_issue_<N>`, `@tdd_expected_fail`). ✅ **No Forbidden Patterns**: No `# type: ignore`, no code changes. ✅ **CI**: All quality gates reported passing (lint, typecheck, unit_tests, coverage, integration_tests, etc.). ### Changes Verified (master → branch) | File | Master Tags | Branch Tags | Correct? | |------|-------------|-------------|----------| | `features/tdd_actor_list_no_db_update.feature` | `@tdd_bug @tdd_bug_797` | `@tdd_issue @tdd_issue_797` | ✅ Bug #797 fixed; permanent regression guard | | `features/tdd_exec_env_resolution_precedence.feature` | `@tdd_issue @tdd_issue_1080 @tdd_bug @tdd_bug_1080 @mock_only` | `@tdd_issue @tdd_issue_1080 @mock_only` | ✅ Removed duplicate `@tdd_bug` tags; `@tdd_expected_fail` on scenario preserved | | `features/tdd_use_action_automation_profile.feature` | `@tdd_bug @tdd_bug_1076` | `@tdd_issue @tdd_issue_1076` | ✅ Bug #1076 fixed; no `@tdd_expected_fail` needed | --- ### Deep Dive: Test Coverage Quality - **Tag validation now functional for these files**: The `validate_tdd_tags()` function in `features/environment.py` (lines 75–115) only recognizes `tdd_issue`, `tdd_issue_<N>` (via `_TDD_ISSUE_N_RE`), and `tdd_expected_fail`. The old `@tdd_bug` tags were completely invisible to this validation system — these files were silently bypassing all TDD tag rule enforcement. After this fix, all three files are properly recognized and validated by the framework. - **No test logic changes**: Scenario definitions, step implementations, and assertions are untouched. Test coverage numbers are unaffected. - **CI verification**: 14,426 scenarios passed, 0 failed. All nox quality gates green. ### Deep Dive: Test Scenario Completeness - **`tdd_actor_list_no_db_update.feature`** (2 scenarios): Permanent regression guards for bug #797 — verifies `actor list` doesn't call `upsert_actor()` or `set_default_actor()`. Bug is fixed; scenarios run as normal passing tests. No `@tdd_expected_fail` needed. ✅ - **`tdd_exec_env_resolution_precedence.feature`** (3 scenarios): One bug-capturing scenario with `@tdd_expected_fail` (bug #1080 still unfixed), plus two regression guard scenarios. The `@mock_only` tag is preserved. Only the redundant `@tdd_bug` tags were removed — correct surgical change. ✅ - **`tdd_use_action_automation_profile.feature`** (5 scenarios): Comprehensive coverage of automation profile propagation (action-level, project-scoped, global default, error fallback, plan-level override). No scenarios carry `@tdd_expected_fail`, consistent with the claim that bug #1076 is fixed. ✅ ### Deep Dive: Test Maintainability - ✅ **Standardization**: All TDD test files now use the documented tag convention, making `@tdd_issue` a reliable filter for all TDD tests across the codebase. - ✅ **Discoverability**: `grep -r "@tdd_issue" features/` will now correctly find all TDD regression tests — no more invisible `@tdd_bug` variants. - ✅ **Validation enforcement**: `validate_tdd_tags()` can now properly enforce tag rules (e.g., `@tdd_issue_<N>` requires `@tdd_issue`) on these files, catching future tag misconfigurations. - ✅ **Filtering reliability**: Behave tag expressions like `@tdd_issue` will now correctly include these files when running targeted TDD test suites. ### Minor Observations (Non-blocking) 1. **Stale feature description in `tdd_use_action_automation_profile.feature`**: The feature narrative still says _"These tests assert the expected behavior and will FAIL until the bug is fixed. The @tdd_expected_fail tag inverts the result so CI passes."_ — but no scenarios carry `@tdd_expected_fail` and the bug is reportedly fixed. This stale text is **pre-existing** (present on master before this PR) and outside the scope of this tag-compliance fix, but could be cleaned up in a future housekeeping pass. **Decision: APPROVED** ✅ --- **Automated by CleverAgents Bot** Supervisor: PR Review | Agent: ca-pr-self-reviewer

freemo referenced this pull request 2026-04-05 19:48:58 +00:00

[Automated] CleverAgents Build Session - 2026-04-05 #3377

freemo referenced this pull request 2026-04-05 20:07:24 +00:00

[Automated] CleverAgents Build Session - 2026-04-05 #3572

freemo merged commit 3d7f213527 into master 2026-04-05 21:12:15 +00:00

freemo removed this from the v3.2.0 milestone 2026-04-06 20:50:49 +00:00

Sign in to join this conversation.

Reviewers

No reviewers

khird

CoreRasurae

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

1 participant

Notifications

Subscribe

Due date

The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format "yyyy-mm-dd".

No due date set.

Blocks

#2779 UAT: Pre-existing @tdd_bug tags in TDD feature files violate CONTRIBUTING.md TDD tag specification

cleveragents/cleveragents-core

Reference

cleveragents/cleveragents-core!3292

No description provided.