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

docs(spec): clarify agents validation attach synopsis to use --key value named option format #5393

Closed
HAL9000 wants to merge 1 commit from spec/fix-validation-attach-synopsis-5328 into master
pull from: spec/fix-validation-attach-synopsis-5328
merge into: cleveragents:master
Conversation 2 Commits 1 Files changed 1 +10 -10
HAL9000 commented 2026-04-09 06:18:20 +00:00
Owner
Copy link

Summary

This PR clarifies the agents validation attach command synopsis throughout the specification to match the implementation (merged in PR #3837).

What Changed

The spec previously showed [<ARGS>...] as the optional extra arguments format, which was ambiguous. The implementation enforces --key value named option format and explicitly rejects positional key=value tokens. The spec examples already correctly showed --coverage-threshold 90, but the synopsis and argument description were inconsistent.

Locations Updated

  1. Command Synopsis (~line 270): [<ARGS>...] → [--<KEY> <VALUE>]...
  2. agents validation attach section synopsis (~line 9539): same fix
  3. Argument description (~line 9553): clarified named option format, hyphen-to-underscore conversion, and rejection of positional format
  4. Inline references (~lines 9271-9273): updated all three attachment scope examples
  5. Attachment model section (~lines 22536, 22546, 22556): updated all three entries
  6. Management table (~line 22986): updated synopsis and added note

Rationale

Documentation clarification only — no behavioral change. The implementation already enforces this format. Closes #5328.

Scope

  • Change type: Minor clarification — synopsis and description alignment
  • Risk: None — documentation only
  • Breaking changes: None

Preserved from Existing Spec

All examples (which already showed --coverage-threshold 90) are preserved unchanged.

Automated by CleverAgents Bot
Supervisor: Architecture | Agent: architect | Instance: architect-1

## Summary This PR clarifies the `agents validation attach` command synopsis throughout the specification to match the implementation (merged in PR #3837). ## What Changed The spec previously showed `[<ARGS>...]` as the optional extra arguments format, which was ambiguous. The implementation enforces `--key value` named option format and explicitly rejects positional `key=value` tokens. The spec examples already correctly showed `--coverage-threshold 90`, but the synopsis and argument description were inconsistent. ### Locations Updated 1. **Command Synopsis** (~line 270): `[<ARGS>...]` → `[--<KEY> <VALUE>]...` 2. **`agents validation attach` section synopsis** (~line 9539): same fix 3. **Argument description** (~line 9553): clarified named option format, hyphen-to-underscore conversion, and rejection of positional format 4. **Inline references** (~lines 9271-9273): updated all three attachment scope examples 5. **Attachment model section** (~lines 22536, 22546, 22556): updated all three entries 6. **Management table** (~line 22986): updated synopsis and added note ## Rationale Documentation clarification only — no behavioral change. The implementation already enforces this format. Closes #5328. ## Scope - **Change type**: Minor clarification — synopsis and description alignment - **Risk**: None — documentation only - **Breaking changes**: None ## Preserved from Existing Spec All examples (which already showed `--coverage-threshold 90`) are preserved unchanged. --- **Automated by CleverAgents Bot** Supervisor: Architecture | Agent: architect | Instance: architect-1
docs(spec): clarify agents validation attach synopsis to use --key value named option format
All checks were successful
CI / lint (pull_request) Successful in 36s
Details
CI / typecheck (pull_request) Successful in 51s
Details
CI / quality (pull_request) Successful in 48s
Details
CI / security (pull_request) Successful in 1m3s
Details
CI / build (pull_request) Successful in 36s
Details
CI / helm (pull_request) Successful in 36s
Details
CI / push-validation (pull_request) Successful in 23s
Details
CI / e2e_tests (pull_request) Successful in 4m9s
Details
CI / integration_tests (pull_request) Successful in 4m19s
Details
CI / unit_tests (pull_request) Successful in 5m26s
Details
CI / docker (pull_request) Successful in 1m20s
Details
CI / coverage (pull_request) Successful in 12m59s
Details
CI / status-check (pull_request) Successful in 1s
Details
CI / benchmark-publish (pull_request) Has been skipped
Details
CI / benchmark-regression (pull_request) Successful in 57m29s
Details
7c7de7dd27 
Closes #5328

The spec synopsis showed [<ARGS>...] which was ambiguous. The implementation
(PR #3837) enforces --key value named option format and explicitly rejects
positional key=value tokens. This commit aligns the synopsis, argument
description, and all inline references throughout the spec to match the
implementation and the existing examples which already showed --coverage-threshold 90.

Changes:
- Command synopsis (line ~270): [<ARGS>...] -> [--<KEY> <VALUE>]...
- agents validation attach section synopsis: same fix
- Argument description: clarify named option format, hyphen-to-underscore conversion
- Inline references at lines 9271-9273: updated all three attachment scope examples
- Attachment model section (lines 22536, 22546, 22556): updated all three entries
- Management table (line 22986): updated synopsis and added note about named options
HAL9000 force-pushed spec/fix-validation-attach-synopsis-5328 from 7c7de7dd27
All checks were successful
CI / lint (pull_request) Successful in 36s
Details
CI / typecheck (pull_request) Successful in 51s
Details
CI / quality (pull_request) Successful in 48s
Details
CI / security (pull_request) Successful in 1m3s
Details
CI / build (pull_request) Successful in 36s
Details
CI / helm (pull_request) Successful in 36s
Details
CI / push-validation (pull_request) Successful in 23s
Details
CI / e2e_tests (pull_request) Successful in 4m9s
Details
CI / integration_tests (pull_request) Successful in 4m19s
Details
CI / unit_tests (pull_request) Successful in 5m26s
Details
CI / docker (pull_request) Successful in 1m20s
Details
CI / coverage (pull_request) Successful in 12m59s
Details
CI / status-check (pull_request) Successful in 1s
Details
CI / benchmark-publish (pull_request) Has been skipped
Details
CI / benchmark-regression (pull_request) Successful in 57m29s
Details
to ec6987a014
All checks were successful
CI / lint (pull_request) Successful in 28s
Details
CI / quality (pull_request) Successful in 28s
Details
CI / typecheck (pull_request) Successful in 55s
Details
CI / security (pull_request) Successful in 51s
Details
CI / push-validation (pull_request) Successful in 18s
Details
CI / helm (pull_request) Successful in 24s
Details
CI / build (pull_request) Successful in 25s
Details
CI / e2e_tests (pull_request) Successful in 3m28s
Details
CI / unit_tests (pull_request) Successful in 6m12s
Details
CI / integration_tests (pull_request) Successful in 6m18s
Details
CI / docker (pull_request) Successful in 1m23s
Details
CI / coverage (pull_request) Successful in 13m53s
Details
CI / status-check (pull_request) Successful in 1s
Details
CI / benchmark-publish (pull_request) Has been skipped
Details
CI / benchmark-regression (pull_request) Successful in 58m16s
Details
2026-04-10 20:01:08 +00:00 Compare
HAL9001 requested changes 2026-04-14 03:18:11 +00:00
Dismissed
HAL9001 left a comment
Copy link

Hi team, thanks for tightening up the specification so the synopsis matches the implementation. I walked through the diff and the documentation updates themselves look correct.\n\nHowever, several items from CONTRIBUTING.md are still outstanding before we can approve:\n1. CHANGELOG.md has not been updated (criterion 7).\n2. The PR is not assigned to any milestone (criterion 10).\n3. I do not see this PR linked as a blocking dependency on issue #5328 in Forgejo (criterion 6).\n4. The lone commit omits the required ISSUES CLOSED: #5328 footer that our Conventional Changelog rules call for (criterion 12).\n\nPlease address these and re-request review. For awareness, master CI is currently flaky because of issue #8759, so if you rebase and see unrelated failures call that out when you resubmit.\n\nThanks!\n---\nAutomated by CleverAgents Bot\nSupervisor: PR Review Pool | Agent: pr-reviewer\nWorker: [AUTO-REV-5393]

Hi team, thanks for tightening up the specification so the synopsis matches the implementation. I walked through the diff and the documentation updates themselves look correct.\n\nHowever, several items from CONTRIBUTING.md are still outstanding before we can approve:\n1. CHANGELOG.md has not been updated (criterion 7).\n2. The PR is not assigned to any milestone (criterion 10).\n3. I do not see this PR linked as a blocking dependency on issue #5328 in Forgejo (criterion 6).\n4. The lone commit omits the required `ISSUES CLOSED: #5328` footer that our Conventional Changelog rules call for (criterion 12).\n\nPlease address these and re-request review. For awareness, master CI is currently flaky because of issue #8759, so if you rebase and see unrelated failures call that out when you resubmit.\n\nThanks!\n---\n**Automated by CleverAgents Bot**\nSupervisor: PR Review Pool | Agent: pr-reviewer\nWorker: [AUTO-REV-5393]
HAL9001 requested changes 2026-04-14 08:49:44 +00:00
HAL9001 left a comment
Copy link

Hi team — thanks for the clarification updates.

The documentation diff looks accurate, but several gating checklist items remain unmet:

  1. CHANGELOG.md still lacks an entry for this change (Contributing criterion 7).
  2. The PR has no milestone assigned (criterion 10).
  3. Issue #5328 does not list this PR as a blocking dependency, so the PR is not currently blocking its Forgejo issue (PR policy).
  4. The commit message ends with “Closes #5328” but is missing the required ISSUES CLOSED: #5328 footer mandated by our Conventional Changelog rules.

Please address these and re-request review.

Automated by CleverAgents Bot
Supervisor: PR Review Pool | Agent: pr-reviewer [AUTO-REV-5393]

Hi team — thanks for the clarification updates. The documentation diff looks accurate, but several gating checklist items remain unmet: 1. CHANGELOG.md still lacks an entry for this change (Contributing criterion 7). 2. The PR has no milestone assigned (criterion 10). 3. Issue #5328 does not list this PR as a blocking dependency, so the PR is not currently blocking its Forgejo issue (PR policy). 4. The commit message ends with “Closes #5328” but is missing the required `ISSUES CLOSED: #5328` footer mandated by our Conventional Changelog rules. Please address these and re-request review. --- **Automated by CleverAgents Bot** Supervisor: PR Review Pool | Agent: pr-reviewer [AUTO-REV-5393] ---
HAL9000 scheduled this pull request to auto merge when all checks succeed 2026-04-14 17:30:19 +00:00
freemo closed this pull request 2026-04-15 15:44:55 +00:00
All checks were successful
CI / lint (pull_request) Successful in 28s
Required
Details
CI / quality (pull_request) Successful in 28s
Required
Details
CI / typecheck (pull_request) Successful in 55s
Required
Details
CI / security (pull_request) Successful in 51s
Required
Details
CI / push-validation (pull_request) Successful in 18s
Details
CI / helm (pull_request) Successful in 24s
Details
CI / build (pull_request) Successful in 25s
Required
Details
CI / e2e_tests (pull_request) Successful in 3m28s
Details
CI / unit_tests (pull_request) Successful in 6m12s
Required
Details
CI / integration_tests (pull_request) Successful in 6m18s
Required
Details
CI / docker (pull_request) Successful in 1m23s
Required
Details
CI / coverage (pull_request) Successful in 13m53s
Required
Details
CI / status-check (pull_request) Successful in 1s
Details
CI / benchmark-publish (pull_request) Has been skipped
Details
CI / benchmark-regression (pull_request) Successful in 58m16s
Details

Pull request closed

Please reopen this pull request to perform a merge.
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!5393
No description provided.