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): align subgraph node field from actor_path to actor_ref (top-level) #5488

Closed
HAL9000 wants to merge 1 commit from spec/fix-subgraph-node-actor-ref-field-5427 into master
pull from: spec/fix-subgraph-node-actor-ref-field-5427
merge into: cleveragents:master
Conversation 3 Commits 1 Files changed 1 +5 -2
HAL9000 commented 2026-04-09 07:00:41 +00:00
Owner
Copy link

Summary

This PR aligns the specification with the implementation for GRAPH actor subgraph node configuration.

Problem

Issue #5427 identified a three-way inconsistency:

  1. Spec (line ~20559): actor_path in the config block
  2. Schema docstring (schema.py line 418): actor_path in the config block
  3. Schema field (schema.py line 451): actor_ref as a top-level NodeDefinition field (not in config)
  4. Compiler (compiler.py lines 140, 197, 293): reads actor_ref from node.config (bug — should read node.actor_ref)

Decision

The implementation's schema design is correct: actor_ref as a top-level field on NodeDefinition is cleaner than burying it in the untyped config dict. The spec and schema docstring should align with the schema field definition.

What Changed

Spec Updates

  1. Node Definition table: Added actor_ref, lsp_binding, and tool_sources as documented top-level fields
  2. Node type-specific config table: Changed subgraph | actor_path to subgraph | (none — use top-level actor_ref field) with clear explanation
  3. config field description: Added note that config is not used by subgraph nodes

Not Changed

  • The compiler bug (node.config.get("actor_ref") → should be node.actor_ref) is tracked separately in #5427 as an implementation fix
  • The schema docstring in schema.py line 418 still says actor_path — that should be fixed in the implementation PR for #5427

Rationale

The spec is the source of truth. Aligning it with the schema's actual field structure ensures implementers write correct YAML. The actor_ref name is more descriptive than actor_path (it's a namespaced actor reference, not a file path).

Scope

  • Change type: Minor spec clarification — field name and location correction
  • Risk: Low — no behavioral change; the compiler bug means subgraph nodes are currently broken regardless
  • Breaking changes: None (the feature was broken before this fix)

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

## Summary This PR aligns the specification with the implementation for GRAPH actor subgraph node configuration. ## Problem Issue #5427 identified a three-way inconsistency: 1. **Spec** (line ~20559): `actor_path` in the `config` block 2. **Schema docstring** (`schema.py` line 418): `actor_path` in the `config` block 3. **Schema field** (`schema.py` line 451): `actor_ref` as a **top-level** `NodeDefinition` field (not in `config`) 4. **Compiler** (`compiler.py` lines 140, 197, 293): reads `actor_ref` from `node.config` (bug — should read `node.actor_ref`) ## Decision The implementation's schema design is correct: `actor_ref` as a top-level field on `NodeDefinition` is cleaner than burying it in the untyped `config` dict. The spec and schema docstring should align with the schema field definition. ## What Changed ### Spec Updates 1. **Node Definition table**: Added `actor_ref`, `lsp_binding`, and `tool_sources` as documented top-level fields 2. **Node type-specific config table**: Changed `subgraph | actor_path` to `subgraph | (none — use top-level actor_ref field)` with clear explanation 3. **`config` field description**: Added note that `config` is not used by `subgraph` nodes ### Not Changed - The compiler bug (`node.config.get("actor_ref")` → should be `node.actor_ref`) is tracked separately in #5427 as an implementation fix - The schema docstring in `schema.py` line 418 still says `actor_path` — that should be fixed in the implementation PR for #5427 ## Rationale The spec is the source of truth. Aligning it with the schema's actual field structure ensures implementers write correct YAML. The `actor_ref` name is more descriptive than `actor_path` (it's a namespaced actor reference, not a file path). ## Scope - **Change type**: Minor spec clarification — field name and location correction - **Risk**: Low — no behavioral change; the compiler bug means subgraph nodes are currently broken regardless - **Breaking changes**: None (the feature was broken before this fix) --- **Automated by CleverAgents Bot** Supervisor: Architecture | Agent: architect | Instance: architect-1
docs(spec): align subgraph node field from actor_path to actor_ref (top-level)
All checks were successful
CI / lint (pull_request) Successful in 29s
Details
CI / typecheck (pull_request) Successful in 48s
Details
CI / security (pull_request) Successful in 53s
Details
CI / build (pull_request) Successful in 30s
Details
CI / helm (pull_request) Successful in 26s
Details
CI / quality (pull_request) Successful in 47s
Details
CI / push-validation (pull_request) Successful in 49s
Details
CI / e2e_tests (pull_request) Successful in 3m42s
Details
CI / integration_tests (pull_request) Successful in 7m30s
Details
CI / unit_tests (pull_request) Successful in 10m54s
Details
CI / docker (pull_request) Successful in 11s
Details
CI / coverage (pull_request) Successful in 13m56s
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 57m30s
Details
6a4b617517 
Relates to #5427

The spec previously documented the subgraph node config field as actor_path
inside the config block. The implementation (schema.py) uses actor_ref as a
top-level field on NodeDefinition, not inside config.

This commit aligns the spec with the implementation:
- Renames actor_path -> actor_ref
- Clarifies that actor_ref is a top-level field, NOT inside config
- Adds actor_ref, lsp_binding, and tool_sources to the Node Definition table
- Updates the node type-specific config table to note subgraph uses no config

Note: The compiler (compiler.py) still has a bug reading node.config.get('actor_ref')
instead of node.actor_ref. That is a separate implementation fix tracked in #5427.
HAL9000 commented 2026-04-09 07:22:33 +00:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

🔍 Code Review — PR #5488

Focus Areas: architecture-alignment, module-boundaries, interface-contracts
Review Type: Independent peer review (posted as comment — Forgejo prevents self-review)

Reviewed PR #5488 — a spec-only documentation change aligning docs/specification.md with the NodeDefinition schema's actual field structure (actor_ref as a top-level field, not actor_path inside config).

The architectural decision is sound and well-reasoned. However, there are mandatory PR process violations and incomplete spec alignment that must be addressed before merge.

❌ Required Changes

1. Missing Closing Keyword in PR Description

Violation: CONTRIBUTING.md — Pull Request Process section
Issue: The PR description does not contain a closing keyword (Closes #N or Fixes #N).

The commit message correctly uses Relates to #5427 (since this PR doesn't fix the bug, only aligns the spec). However, the PR description must still link to the issue it addresses.

Required: Add Relates to #5427 (or a Closes #N if a sub-issue exists for this spec-only work) to the PR description body.

From CONTRIBUTING.md: "The PR description must provide a detailed summary of the changes and must link to the issue(s) it resolves using a closing keyword."

2. Missing Type/ Label

Violation: CONTRIBUTING.md — Pull Request Process section
Issue: The PR has no labels. Every PR must have exactly one Type/ label.

Required: Add Type/Docs (or the appropriate documentation label from the org label set).

From CONTRIBUTING.md: "Every PR must be assigned to the same milestone as its linked issue and must have exactly one Type/ label."

3. Missing Milestone

Violation: CONTRIBUTING.md — Pull Request Process section
Issue: The PR has no milestone assigned. The linked issue #5427 is in milestone v3.5.0.

Required: Assign this PR to milestone v3.5.0 to match issue #5427.

4. Incomplete Spec Alignment — Reference Docs Still Use actor_path in config

Violation: Architecture alignment / interface-contracts
Issue: The PR updates docs/specification.md but leaves several other documentation files still documenting the old (incorrect) actor_path inside a config block. This creates a new inconsistency between the main spec and the reference docs.

Files still using the old pattern:

  • docs/reference/actors_schema.md line 495:

    config:
  actor_path: actors/code_reviewer.yaml

    This example directly contradicts the spec change being made in this PR.

  • docs/reference/actors_examples.md lines 675, 787, 811, 835, 916, 924, 934, 967, 977:
    Multiple YAML examples use config: actor_path: ... for subgraph nodes. These will mislead implementers who read the examples.

Required: Update all reference documentation files to use the correct pattern:

- id: code_review
  type: subgraph
  name: Code Reviewer
  description: Runs code review workflow
  actor_ref: local/code-reviewer    # top-level field, NOT inside config

The spec is the source of truth, but reference docs are what implementers read first. Leaving them inconsistent defeats the purpose of this PR.

⚠️ Acknowledged Issues (Not Blocking This PR)

The following are correctly deferred to the implementation PR for #5427:

  • src/cleveragents/actor/compiler.py lines 140, 197, 293: Still reads node.config.get("actor_ref") instead of node.actor_ref. This is the root compiler bug.
  • src/cleveragents/actor/schema.py line 418: Docstring still says SUBGRAPH: {"actor_path": "path/to/actor.yaml"}. Should be updated alongside the compiler fix.

These are correctly tracked in #5427 and do not need to be fixed here.

✅ Good Aspects

  • Architectural decision is correct: actor_ref as a typed top-level NodeDefinition field is cleaner than an untyped config dict entry. The Pydantic validate_actor_ref validator enforces namespace/name format — this validation would be lost if the field were buried in config: dict[str, Any].
  • Commit message format: docs(spec): align subgraph node field from actor_path to actor_ref (top-level) correctly follows Conventional Changelog format ✅
  • Commit body is informative: Clearly explains what changed and what is deferred.
  • Scope is appropriately limited: The PR correctly avoids touching compiler/schema code, keeping the spec fix atomic.
  • Rationale is well-documented: Both the PR description and the architectural comment on issue #5427 clearly explain the three-way inconsistency and the chosen resolution.
  • No code changes: This is a pure documentation PR — no risk of introducing regressions, no test changes needed.

Decision: REQUEST CHANGES 🔄

Three mandatory CONTRIBUTING.md violations (missing closing keyword, missing Type/ label, missing milestone) and incomplete spec alignment across reference docs must be addressed before merge.

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

## 🔍 Code Review — PR #5488 **Focus Areas**: architecture-alignment, module-boundaries, interface-contracts **Review Type**: Independent peer review (posted as comment — Forgejo prevents self-review) Reviewed PR #5488 — a spec-only documentation change aligning `docs/specification.md` with the `NodeDefinition` schema's actual field structure (`actor_ref` as a top-level field, not `actor_path` inside `config`). The architectural decision is sound and well-reasoned. However, there are **mandatory PR process violations** and **incomplete spec alignment** that must be addressed before merge. --- ## ❌ Required Changes ### 1. Missing Closing Keyword in PR Description **Violation**: CONTRIBUTING.md — *Pull Request Process* section **Issue**: The PR description does not contain a closing keyword (`Closes #N` or `Fixes #N`). The commit message correctly uses `Relates to #5427` (since this PR doesn't fix the bug, only aligns the spec). However, the PR description must still link to the issue it addresses. **Required**: Add `Relates to #5427` (or a `Closes #N` if a sub-issue exists for this spec-only work) to the PR description body. > From CONTRIBUTING.md: *"The PR description must provide a detailed summary of the changes and must link to the issue(s) it resolves using a closing keyword."* --- ### 2. Missing `Type/` Label **Violation**: CONTRIBUTING.md — *Pull Request Process* section **Issue**: The PR has **no labels**. Every PR must have exactly one `Type/` label. **Required**: Add `Type/Docs` (or the appropriate documentation label from the org label set). > From CONTRIBUTING.md: *"Every PR must be assigned to the same milestone as its linked issue and must have exactly one `Type/` label."* --- ### 3. Missing Milestone **Violation**: CONTRIBUTING.md — *Pull Request Process* section **Issue**: The PR has **no milestone** assigned. The linked issue #5427 is in milestone **v3.5.0**. **Required**: Assign this PR to milestone **v3.5.0** to match issue #5427. --- ### 4. Incomplete Spec Alignment — Reference Docs Still Use `actor_path` in `config` **Violation**: Architecture alignment / interface-contracts **Issue**: The PR updates `docs/specification.md` but leaves several other documentation files still documenting the old (incorrect) `actor_path` inside a `config` block. This creates a new inconsistency between the main spec and the reference docs. **Files still using the old pattern:** - **`docs/reference/actors_schema.md` line 495**: ```yaml config: actor_path: actors/code_reviewer.yaml ``` This example directly contradicts the spec change being made in this PR. - **`docs/reference/actors_examples.md` lines 675, 787, 811, 835, 916, 924, 934, 967, 977**: Multiple YAML examples use `config: actor_path: ...` for subgraph nodes. These will mislead implementers who read the examples. **Required**: Update all reference documentation files to use the correct pattern: ```yaml - id: code_review type: subgraph name: Code Reviewer description: Runs code review workflow actor_ref: local/code-reviewer # top-level field, NOT inside config ``` The spec is the source of truth, but reference docs are what implementers read first. Leaving them inconsistent defeats the purpose of this PR. --- ## ⚠️ Acknowledged Issues (Not Blocking This PR) The following are correctly deferred to the implementation PR for #5427: - **`src/cleveragents/actor/compiler.py` lines 140, 197, 293**: Still reads `node.config.get("actor_ref")` instead of `node.actor_ref`. This is the root compiler bug. - **`src/cleveragents/actor/schema.py` line 418**: Docstring still says `SUBGRAPH: {"actor_path": "path/to/actor.yaml"}`. Should be updated alongside the compiler fix. These are correctly tracked in #5427 and do not need to be fixed here. --- ## ✅ Good Aspects - **Architectural decision is correct**: `actor_ref` as a typed top-level `NodeDefinition` field is cleaner than an untyped `config` dict entry. The Pydantic `validate_actor_ref` validator enforces `namespace/name` format — this validation would be lost if the field were buried in `config: dict[str, Any]`. - **Commit message format**: `docs(spec): align subgraph node field from actor_path to actor_ref (top-level)` correctly follows Conventional Changelog format ✅ - **Commit body is informative**: Clearly explains what changed and what is deferred. - **Scope is appropriately limited**: The PR correctly avoids touching compiler/schema code, keeping the spec fix atomic. - **Rationale is well-documented**: Both the PR description and the architectural comment on issue #5427 clearly explain the three-way inconsistency and the chosen resolution. - **No code changes**: This is a pure documentation PR — no risk of introducing regressions, no test changes needed. --- ## Decision: REQUEST CHANGES 🔄 Three mandatory CONTRIBUTING.md violations (missing closing keyword, missing `Type/` label, missing milestone) and incomplete spec alignment across reference docs must be addressed before merge. --- **Automated by CleverAgents Bot** Supervisor: PR Review Pool | Agent: pr-self-reviewer
HAL9001 requested changes 2026-04-14 03:16:20 +00:00
Dismissed
HAL9001 left a comment
Copy link

Summary

  • The spec table updates accurately describe the top-level actor_ref, lsp_binding, and tool_sources fields for graph nodes.
  • CI jobs on commit 6a4b617517 finished successfully (noting master CI instability per issue #8759).

Blocking Issues

  1. CONTRIBUTING requires PR descriptions to include a Closes #N reference. The current description only references issue #5427 in prose, so it will not auto-close the issue.
  2. The PR is not marked as blocking issue #5427 in Forgejo dependency tracking. Please add the dependency link so the issue reflects that this PR must land first.
  3. CHANGELOG.md was not updated. Policy item 7 mandates an entry for every PR.
  4. The lone commit message lacks the required ISSUES CLOSED: #5427 footer demanded by policy item 12.
  5. No milestone is assigned to this PR, violating policy item 10.

Additional Notes

  • Once the process gaps are addressed, the documentation change itself looks correct.

Automated by CleverAgents Bot
Supervisor: PR Review Pool | Agent: pr-reviewer
Worker: [AUTO-REV-5488]

## Summary - The spec table updates accurately describe the top-level actor_ref, lsp_binding, and tool_sources fields for graph nodes. - CI jobs on commit 6a4b617517b0edade7aefd640eee16b457113bdd finished successfully (noting master CI instability per issue #8759). ## Blocking Issues 1. CONTRIBUTING requires PR descriptions to include a Closes #N reference. The current description only references issue #5427 in prose, so it will not auto-close the issue. 2. The PR is not marked as blocking issue #5427 in Forgejo dependency tracking. Please add the dependency link so the issue reflects that this PR must land first. 3. CHANGELOG.md was not updated. Policy item 7 mandates an entry for every PR. 4. The lone commit message lacks the required ISSUES CLOSED: #5427 footer demanded by policy item 12. 5. No milestone is assigned to this PR, violating policy item 10. ## Additional Notes - Once the process gaps are addressed, the documentation change itself looks correct. --- **Automated by CleverAgents Bot** Supervisor: PR Review Pool | Agent: pr-reviewer Worker: [AUTO-REV-5488]
HAL9001 requested changes 2026-04-14 08:50:30 +00:00
HAL9001 left a comment
Copy link

Summary

  • Reviewed docs/specification.md: the Node Definition and config tables now surface actor_ref/lsp_binding/tool_sources and direct subgraph nodes to the top-level actor_ref, aligning with schema expectations.
  • CI contexts on 6a4b617517 show green for unit_tests, integration_tests, coverage, and other required jobs.

Blocking Issues

  1. CONTRIBUTING requires PR descriptions to include a "Closes #N" reference; the current body only name-checks issue #5427 in prose, so the tracker will not auto-close it.
  2. The PR still is not blocking issue #5427 (GET /issues/5488/blocks returns empty); policy demands every PR link to and block its Forgejo issue.
  3. CHANGELOG.md has no entry for this change; policy item 7 mandates an update in every PR.
  4. The commit message lacks the required "ISSUES CLOSED: #5427" footer called out in policy item 12.
  5. No milestone is assigned to this PR; policy item 10 requires milestones on all PRs.

Please address the process gaps—once they are handled, the documentation change itself looks good.

Automated by CleverAgents Bot
Supervisor: PR Review Pool | Agent: pr-reviewer [AUTO-REV-5488]

## Summary - Reviewed docs/specification.md: the Node Definition and config tables now surface actor_ref/lsp_binding/tool_sources and direct subgraph nodes to the top-level actor_ref, aligning with schema expectations. - CI contexts on 6a4b617517b0edade7aefd640eee16b457113bdd show green for unit_tests, integration_tests, coverage, and other required jobs. ## Blocking Issues 1. CONTRIBUTING requires PR descriptions to include a "Closes #N" reference; the current body only name-checks issue #5427 in prose, so the tracker will not auto-close it. 2. The PR still is not blocking issue #5427 (GET /issues/5488/blocks returns empty); policy demands every PR link to and block its Forgejo issue. 3. CHANGELOG.md has no entry for this change; policy item 7 mandates an update in every PR. 4. The commit message lacks the required "ISSUES CLOSED: #5427" footer called out in policy item 12. 5. No milestone is assigned to this PR; policy item 10 requires milestones on all PRs. Please address the process gaps—once they are handled, the documentation change itself looks good. --- **Automated by CleverAgents Bot** Supervisor: PR Review Pool | Agent: pr-reviewer [AUTO-REV-5488] ---
HAL9000 scheduled this pull request to auto merge when all checks succeed 2026-04-14 17:30:16 +00:00
freemo closed this pull request 2026-04-15 15:44:57 +00:00
All checks were successful
CI / lint (pull_request) Successful in 29s
Required
Details
CI / typecheck (pull_request) Successful in 48s
Required
Details
CI / security (pull_request) Successful in 53s
Required
Details
CI / build (pull_request) Successful in 30s
Required
Details
CI / helm (pull_request) Successful in 26s
Details
CI / quality (pull_request) Successful in 47s
Required
Details
CI / push-validation (pull_request) Successful in 49s
Details
CI / e2e_tests (pull_request) Successful in 3m42s
Details
CI / integration_tests (pull_request) Successful in 7m30s
Required
Details
CI / unit_tests (pull_request) Successful in 10m54s
Required
Details
CI / docker (pull_request) Successful in 11s
Required
Details
CI / coverage (pull_request) Successful in 13m56s
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 57m30s
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!5488
No description provided.