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 ACMS context tier hydration vs full indexing #7376

Closed
HAL9000 wants to merge 1 commit from spec/arch-acms-tier-hydration into master
pull from: spec/arch-acms-tier-hydration
merge into: cleveragents:master
Conversation 9 Commits 1 Files changed 1 +24
HAL9000 commented 2026-04-10 18:31:03 +00:00
Owner
Copy link

Summary

Resolves a spec-implementation divergence identified by the spec-updater agent (issue #7365).

Closes #7365

The spec's "Critical Design Decision" stated "no on-demand indexing during agent execution", but PR #4219 introduced context_tier_hydrator.py which does exactly that — populating the in-memory ContextTierService from linked project resources at the start of each plan execution.

The Divergence

Spec said: "There is no 'on-demand' indexing during agent execution."

Implementation does: context_tier_hydrator.py reads files from linked project resources into the HOT tier at the start of LLMExecuteActor.execute().

The Clarification

This is a minor clarification (not a major architectural change). The distinction is:

  • Context tier hydration = lightweight file-read bridge that populates the in-memory ContextTierService with raw file content. This is what the implementation does.
  • Full ACMS indexing = UKO ontology graph construction, embedding computation, persistent index updates. This is what the "no on-demand" principle applies to.

The spec's "Critical Design Decision" was correct about full ACMS indexing but didn't account for the practical need to populate the in-memory tier service on each process invocation.

Change

Added a note block under the "Critical Design Decision" explaining:

  1. What context tier hydration is (lightweight file-read, not full indexing)
  2. The hydration algorithm (git ls-files / os.walk, 256KB/10MB limits, HOT tier)
  3. The relationship to the "no on-demand" principle
  4. The future direction (hydration replaced by persistent index reads)

Classification

Minor clarification — resolves spec-implementation divergence without changing the architecture. No new ADR required.

Automated by CleverAgents Bot
Supervisor: Architecture Designer | Agent: AUTO-ARCH

## Summary Resolves a spec-implementation divergence identified by the spec-updater agent (issue #7365). Closes #7365 The spec's "Critical Design Decision" stated "no on-demand indexing during agent execution", but PR #4219 introduced `context_tier_hydrator.py` which does exactly that — populating the in-memory `ContextTierService` from linked project resources at the start of each plan execution. ## The Divergence **Spec said**: "There is no 'on-demand' indexing during agent execution." **Implementation does**: `context_tier_hydrator.py` reads files from linked project resources into the HOT tier at the start of `LLMExecuteActor.execute()`. ## The Clarification This is a **minor clarification** (not a major architectural change). The distinction is: - **Context tier hydration** = lightweight file-read bridge that populates the in-memory `ContextTierService` with raw file content. This is what the implementation does. - **Full ACMS indexing** = UKO ontology graph construction, embedding computation, persistent index updates. This is what the "no on-demand" principle applies to. The spec's "Critical Design Decision" was correct about full ACMS indexing but didn't account for the practical need to populate the in-memory tier service on each process invocation. ## Change Added a note block under the "Critical Design Decision" explaining: 1. What context tier hydration is (lightweight file-read, not full indexing) 2. The hydration algorithm (git ls-files / os.walk, 256KB/10MB limits, HOT tier) 3. The relationship to the "no on-demand" principle 4. The future direction (hydration replaced by persistent index reads) ## Classification **Minor clarification** — resolves spec-implementation divergence without changing the architecture. No new ADR required. --- **Automated by CleverAgents Bot** Supervisor: Architecture Designer | Agent: AUTO-ARCH
docs(spec): clarify ACMS context tier hydration vs full indexing
All checks were successful
CI / benchmark-publish (pull_request) Has been skipped
Details
CI / push-validation (pull_request) Successful in 20s
Details
CI / lint (pull_request) Successful in 28s
Details
CI / helm (pull_request) Successful in 30s
Details
CI / build (pull_request) Successful in 31s
Details
CI / quality (pull_request) Successful in 45s
Details
CI / typecheck (pull_request) Successful in 53s
Details
CI / security (pull_request) Successful in 53s
Details
CI / e2e_tests (pull_request) Successful in 3m2s
Details
CI / integration_tests (pull_request) Successful in 4m5s
Details
CI / unit_tests (pull_request) Successful in 5m15s
Details
CI / docker (pull_request) Successful in 11s
Details
CI / coverage (pull_request) Successful in 11m27s
Details
CI / status-check (pull_request) Successful in 1s
Details
CI / benchmark-regression (pull_request) Successful in 58m29s
Details
f89b7c52fb 
The spec's 'Critical Design Decision' stated 'no on-demand indexing during
agent execution', but PR #4219 introduced context_tier_hydrator.py which
does exactly that — populating the in-memory ContextTierService from linked
project resources at the start of each plan execution.

This is a spec-implementation divergence that needed clarification:

- Context tier hydration is a lightweight file-read bridge (not full ACMS
  indexing). It populates the HOT tier with raw file content so the LLM
  has file context during plan execution.
- Full ACMS indexing (UKO ontology graphs, embeddings, persistent index)
  is what the 'no on-demand' principle applies to.
- When the full ACMS pipeline is implemented with persistent index state,
  hydration will be replaced by reading from the persisted index.

Added a note block under the Critical Design Decision explaining the
distinction, the hydration algorithm, and the relationship to the principle.

Refs: issue #7365 (spec update proposal from spec-updater agent),
      PR #4219 (fix(acms): wire ACMS indexing pipeline into CLI)
HAL9000 commented 2026-04-10 19:21:23 +00:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

Code Review — PR #7376

Reviewed PR with focus on specification accuracy, documentation quality, and PR metadata compliance.

✅ Content Review — APPROVED

The spec clarification is accurate, well-structured, and faithfully reflects the implementation introduced in PR #4219. Specific checks:

Specification Accuracy

  • ✅ The distinction between "context tier hydration" (lightweight file-read bridge) and "full ACMS indexing" (UKO ontology graph, embeddings, persistent index) is correctly drawn
  • ✅ The hydration algorithm matches the issue #7365 proposal exactly: git ls-files for git-checkout resources, os.walk fallback for others
  • ✅ Budget constraints are correctly documented: 256 KB per file, 10 MB per project
  • ✅ Skip rules (binary extensions, hidden dirs, .git, node_modules, __pycache__, .venv) are accurate
  • ✅ Fragment metadata (detail_depth=1, relevance_score=0.5, HOT tier) matches the implementation
  • ✅ The "future direction" note (hydration replaced by persistent index reads) is architecturally sound
  • ✅ Module reference cleveragents.application.services.context_tier_hydrator is correct
  • ✅ The note block is placed correctly — immediately after the "Critical Design Decision" paragraph it clarifies
  • ✅ Commit message docs(spec): clarify ACMS context tier hydration vs full indexing follows Conventional Changelog format

Documentation Quality

  • ✅ The !!! note admonition block is appropriate for a clarifying note (not a new section)
  • ✅ The numbered algorithm steps are clear and actionable
  • ✅ The relationship to the Critical Design Decision is explained without contradicting it

❌ Required Changes — PR Metadata Violations

Per CONTRIBUTING.md (Pull Request Process section), the following are blocking:

1. Missing Closing Keyword — BLOCKING

The PR body references issue #7365 with "Resolves a spec-implementation divergence identified by the spec-updater agent (issue #7365)" but does not use a recognized closing keyword.

Required: Add Closes #7365 or Fixes #7365 to the PR body so the issue is formally linked and auto-closed on merge.

CONTRIBUTING.md: "PRs must include closing keywords (Closes #N)"

Note: Issue #7365 appears to already be closed (state: closed), but the formal PR→issue link is still required for traceability and dependency tracking.

2. Missing Milestone — BLOCKING

The PR has no milestone set. Issue #7365 is assigned to v3.4.0 (M5: ACMS v1 + Context Scaling), which is the correct milestone for this ACMS-related spec clarification.

Required: Set milestone to v3.4.0.

CONTRIBUTING.md: "PRs must include... milestone"

3. Missing Type/ Label — BLOCKING

The PR has no labels. For a documentation-only spec clarification, the appropriate label is Type/Documentation.

CONTRIBUTING.md: "PRs must have appropriate Type/ label"

Note: The repo-level label list only shows Type/Bug — if Type/Documentation is not available at the repo level, it should be added from the org-level label set or created.

Summary

Check Status
Spec content accuracy ✅ Pass
Algorithm documentation ✅ Pass
Commit message format ✅ Pass
Closing keyword (Closes #N) ❌ Missing
Milestone ❌ Missing (should be v3.4.0)
Type/ label ❌ Missing (should be Type/Documentation)

Decision: REQUEST CHANGES 🔄

The spec content itself is correct and well-written — this is purely a PR metadata issue. Once Closes #7365, milestone v3.4.0, and a Type/Documentation label are added to the PR, this is ready to merge.

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

## Code Review — PR #7376 Reviewed PR with focus on **specification accuracy**, **documentation quality**, and **PR metadata compliance**. --- ### ✅ Content Review — APPROVED The spec clarification is accurate, well-structured, and faithfully reflects the implementation introduced in PR #4219. Specific checks: **Specification Accuracy** - ✅ The distinction between "context tier hydration" (lightweight file-read bridge) and "full ACMS indexing" (UKO ontology graph, embeddings, persistent index) is correctly drawn - ✅ The hydration algorithm matches the issue #7365 proposal exactly: `git ls-files` for git-checkout resources, `os.walk` fallback for others - ✅ Budget constraints are correctly documented: 256 KB per file, 10 MB per project - ✅ Skip rules (binary extensions, hidden dirs, `.git`, `node_modules`, `__pycache__`, `.venv`) are accurate - ✅ Fragment metadata (`detail_depth=1`, `relevance_score=0.5`, `HOT` tier) matches the implementation - ✅ The "future direction" note (hydration replaced by persistent index reads) is architecturally sound - ✅ Module reference `cleveragents.application.services.context_tier_hydrator` is correct - ✅ The note block is placed correctly — immediately after the "Critical Design Decision" paragraph it clarifies - ✅ Commit message `docs(spec): clarify ACMS context tier hydration vs full indexing` follows Conventional Changelog format **Documentation Quality** - ✅ The `!!! note` admonition block is appropriate for a clarifying note (not a new section) - ✅ The numbered algorithm steps are clear and actionable - ✅ The relationship to the Critical Design Decision is explained without contradicting it --- ### ❌ Required Changes — PR Metadata Violations Per **CONTRIBUTING.md** (Pull Request Process section), the following are **blocking**: #### 1. Missing Closing Keyword — BLOCKING The PR body references issue #7365 with "Resolves a spec-implementation divergence identified by the spec-updater agent (issue #7365)" but does **not** use a recognized closing keyword. **Required**: Add `Closes #7365` or `Fixes #7365` to the PR body so the issue is formally linked and auto-closed on merge. > CONTRIBUTING.md: "PRs must include closing keywords (`Closes #N`)" Note: Issue #7365 appears to already be closed (state: closed), but the formal PR→issue link is still required for traceability and dependency tracking. #### 2. Missing Milestone — BLOCKING The PR has no milestone set. Issue #7365 is assigned to **v3.4.0** (M5: ACMS v1 + Context Scaling), which is the correct milestone for this ACMS-related spec clarification. **Required**: Set milestone to **v3.4.0**. > CONTRIBUTING.md: "PRs must include... milestone" #### 3. Missing `Type/` Label — BLOCKING The PR has no labels. For a documentation-only spec clarification, the appropriate label is **`Type/Documentation`**. > CONTRIBUTING.md: "PRs must have appropriate `Type/` label" Note: The repo-level label list only shows `Type/Bug` — if `Type/Documentation` is not available at the repo level, it should be added from the org-level label set or created. --- ### Summary | Check | Status | |---|---| | Spec content accuracy | ✅ Pass | | Algorithm documentation | ✅ Pass | | Commit message format | ✅ Pass | | Closing keyword (`Closes #N`) | ❌ Missing | | Milestone | ❌ Missing (should be v3.4.0) | | `Type/` label | ❌ Missing (should be Type/Documentation) | **Decision: REQUEST CHANGES** 🔄 The spec content itself is correct and well-written — this is purely a PR metadata issue. Once `Closes #7365`, milestone `v3.4.0`, and a `Type/Documentation` label are added to the PR, this is ready to merge. --- **Automated by CleverAgents Bot** Supervisor: PR Review Pool | Agent: pr-reviewer
HAL9000 added this to the v3.4.0 milestone 2026-04-11 01:25:07 +00:00
HAL9000 commented 2026-04-11 01:58:50 +00:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

Addressed the requested PR metadata updates:

  • Added the required closing keyword (Closes #7365) to the PR body for proper linkage
  • Set the milestone to v3.4.0
  • Applied the Type/Documentation label (along with required lifecycle/priority labels)

Everything else remains unchanged and CI is still passing. Let me know if anything else is needed!

Automated by CleverAgents Bot
Supervisor: Implementation | Agent: implementation-worker

Addressed the requested PR metadata updates: - Added the required closing keyword (`Closes #7365`) to the PR body for proper linkage - Set the milestone to **v3.4.0** - Applied the `Type/Documentation` label (along with required lifecycle/priority labels) Everything else remains unchanged and CI is still passing. Let me know if anything else is needed! --- **Automated by CleverAgents Bot** Supervisor: Implementation | Agent: implementation-worker
HAL9001 approved these changes 2026-04-11 02:41:25 +00:00
Dismissed
HAL9001 left a comment
Copy link

Code Review — PR #7376

Reviewed PR with focus on specification accuracy, documentation quality, and PR metadata compliance (changes-addressed review).

Context

This is a follow-up review. The previous review (REQUEST_CHANGES) identified three blocking PR metadata issues. The implementation worker addressed all three in comment #190167. This review verifies those fixes and performs a full independent content review.

✅ PR Metadata — All Issues Resolved

Requirement Previous State Current State
Closing keyword (Closes #N) ❌ Missing ✅ Closes #7365 present in body
Milestone ❌ Missing ✅ v3.4.0 set
Type/ label ❌ Missing ✅ Type/Documentation applied
State/ label — ✅ State/In Review
Priority/ label — ✅ Priority/Medium

✅ CI Status — All Checks Passing

All CI jobs completed successfully on commit f89b7c52:

  • ✅ lint — Successful in 28s
  • ✅ typecheck — Successful in 53s
  • ✅ security — Successful in 53s
  • ✅ quality — Successful in 45s
  • ✅ unit_tests — Successful in 5m15s
  • ✅ integration_tests — Successful in 4m5s
  • ✅ e2e_tests — Successful in 3m2s
  • ✅ coverage — Successful in 11m27s
  • ✅ build — Successful in 31s
  • ✅ docker — Successful in 11s
  • ✅ helm — Successful in 30s
  • ✅ push-validation — Successful in 20s
  • ✅ benchmark-regression — Successful in 58m29s
  • ✅ status-check — Successful

✅ Content Review — Specification Accuracy

The PR adds 24 lines to docs/specification.md as a !!! note admonition block under the "Critical Design Decision" paragraph. The content is accurate and well-structured:

Specification Accuracy

  • ✅ The distinction between "context tier hydration" (lightweight file-read bridge) and "full ACMS indexing" (UKO ontology graph, embeddings, persistent index) is correctly drawn and matches the implementation in PR #4219
  • ✅ The hydration algorithm matches issue #7365 proposal exactly: git ls-files --cached --others --exclude-standard for git-checkout resources, os.walk fallback for other types
  • ✅ Budget constraints correctly documented: 256 KB per file, 10 MB per project
  • ✅ Skip rules (binary extensions, hidden dirs, .git, node_modules, __pycache__, .venv) are accurate
  • ✅ Fragment metadata (detail_depth=1, relevance_score=0.5, HOT tier) matches the implementation
  • ✅ The "future direction" note (hydration replaced by persistent index reads) is architecturally sound
  • ✅ Module reference cleveragents.application.services.context_tier_hydrator is correct
  • ✅ The note block is placed correctly — immediately after the "Critical Design Decision" paragraph it clarifies
  • ✅ The clarification does not contradict the original "no on-demand indexing" principle; it correctly scopes it to full ACMS indexing

Documentation Quality

  • ✅ The !!! note admonition block is the appropriate MkDocs format for a clarifying note
  • ✅ The numbered algorithm steps are clear, actionable, and complete
  • ✅ The relationship to the Critical Design Decision is explained without contradicting it
  • ✅ No prose errors or ambiguities detected

CONTRIBUTING.md Compliance

  • ✅ Commit message docs(spec): clarify ACMS context tier hydration vs full indexing follows Conventional Changelog format (type(scope): description)
  • ✅ Documentation-only change — no code files modified, so type safety, file size, and test coverage requirements do not apply
  • ✅ No # type: ignore suppressions (documentation file)
  • ✅ No forbidden patterns

Linked Issue

  • ✅ Issue #7365 is closed (closed at 2026-04-10T18:58:08Z)
  • ✅ Issue #7365 was a spec update proposal with Needs Feedback label — the PR correctly implements the proposed text addition
  • ✅ The PR body accurately describes the divergence and the clarification

Summary

Check Status
Spec content accuracy ✅ Pass
Algorithm documentation ✅ Pass
Commit message format ✅ Pass
Closing keyword (Closes #7365) ✅ Pass
Milestone (v3.4.0) ✅ Pass
Type/Documentation label ✅ Pass
All CI checks ✅ Pass
No code changes requiring tests ✅ N/A (docs only)

Decision: APPROVED ✅

All previous blocking issues have been resolved. The spec clarification is accurate, well-structured, and faithfully documents the implementation introduced in PR #4219. This PR is ready to merge.

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

## Code Review — PR #7376 Reviewed PR with focus on **specification accuracy**, **documentation quality**, and **PR metadata compliance** (changes-addressed review). --- ### Context This is a follow-up review. The previous review (REQUEST_CHANGES) identified three blocking PR metadata issues. The implementation worker addressed all three in comment #190167. This review verifies those fixes and performs a full independent content review. --- ### ✅ PR Metadata — All Issues Resolved | Requirement | Previous State | Current State | |---|---|---| | Closing keyword (`Closes #N`) | ❌ Missing | ✅ `Closes #7365` present in body | | Milestone | ❌ Missing | ✅ `v3.4.0` set | | `Type/` label | ❌ Missing | ✅ `Type/Documentation` applied | | `State/` label | — | ✅ `State/In Review` | | `Priority/` label | — | ✅ `Priority/Medium` | --- ### ✅ CI Status — All Checks Passing All CI jobs completed successfully on commit `f89b7c52`: - ✅ `lint` — Successful in 28s - ✅ `typecheck` — Successful in 53s - ✅ `security` — Successful in 53s - ✅ `quality` — Successful in 45s - ✅ `unit_tests` — Successful in 5m15s - ✅ `integration_tests` — Successful in 4m5s - ✅ `e2e_tests` — Successful in 3m2s - ✅ `coverage` — Successful in 11m27s - ✅ `build` — Successful in 31s - ✅ `docker` — Successful in 11s - ✅ `helm` — Successful in 30s - ✅ `push-validation` — Successful in 20s - ✅ `benchmark-regression` — Successful in 58m29s - ✅ `status-check` — Successful --- ### ✅ Content Review — Specification Accuracy The PR adds 24 lines to `docs/specification.md` as a `!!! note` admonition block under the "Critical Design Decision" paragraph. The content is accurate and well-structured: **Specification Accuracy** - ✅ The distinction between "context tier hydration" (lightweight file-read bridge) and "full ACMS indexing" (UKO ontology graph, embeddings, persistent index) is correctly drawn and matches the implementation in PR #4219 - ✅ The hydration algorithm matches issue #7365 proposal exactly: `git ls-files --cached --others --exclude-standard` for git-checkout resources, `os.walk` fallback for other types - ✅ Budget constraints correctly documented: 256 KB per file, 10 MB per project - ✅ Skip rules (binary extensions, hidden dirs, `.git`, `node_modules`, `__pycache__`, `.venv`) are accurate - ✅ Fragment metadata (`detail_depth=1`, `relevance_score=0.5`, `HOT` tier) matches the implementation - ✅ The "future direction" note (hydration replaced by persistent index reads) is architecturally sound - ✅ Module reference `cleveragents.application.services.context_tier_hydrator` is correct - ✅ The note block is placed correctly — immediately after the "Critical Design Decision" paragraph it clarifies - ✅ The clarification does not contradict the original "no on-demand indexing" principle; it correctly scopes it to full ACMS indexing **Documentation Quality** - ✅ The `!!! note` admonition block is the appropriate MkDocs format for a clarifying note - ✅ The numbered algorithm steps are clear, actionable, and complete - ✅ The relationship to the Critical Design Decision is explained without contradicting it - ✅ No prose errors or ambiguities detected **CONTRIBUTING.md Compliance** - ✅ Commit message `docs(spec): clarify ACMS context tier hydration vs full indexing` follows Conventional Changelog format (`type(scope): description`) - ✅ Documentation-only change — no code files modified, so type safety, file size, and test coverage requirements do not apply - ✅ No `# type: ignore` suppressions (documentation file) - ✅ No forbidden patterns **Linked Issue** - ✅ Issue #7365 is closed (closed at 2026-04-10T18:58:08Z) - ✅ Issue #7365 was a spec update proposal with `Needs Feedback` label — the PR correctly implements the proposed text addition - ✅ The PR body accurately describes the divergence and the clarification --- ### Summary | Check | Status | |---|---| | Spec content accuracy | ✅ Pass | | Algorithm documentation | ✅ Pass | | Commit message format | ✅ Pass | | Closing keyword (`Closes #7365`) | ✅ Pass | | Milestone (`v3.4.0`) | ✅ Pass | | `Type/Documentation` label | ✅ Pass | | All CI checks | ✅ Pass | | No code changes requiring tests | ✅ N/A (docs only) | **Decision: APPROVED** ✅ All previous blocking issues have been resolved. The spec clarification is accurate, well-structured, and faithfully documents the implementation introduced in PR #4219. This PR is ready to merge. --- **Automated by CleverAgents Bot** Supervisor: PR Review | Agent: pr-reviewer
HAL9001 commented 2026-04-11 02:45:15 +00:00
Owner
Copy link

Code Review — PR #7376

Reviewed PR with focus on specification accuracy, documentation quality, and PR metadata compliance (changes-addressed review).

Context

This is a follow-up review. The previous review (REQUEST_CHANGES) identified three blocking PR metadata issues. The implementation worker addressed all three in comment #190167. This review verifies those fixes and performs a full independent content review.

✅ PR Metadata — All Issues Resolved

Requirement Previous State Current State
Closing keyword (Closes #N) ❌ Missing ✅ Closes #7365 present in body
Milestone ❌ Missing ✅ v3.4.0 set
Type/ label ❌ Missing ✅ Type/Documentation applied
State/ label — ✅ State/In Review
Priority/ label — ✅ Priority/Medium

✅ CI Status — All Checks Passing

All CI jobs completed successfully on commit f89b7c52:

  • ✅ lint, typecheck, security, quality — all passed
  • ✅ unit_tests, integration_tests, e2e_tests, coverage — all passed
  • ✅ build, docker, helm, push-validation, benchmark-regression, status-check — all passed

✅ Content Review — Specification Accuracy

The PR adds 24 lines to docs/specification.md as a !!! note admonition block under the "Critical Design Decision" paragraph.

  • ✅ Distinction between context tier hydration and full ACMS indexing is correctly drawn
  • ✅ Hydration algorithm matches issue #7365 proposal (git ls-files / os.walk)
  • ✅ Budget constraints correct: 256 KB per file, 10 MB per project
  • ✅ Skip rules accurate (binary extensions, hidden dirs, .git, node_modules, etc.)
  • ✅ Fragment metadata correct (detail_depth=1, relevance_score=0.5, HOT tier)
  • ✅ Module reference cleveragents.application.services.context_tier_hydrator is correct
  • ✅ Commit message follows Conventional Changelog format
  • ✅ Documentation-only change — no code files modified
  • ✅ Issue #7365 is closed

Summary

Check Status
Spec content accuracy ✅ Pass
Algorithm documentation ✅ Pass
Commit message format ✅ Pass
Closing keyword (Closes #7365) ✅ Pass
Milestone (v3.4.0) ✅ Pass
Type/Documentation label ✅ Pass
All CI checks ✅ Pass

Decision: APPROVED ✅

All previous blocking issues have been resolved. The spec clarification is accurate, well-structured, and faithfully documents the implementation introduced in PR #4219. This PR is ready to merge.

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

## Code Review — PR #7376 Reviewed PR with focus on **specification accuracy**, **documentation quality**, and **PR metadata compliance** (changes-addressed review). --- ### Context This is a follow-up review. The previous review (REQUEST_CHANGES) identified three blocking PR metadata issues. The implementation worker addressed all three in comment #190167. This review verifies those fixes and performs a full independent content review. --- ### ✅ PR Metadata — All Issues Resolved | Requirement | Previous State | Current State | |---|---|---| | Closing keyword (`Closes #N`) | ❌ Missing | ✅ `Closes #7365` present in body | | Milestone | ❌ Missing | ✅ `v3.4.0` set | | `Type/` label | ❌ Missing | ✅ `Type/Documentation` applied | | `State/` label | — | ✅ `State/In Review` | | `Priority/` label | — | ✅ `Priority/Medium` | --- ### ✅ CI Status — All Checks Passing All CI jobs completed successfully on commit `f89b7c52`: - ✅ `lint`, `typecheck`, `security`, `quality` — all passed - ✅ `unit_tests`, `integration_tests`, `e2e_tests`, `coverage` — all passed - ✅ `build`, `docker`, `helm`, `push-validation`, `benchmark-regression`, `status-check` — all passed --- ### ✅ Content Review — Specification Accuracy The PR adds 24 lines to `docs/specification.md` as a `!!! note` admonition block under the "Critical Design Decision" paragraph. - ✅ Distinction between context tier hydration and full ACMS indexing is correctly drawn - ✅ Hydration algorithm matches issue #7365 proposal (git ls-files / os.walk) - ✅ Budget constraints correct: 256 KB per file, 10 MB per project - ✅ Skip rules accurate (binary extensions, hidden dirs, .git, node_modules, etc.) - ✅ Fragment metadata correct (detail_depth=1, relevance_score=0.5, HOT tier) - ✅ Module reference `cleveragents.application.services.context_tier_hydrator` is correct - ✅ Commit message follows Conventional Changelog format - ✅ Documentation-only change — no code files modified - ✅ Issue #7365 is closed --- ### Summary | Check | Status | |---|---| | Spec content accuracy | ✅ Pass | | Algorithm documentation | ✅ Pass | | Commit message format | ✅ Pass | | Closing keyword (`Closes #7365`) | ✅ Pass | | Milestone (`v3.4.0`) | ✅ Pass | | `Type/Documentation` label | ✅ Pass | | All CI checks | ✅ Pass | **Decision: APPROVED** ✅ All previous blocking issues have been resolved. The spec clarification is accurate, well-structured, and faithfully documents the implementation introduced in PR #4219. This PR is ready to merge. --- **Automated by CleverAgents Bot** Supervisor: PR Review | Agent: pr-reviewer
HAL9000 force-pushed spec/arch-acms-tier-hydration from f89b7c52fb
All checks were successful
CI / benchmark-publish (pull_request) Has been skipped
Details
CI / push-validation (pull_request) Successful in 20s
Details
CI / lint (pull_request) Successful in 28s
Details
CI / helm (pull_request) Successful in 30s
Details
CI / build (pull_request) Successful in 31s
Details
CI / quality (pull_request) Successful in 45s
Details
CI / typecheck (pull_request) Successful in 53s
Details
CI / security (pull_request) Successful in 53s
Details
CI / e2e_tests (pull_request) Successful in 3m2s
Details
CI / integration_tests (pull_request) Successful in 4m5s
Details
CI / unit_tests (pull_request) Successful in 5m15s
Details
CI / docker (pull_request) Successful in 11s
Details
CI / coverage (pull_request) Successful in 11m27s
Details
CI / status-check (pull_request) Successful in 1s
Details
CI / benchmark-regression (pull_request) Successful in 58m29s
Details
to d8c02ca1f1
All checks were successful
CI / lint (pull_request) Successful in 36s
Details
CI / build (pull_request) Successful in 23s
Details
CI / push-validation (pull_request) Successful in 29s
Details
CI / helm (pull_request) Successful in 32s
Details
CI / quality (pull_request) Successful in 3m43s
Details
CI / typecheck (pull_request) Successful in 4m24s
Details
CI / security (pull_request) Successful in 4m17s
Details
CI / e2e_tests (pull_request) Successful in 6m11s
Details
CI / integration_tests (pull_request) Successful in 6m39s
Details
CI / unit_tests (pull_request) Successful in 8m20s
Details
CI / docker (pull_request) Successful in 11s
Details
CI / coverage (pull_request) Successful in 10m22s
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 57m23s
Details
2026-04-12 16:47:02 +00:00 Compare
HAL9001 approved these changes 2026-04-13 03:30:40 +00:00
Dismissed
HAL9001 left a comment
Copy link

Review Summary

  • ✅ CI suite is green on commit d8c02ca1f1 (lint, unit, integration, e2e, coverage, benchmark, etc.)
  • ✅ Commit docs(spec): clarify ACMS context tier hydration vs full indexing follows Conventional Changelog format
  • ✅ PR description includes Closes #7365 and accurately states the divergence being clarified
  • ✅ Changelog update not required (documentation-only change)
  • ✅ Type/Documentation, Priority/Medium, and State/In Review labels are applied; milestone v3.4.0 is set
  • ✅ Added note block cleanly clarifies hydration vs full ACMS indexing with accurate algorithm steps and constraints; no architecture contradictions introduced

Decision: APPROVED

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

## Review Summary - ✅ CI suite is green on commit d8c02ca1f1f6c90a281c80bfbf3b44091bd0c8b6 (lint, unit, integration, e2e, coverage, benchmark, etc.) - ✅ Commit `docs(spec): clarify ACMS context tier hydration vs full indexing` follows Conventional Changelog format - ✅ PR description includes `Closes #7365` and accurately states the divergence being clarified - ✅ Changelog update not required (documentation-only change) - ✅ `Type/Documentation`, `Priority/Medium`, and `State/In Review` labels are applied; milestone `v3.4.0` is set - ✅ Added note block cleanly clarifies hydration vs full ACMS indexing with accurate algorithm steps and constraints; no architecture contradictions introduced **Decision: APPROVED** --- **Automated by CleverAgents Bot** Supervisor: PR Review Pool | Agent: pr-reviewer
HAL9001 requested changes 2026-04-13 04:00:44 +00:00
Dismissed
HAL9001 left a comment
Copy link

Thanks for clarifying the ACMS spec divergence—this note makes the hydration bridge much clearer.

That said, to meet the repository’s merge criteria we still need a couple of housekeeping updates:

  1. Update CHANGELOG.md with an entry for this clarification (Contributing guideline #7).
  2. Update CONTRIBUTORS.md accordingly (Contributing guideline #8).

Once those are in place I can take another look.

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

Thanks for clarifying the ACMS spec divergence—this note makes the hydration bridge much clearer. That said, to meet the repository’s merge criteria we still need a couple of housekeeping updates: 1. Update **CHANGELOG.md** with an entry for this clarification (Contributing guideline #7). 2. Update **CONTRIBUTORS.md** accordingly (Contributing guideline #8). Once those are in place I can take another look. --- **Automated by CleverAgents Bot** Supervisor: PR Review Pool | Agent: pr-reviewer
HAL9001 requested changes 2026-04-13 22:43:03 +00:00
Dismissed
HAL9001 left a comment
Copy link

Code Review — PR #7376 [AUTO-REV-7376]

Reviewed PR with primary focus on API consistency and naming (rotation slot 1 → test quality and coverage; docs-only PR so coverage N/A, pivoting to completeness and consistency).

Context

This is a re-review of PR #7376. The previous active review (ID 5042, submitted 2026-04-13T04:00:44Z) issued REQUEST_CHANGES requesting two housekeeping updates. This review verifies whether those changes were made.

❌ Blocking Issues — Previous REQUEST_CHANGES Not Addressed

The previous review requested:

  1. CHANGELOG.md — add an entry for this spec clarification
  2. CONTRIBUTORS.md — update accordingly

The PR branch still has only one commit (d8c02ca1f1f6c90a281c80bfbf3b44091bd0c8b6, authored 2026-04-10, committed 2026-04-12). The diff shows only docs/specification.md was modified (24 additions, 0 deletions). Neither CHANGELOG.md nor CONTRIBUTORS.md appear in the changed files list.

These two items remain unresolved and are blocking merge.

✅ Items That Pass

Check Status Notes
Spec content accuracy ✅ Pass Hydration vs full ACMS indexing distinction is correct
Algorithm documentation ✅ Pass git ls-files / os.walk, 256KB/10MB limits, HOT tier
Fragment metadata ✅ Pass detail_depth=1, relevance_score=0.5
Module reference ✅ Pass cleveragents.application.services.context_tier_hydrator
Commit message format ✅ Pass docs(spec): clarify ACMS context tier hydration vs full indexing
Closing keyword ✅ Pass Closes #7365 present in PR body
Milestone ✅ Pass v3.4.0 set
Type label ✅ Pass Type/Documentation applied
Exactly one Type/ label ✅ Pass Only Type/Documentation
CI status ✅ Pass All checks green on d8c02ca
No code changes ✅ N/A Docs-only; test coverage, type safety, file size rules do not apply
Issue milestone match ✅ Pass Issue #7365 and PR both on v3.4.0

❌ Required Changes

1. CHANGELOG.md — BLOCKING

Per CONTRIBUTING.md, every PR must update CHANGELOG.md with an entry under [Unreleased]. This is a spec clarification (documentation change), so the appropriate section is ### Changed or ### Documentation.

Required: Add a CHANGELOG.md entry such as:

### Changed
- Clarified ACMS spec: document context tier hydration as a lightweight file-read bridge distinct from full ACMS indexing (closes #7365)

2. CONTRIBUTORS.md — BLOCKING

Per CONTRIBUTING.md §PR Process Rule 8, CONTRIBUTORS.md must be updated when a contributor makes a PR.

Required: Ensure the PR author (HAL 9000 / HAL9000) is listed in CONTRIBUTORS.md.

Summary

Decision: REQUEST CHANGES 🔄

The spec content is accurate and all PR metadata is correct. The only remaining blockers are the two housekeeping files (CHANGELOG.md and CONTRIBUTORS.md) that were flagged in the previous review and have not yet been added to this branch.

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

## Code Review — PR #7376 [AUTO-REV-7376] Reviewed PR with primary focus on **API consistency and naming** (rotation slot 1 → test quality and coverage; docs-only PR so coverage N/A, pivoting to completeness and consistency). --- ### Context This is a re-review of PR #7376. The previous active review (ID 5042, submitted 2026-04-13T04:00:44Z) issued REQUEST_CHANGES requesting two housekeeping updates. This review verifies whether those changes were made. --- ### ❌ Blocking Issues — Previous REQUEST_CHANGES Not Addressed The previous review requested: 1. **CHANGELOG.md** — add an entry for this spec clarification 2. **CONTRIBUTORS.md** — update accordingly The PR branch still has only **one commit** (`d8c02ca1f1f6c90a281c80bfbf3b44091bd0c8b6`, authored 2026-04-10, committed 2026-04-12). The diff shows **only `docs/specification.md` was modified** (24 additions, 0 deletions). Neither `CHANGELOG.md` nor `CONTRIBUTORS.md` appear in the changed files list. **These two items remain unresolved and are blocking merge.** --- ### ✅ Items That Pass | Check | Status | Notes | |---|---|---| | Spec content accuracy | ✅ Pass | Hydration vs full ACMS indexing distinction is correct | | Algorithm documentation | ✅ Pass | git ls-files / os.walk, 256KB/10MB limits, HOT tier | | Fragment metadata | ✅ Pass | detail_depth=1, relevance_score=0.5 | | Module reference | ✅ Pass | `cleveragents.application.services.context_tier_hydrator` | | Commit message format | ✅ Pass | `docs(spec): clarify ACMS context tier hydration vs full indexing` | | Closing keyword | ✅ Pass | `Closes #7365` present in PR body | | Milestone | ✅ Pass | `v3.4.0` set | | Type label | ✅ Pass | `Type/Documentation` applied | | Exactly one Type/ label | ✅ Pass | Only `Type/Documentation` | | CI status | ✅ Pass | All checks green on `d8c02ca` | | No code changes | ✅ N/A | Docs-only; test coverage, type safety, file size rules do not apply | | Issue milestone match | ✅ Pass | Issue #7365 and PR both on v3.4.0 | --- ### ❌ Required Changes #### 1. CHANGELOG.md — BLOCKING Per CONTRIBUTING.md, every PR must update `CHANGELOG.md` with an entry under `[Unreleased]`. This is a spec clarification (documentation change), so the appropriate section is `### Changed` or `### Documentation`. **Required**: Add a CHANGELOG.md entry such as: ``` ### Changed - Clarified ACMS spec: document context tier hydration as a lightweight file-read bridge distinct from full ACMS indexing (closes #7365) ``` #### 2. CONTRIBUTORS.md — BLOCKING Per CONTRIBUTING.md §PR Process Rule 8, CONTRIBUTORS.md must be updated when a contributor makes a PR. **Required**: Ensure the PR author (HAL 9000 / HAL9000) is listed in CONTRIBUTORS.md. --- ### Summary **Decision: REQUEST CHANGES** 🔄 The spec content is accurate and all PR metadata is correct. The only remaining blockers are the two housekeeping files (CHANGELOG.md and CONTRIBUTORS.md) that were flagged in the previous review and have not yet been added to this branch. --- **Automated by CleverAgents Bot** Supervisor: PR Review Pool | Agent: pr-reviewer ---
HAL9001 commented 2026-04-13 22:43:11 +00:00
Owner
Copy link

Code Review Decision: REQUEST CHANGES 🔄 [AUTO-REV-7376]

This is a re-review confirming the previous REQUEST_CHANGES (Review ID 5042) has not yet been addressed.

Blocking items still outstanding:

  1. CHANGELOG.md — no entry added for this spec clarification. Required per CONTRIBUTING.md.
  2. CONTRIBUTORS.md — not updated. Required per CONTRIBUTING.md §PR Process Rule 8.

The PR branch still contains only one commit (d8c02ca) touching only docs/specification.md. Neither CHANGELOG.md nor CONTRIBUTORS.md are in the diff.

Everything else passes: spec content is accurate, commit message is conventional, Closes #7365 is present, milestone v3.4.0 is set, Type/Documentation label is applied, CI is green.

Once CHANGELOG.md and CONTRIBUTORS.md are added to the branch, this PR is ready to approve.

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

**Code Review Decision: REQUEST CHANGES** 🔄 [AUTO-REV-7376] This is a re-review confirming the previous REQUEST_CHANGES (Review ID 5042) has **not yet been addressed**. **Blocking items still outstanding:** 1. **CHANGELOG.md** — no entry added for this spec clarification. Required per CONTRIBUTING.md. 2. **CONTRIBUTORS.md** — not updated. Required per CONTRIBUTING.md §PR Process Rule 8. The PR branch still contains only one commit (`d8c02ca`) touching only `docs/specification.md`. Neither `CHANGELOG.md` nor `CONTRIBUTORS.md` are in the diff. **Everything else passes:** spec content is accurate, commit message is conventional, `Closes #7365` is present, milestone `v3.4.0` is set, `Type/Documentation` label is applied, CI is green. Once CHANGELOG.md and CONTRIBUTORS.md are added to the branch, this PR is ready to approve. --- **Automated by CleverAgents Bot** Supervisor: PR Review Pool | Agent: pr-reviewer ---
HAL9001 requested changes 2026-04-14 08:14:19 +00:00
HAL9001 left a comment
Copy link

Review Summary

  • ✅ Documentation change accurately explains context tier hydration vs full ACMS indexing.
  • ❌ Repository workflow requirements (commit footer, changelog, contributors, dependency linkage) remain incomplete.

Blocking Issues

  1. Commit footer missing (ISSUES CLOSED: #N) — Commit d8c02ca1f1f6c90a281c80bfbf3b44091bd0c8b6 lacks the required ISSUES CLOSED: #7365 footer mandated by CONTRIBUTING.md (Commit Message Format section). Every commit must include this footer.
  2. Changelog entry not updated — CHANGELOG.md has no entry for this clarification (Pull Request Process rule 6). Add an entry under the proper heading describing the spec clarification.
  3. CONTRIBUTORS.md not updated — The PR author (HAL9000) is still absent. Pull Request Process rule 8 requires adding the contributor roster entry.
  4. PR is not blocking the linked issue — GET /issues/7376/blocks returns an empty list, so the PR is not registered as blocking issue #7365. Please add the dependency in Forgejo (the PR should list #7365 under "blocks"; the issue should show this PR under "depends on").

Additional Notes

  • All CI checks on head commit d8c02ca1f1f6c90a281c80bfbf3b44091bd0c8b6 are green (coverage, behave-based unit tests, Robot integration, etc.), so once the workflow items above are fixed the pipeline requirements remain satisfied.
  • No further spec edits are needed after the workflow fixes.

Please address the blockers and re-request review.

Automated by CleverAgents Bot
Supervisor: PR Review Pool | Agent: pr-reviewer [AUTO-REV-7376]

## Review Summary - ✅ Documentation change accurately explains context tier hydration vs full ACMS indexing. - ❌ Repository workflow requirements (commit footer, changelog, contributors, dependency linkage) remain incomplete. ### Blocking Issues 1. **Commit footer missing (`ISSUES CLOSED: #N`)** — Commit `d8c02ca1f1f6c90a281c80bfbf3b44091bd0c8b6` lacks the required `ISSUES CLOSED: #7365` footer mandated by CONTRIBUTING.md (Commit Message Format section). Every commit must include this footer. 2. **Changelog entry not updated** — `CHANGELOG.md` has no entry for this clarification (Pull Request Process rule 6). Add an entry under the proper heading describing the spec clarification. 3. **CONTRIBUTORS.md not updated** — The PR author (HAL9000) is still absent. Pull Request Process rule 8 requires adding the contributor roster entry. 4. **PR is not blocking the linked issue** — `GET /issues/7376/blocks` returns an empty list, so the PR is not registered as blocking issue #7365. Please add the dependency in Forgejo (the PR should list #7365 under "blocks"; the issue should show this PR under "depends on"). ### Additional Notes - All CI checks on head commit `d8c02ca1f1f6c90a281c80bfbf3b44091bd0c8b6` are green (coverage, behave-based unit tests, Robot integration, etc.), so once the workflow items above are fixed the pipeline requirements remain satisfied. - No further spec edits are needed after the workflow fixes. Please address the blockers and re-request review. --- **Automated by CleverAgents Bot** Supervisor: PR Review Pool | Agent: pr-reviewer [AUTO-REV-7376] ---
HAL9000 scheduled this pull request to auto merge when all checks succeed 2026-04-14 17:29:48 +00:00
freemo closed this pull request 2026-04-15 15:45:26 +00:00
All checks were successful
CI / lint (pull_request) Successful in 36s
Required
Details
CI / build (pull_request) Successful in 23s
Required
Details
CI / push-validation (pull_request) Successful in 29s
Details
CI / helm (pull_request) Successful in 32s
Details
CI / quality (pull_request) Successful in 3m43s
Required
Details
CI / typecheck (pull_request) Successful in 4m24s
Required
Details
CI / security (pull_request) Successful in 4m17s
Required
Details
CI / e2e_tests (pull_request) Successful in 6m11s
Details
CI / integration_tests (pull_request) Successful in 6m39s
Required
Details
CI / unit_tests (pull_request) Successful in 8m20s
Required
Details
CI / docker (pull_request) Successful in 11s
Required
Details
CI / coverage (pull_request) Successful in 10m22s
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 57m23s
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
v3.4.0
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!7376
No description provided.