Five independent bug fixes around the reviewer's data pipeline,
all live-observed on 2026-05-17 run-1 (PR #35 / PR-shaped traffic
generally). Bundled because they share the same data-correctness
intent and one fixture-update covers two of them.
1) **PR diff: distinguish "fetch failed" from "PR has no changes."**
``tools/_pr_diff.py``. The old code conflated both cases into
``unavailable=True``, which forced ``data_complete=False`` and
blocked APPROVED verdicts. Live-observed on PR #35 created by
the new_issue worker without any code changes — Forgejo returns
HTTP 200 + empty body for a head==base PR, and the reviewer
was incorrectly told the diff was unavailable.
2) **PR-state cache: refresh body + labels on the unchanged-
``updated_at`` branch.** ``tools/_pr_state_cache.py``. Forgejo
label add/remove mutations do NOT bump ``updated_at``, so the
warmer's cached PR object would carry stale labels for as long
as the PR sat idle. Downstream consumers (cycle-cap, claim
sweeps, filter exclusions) would never see them. Cheap fix —
same row, two extra columns refreshed.
3) **Comments cache: URL-encode the ``since=`` cursor.**
``tools/_pr_comments_cache.py`` + matching test update. The
``+`` in ``+00:00`` decodes to a space on Forgejo's query-
string parser, producing 422 errors. Live-observed on PR #35
run-1: 6 consecutive 422s on the same clean ``+00:00`` cursor
before the cache backed off for 30 min. ``urllib.parse.quote``
with ``safe=''`` quotes every non-alphanumeric so ``+`` →
``%2B``, ``:`` → ``%3A``. Test updated to ``unquote`` the
captured path before substring-matching.
4) **Reviewer prompt: surface the clone fallback.**
``tools/_review_prompt.py``. Adds an inline note in the
pre-fetched diff section explaining the two diff sources
(inline-truncated vs pre-cloned worktree) and the
``REVIEW_DISPATCHER_DIFF_MAX_BYTES`` cap. Closes a reviewer-
side confusion where the model didn't know it could read
source files from disk when the inline diff was truncated.
5) **Reviewer agent contract: truncated diff + clone IS
data-complete.** ``.opencode/agents/pr-review-worker.md``. The
prior wording said ``truncated=True`` forced ``data_complete=
False`` and blocked APPROVED — but with the pre-cloned
worktree available, the reviewer DOES have full code access
and APPROVED should remain valid. Updated guidance now
distinguishes "truncated but clone present" (APPROVED OK)
from "truncated AND no clone" (COMMENT / REQUEST_CHANGES only).
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
drew
b80f5f7c3a