Skip to content

rebase: make reports and metrics truthful - #131

Merged
tzhouam merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
agent/rebase-truthful-reporting
Sep 5, 2026
Merged

tzhouam merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
agent/rebase-truthful-reporting

Conversation

@tzhouam

@tzhouam tzhouam commented Sep 5, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Summary

  • distinguish skipped modules, executed/local-not-run tests, and raw versus effective CI state
  • embed the rebase phase summary in the canonical RUN_REPORT
  • archive stale escalation markers after a successful resume
  • derive push/build/tool counts and rebase quality from durable state, persisting CI monitor timing
  • report missing CI/token cost evidence as partial/unknown instead of zero

Tests

  • full pytest -q suite
  • focused metrics, notification, report, and CI tests
  • strict architecture-spec freshness gate
  • git diff --check

Signed-off-by: tzhouam <tzhouam@connect.ust.hk>
@chatgpt-codex-connector

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot commented Sep 5, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codex Review Summary

This comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.

Review Status Commit Review trigger
📝 Code Review ✅ Completed 2026-09-05T19:56:50.393108Z e27ff92 PR opened
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review" or "@codex security review".

Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings.

@tzhouam
tzhouam merged commit c0328a2 into main Sep 5, 2026
2 checks passed

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: e27ff92523

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

Comment on lines +508 to +511
llm_requests = sum(1 for ev in events
if ev.get("kind") == "rebase_llm_request")
usage_missing = span_cost is None and llm_requests > 0 \
and tokens_in == 0 and tokens_out == 0

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

P2 Badge Track watchdog LLM requests as unpriced cost

When a repo-rebase local test triggers a Tier-2 watchdog review, _watchdog_collaborators.review_fn calls client.messages.create directly without producing either an llm span or a rebase_llm_request event. Consequently this check remains false, and the paid request is reported as zero token/USD cost with cost_partial: false, biasing experiment CATQ upward. Instrument those requests or include a durable watchdog-review signal in the partial-cost test.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

Comment on lines +142 to +143
manifest_jobs = int(ctx.state.get("manifest_jobs") or 0)
total = manifest_jobs or passed + failed + skipped

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

P2 Badge Populate the manifest count for full rebase reports

In the locked workflow, phase5_report runs only in full mode, while the only producer of manifest_jobs is rebase.v3_scan, which runs only in report-only mode. Full runs therefore always take this fallback; when the manifest contains nightly jobs, rebase.v3_test_loop excludes them, so the report labels only the local pipeline total as “manifest jobs” and omits those unrun jobs. Publish len(built.jobs) from the full test-manifest construction or derive the count from a persisted artifact.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

Comment on lines +163 to +166
f"- raw provider state: {round_.get('build_state') or 'unknown'} "
f"(build {build}; {round_.get('passed', 0)} passed, "
f"{len(round_.get('failed') or [])} unresolved, "
f"{round_.get('ignored_baseline', 0)} baseline, "

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

P2 Badge Include incomplete CI jobs in the unresolved count

When monitoring ends with scheduled/running jobs or per-job budget timeouts, _record_outcome stores them in incomplete and budget_timeouts, not in failed. This report therefore prints 0 unresolved for rounds that still have unresolved jobs, contradicting the raw provider state and potentially misleading operators reviewing a failed/no-signal run. Count the unresolved union rather than only failed.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant