External/roboco
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/rennf93/roboco.git synced 2026-08-03 07:23:24 +02:00
Code Issues Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

[sweep] strip Fxxx audit-ID tokens + trim bloated comments/docstrings + add behavior-change docs

Browse Source 
Post-audit sweep over the 135 audit-fix commits since 19a474d3:

1. Stripped every # Fxxx: audit-ID token from comments AND every Fxxx token
   from docstring openings across 211 blocks / ~626 lines. The CEO flagged
   these twice: audit-issue IDs in code confuse future devs/agents. The
   descriptive text is preserved; only the Fxxx token is removed (and bloated
   narrative blocks trimmed to 1-3 lines keeping the one non-obvious invariant).
2. Trimmed bloated comments/docstrings to the concise standard (1-3 lines).
3. Added missing behavior-change docs for the audit-fix batch: prompts/roles
   (documenter, pr_reviewer, qa), user-facing docs (api auth, websockets,
   agent-gateway, megatask, merge-model, task-lifecycle, grok, resilience,
   conventions, panel, security, troubleshooting), and the RAG corpus (cell-pm,
   main-pm, pr-reviewer, qa roles; conventions; messaging-tools; escalation;
   megatask; task-claiming workflows).

Comment/docstring/prose ONLY — zero code-line edits (verified: the diff
contains no def/class/return/if/for/await/assignment/call lines). Gates green:
ruff format + ruff check clean, mypy clean on roboco/. The only pytest failures
are the pre-existing sync_branch tracing-decision gap (B1, 250be5c2) — not
sweep-caused and tracked separately.
This commit is contained in:
Renn F
2026-06-29 01:25:40 +02:00
parent fb850e8235
commit 3441e37120
131 changed files with 842 additions and 1391 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files
docs/rag/roles/pr-reviewer.md
+3 -1
View File
@@ -21,7 +21,9 @@ The `pr_reviewer` role also runs the **in-path gate** on the org's OWN assembled
### Gate enforcement
When the architectural-conventions standard is enabled, `pr_pass` is refused on any block-level convention finding, the same way the developer's `i_am_done` is. When toolchain matching is enabled, `pr_pass` is likewise refused on a "broken" toolchain status. Your verdict note is a mandatory structured field (`pr_reviewer_notes`) written at `pr_pass` / `pr_fail`; it is persisted structured with a derived text mirror.
When the architectural-conventions standard is enabled, `pr_pass` is refused on any block-level convention finding, the same way the developer's `i_am_done` is — the remediation hint points you at the offending `file:line` + the `pr_fail` verb (not `i_am_blocked`). When toolchain matching is enabled, `pr_pass` is likewise refused on a "broken" toolchain status. Your verdict note is a mandatory structured field (`pr_reviewer_notes`) written at `pr_pass` / `pr_fail`; it is persisted structured with a derived text mirror.
You cannot `pr_pass` / `pr_fail` an assembled PR you authored (self-review guard, same shape as QA's). A `claim_gate_review` on your own work returns `not_authorized`.
## What You CAN Do