feat(agents): query published work classification - #1785
Conversation
|
Navigate logical layers of code changes, visualize relationships, and explore their blast radius. No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉 ℹ️ Recent review info⚙️ Run configuration
📒 Files selected for processing (5)
Included review availability: This review used your included allowance. Your plan provides up to 4 included reviews per hour; 3 remain after this review. 📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughThe change adds opt-in published-work data to orchestrator discovery and introduces a library search for classified work. The search validates filters and selection, limits peer and catalog reads, and returns detached results with match and coverage details. ChangesPublished work search
Priority: ⬇️ Low Estimated code review effort: 3 (Moderate) | ~25 minutes Change: Feature Sequence Diagram(s)sequenceDiagram
participant Caller
participant searchPublishedWork
participant PresenceAndCatalogData
Caller->>searchPublishedWork: Submit filter, peers, and selection
searchPublishedWork->>searchPublishedWork: Validate filter and selection
searchPublishedWork->>PresenceAndCatalogData: Examine bounded peer and catalog data
PresenceAndCatalogData-->>searchPublishedWork: Return presence and catalog records
searchPublishedWork-->>Caller: Return matches and coverage details
Merge Risk: ⚪ Minimal · up to This change adds an opt-in work projection and a bounded library-only search over published work. No actionable merge-blocking issue was found, and the default discovery behavior is preserved. Security Architecture ReviewSecurity architecture risk: 🔵 Low · up to The new query exposes deliberately published metadata without granting execution authority or exporting private owner notes. Recipient and identity checks remain effective. Some inherited persistence and partial-publication guarantees remain unverified, but no introduced security vulnerability was established. Retained concerns Security review detailsSecurity Blast Radius
Trust Boundaries and Controls
Resilience and Maintainability Implications
🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 4 | ❌ 1❌ Failed checks (1 warning)
✅ Passed checks (4 passed)
Full details: Docstring CoverageExplanation Docstring coverage is 66.67% which is insufficient. The required threshold is 80.00%. Docstring coverage is scoped to functions touched by this diff. Analyzed 6 functions across 3 files. (2 skipped: 2 unsupported.)
✨ Finishing Touches 💡 1📝 Generate docstrings 💡
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
Linked issue
Refs #1702; additive metadata-only coordination, not closure of owner decision work.
PR type
type:feature)Summary
searchPublishedWorklibrary over existing presence/discovery, with strict AND area/topic/tag/text/typed-reference/recorded-root filters.Changes
lib/orchestrator-work-search.tslib/orchestrator-discovery.tstests/orchestrator-work-search.test.tsdocs/gentle-agents-activity.md,odd/tasks/work-discovery.mdTest plan
[]and rejects invalid query selections before reads.Contributor checklist
type:featurerequested, verify readback.Chain context
feat/work-task-annotations, PR #1780 (520cab8b)The full query forecast was 430–540 lines; it was split by useful behavior, not compressed.
related_todeliberately rejects until the next unit. No new tool verb, store, index artifact, owner wake, model call or Git probe. Shared declared refs do not prove dependencies or approval; classification remains descriptive.Coverage is not exhaustive: at most 64 unique advertised peers, all activations retained for ambiguity checks, one eight-task catalog page each, 16-KiB whole JSON limit with whole-row omissions. Unknown/unclassified/historical unmatched annotations and catalog omissions/pending pages are counted. Rejected/overflow presence scans retain existing fail-closed behavior. Task roots never inherit the parent root or resolve launch paths.
Out of scope: public
orchestrator_list.filter, related-source selection, new search SDK proof, helper classification capture, owner decisions, permission/ownership/exclusivity and runtime activation. Existing SDK regression passed, but it does not prove the not-yet-wired public query feature.Native assessment: medium risk, runtime large profile, under budget, outcome unknown. Extra independent functional verification is separate evidence, not native review consumption or main merge approval.
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Documentation