Skip to content

Temporary linear-history PR diagnostic#139

Closed
RomanOstr wants to merge 4 commits into
mainfrom
release/pr-diagnostic-linear
Closed

Temporary linear-history PR diagnostic#139
RomanOstr wants to merge 4 commits into
mainfrom
release/pr-diagnostic-linear

Conversation

@RomanOstr

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

No description provided.

@RomanOstr RomanOstr closed this Jul 24, 2026
@RomanOstr
RomanOstr deleted the release/pr-diagnostic-linear branch July 24, 2026 20:02

@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: 259ec09d2a

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".

"result_contract": "Exit 0 with an ok line when selected deterministic checks pass; nonzero with line-specific errors when they fail."
"runtime_validation_command": "python skills/ceratops-skill-lifecycle/scripts/runtime/skills-consistency-runtime-validator.py --skill <skill-name>",
"runtime_inventory_command": "python skills/ceratops-skill-lifecycle/scripts/runtime/skills-consistency-runtime-validator.py --inventory",
"result_contract": "Validation exits zero with compact JSON when selected deterministic checks pass and nonzero with line-specific errors when they fail; inventory exits zero with compact valid entries and malformed direct-manifest blockers."

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 Keep the source-validator result contract accurate

When this execution contract is used for the skill_validation_command, full_validation_command, or section_validation_command, it now tells callers to expect compact JSON on success, but skills-consistency-source-validator.py still prints ok: skill ..., ok: sections ..., or ok: .... Any automation or agent following this contract would parse the source-validation success output incorrectly; split the contract so only runtime validation/inventory are JSON and source validation remains an ok line.

AGENTS.md reference: AGENTS.md:L81-L83

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