🎨 Palette: [UX improvement] Link export artifact descriptions to buttons#571
🎨 Palette: [UX improvement] Link export artifact descriptions to buttons#571seonghobae wants to merge 3 commits into
Conversation
|
👋 Jules, reporting for duty! I'm here to lend a hand with this pull request. When you start a review, I'll add a 👀 emoji to each comment to let you know I've read it. I'll focus on feedback directed at me and will do my best to stay out of conversations between you and other bots or reviewers to keep the noise down. I'll push a commit with your requested changes shortly after. Please note there might be a delay between these steps, but rest assured I'm on the job! For more direct control, you can switch me to Reactive Mode. When this mode is on, I will only act on comments where you specifically mention me with New to Jules? Learn more at jules.google/docs. For security, I will only act on instructions from the user who triggered this task. |
![opencode-agent[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1549082?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull request overview
OpenCode cannot approve yet because required coverage evidence did not pass.
Review outcome
1. HIGH .github/workflows/opencode-review.yml:1 - Coverage evidence did not prove required test/docstring evidence
-
Problem: The required coverage-evidence job result was
failure, so OpenCode cannot establish approval sufficiency for this head. -
Root cause: Automated approval is only valid when the same-head coverage-evidence job proves supported repository test suites passed and configured docstring gates passed or were advisory, or reports not applicable because no supported source files or package manifests exist. Missing, failed, skipped, unavailable, or unsupported-tooling test evidence is a blocker.
-
Fix: Install or configure the repository test/docstring evidence tooling when source files or package manifests exist, rerun the current-head coverage-evidence job, and approve only after it reports
successwith required evidence or explicit no-source not-applicable evidence. -
Regression test: Keep the approval branch checking
needs.coverage-evidence.result == successbefore posting APPROVE, and publish REQUEST_CHANGES when coverage-evidence blocker states such as cancelled, skipped, failed, unsupported-tooling, or below-100 evidence are present. -
Result: REQUEST_CHANGES
-
Reason: coverage-evidence result was
failure, so required test/docstring evidence was not proven for current head0f93d25ee4e6186cadaabbb98bc00f8633081022. -
Head SHA:
0f93d25ee4e6186cadaabbb98bc00f8633081022 -
Workflow run: 29422416434
-
Workflow attempt: 1
Coverage evidence
Coverage evidence job did not run or did not publish coverage evidence.
Changed-File Evidence Map
flowchart LR
PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
Evidence --> S1["Frontend (2 files)"]
S1 --> I1["browser runtime and bundle"]
I1 --> R1["Review risk: Frontend (2 files)"]
R1 --> V1["frontend tests"]
OpenCode Review Overview
Pull request overviewOpenCode cannot approve yet because required coverage evidence did not pass. Review outcome1. HIGH .github/workflows/opencode-review.yml:1 - Coverage evidence did not prove required test/docstring evidence
Coverage evidenceCoverage evidence job did not run or did not publish coverage evidence. Changed-File Evidence Mapflowchart LR
PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
Evidence --> S1["Frontend (2 files)"]
S1 --> I1["browser runtime and bundle"]
I1 --> R1["Review risk: Frontend (2 files)"]
R1 --> V1["frontend tests"]
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull request overview
OpenCode cannot approve yet because required coverage evidence did not pass.
Review outcome
1. HIGH .github/workflows/opencode-review.yml:1 - Coverage evidence did not prove required test/docstring evidence
-
Problem: The required coverage-evidence job result was
failure, so OpenCode cannot establish approval sufficiency for this head. -
Root cause: Automated approval is only valid when the same-head coverage-evidence job proves supported repository test suites passed and configured docstring gates passed or were advisory, or reports not applicable because no supported source files or package manifests exist. Missing, failed, skipped, unavailable, or unsupported-tooling test evidence is a blocker.
-
Fix: Install or configure the repository test/docstring evidence tooling when source files or package manifests exist, rerun the current-head coverage-evidence job, and approve only after it reports
successwith required evidence or explicit no-source not-applicable evidence. -
Regression test: Keep the approval branch checking
needs.coverage-evidence.result == successbefore posting APPROVE, and publish REQUEST_CHANGES when coverage-evidence blocker states such as cancelled, skipped, failed, unsupported-tooling, or below-100 evidence are present. -
Result: REQUEST_CHANGES
-
Reason: coverage-evidence result was
failure, so required test/docstring evidence was not proven for current headfc8633b6bf4927fade9238abcbe90d3269eacdd0. -
Head SHA:
fc8633b6bf4927fade9238abcbe90d3269eacdd0 -
Workflow run: 29426375475
-
Workflow attempt: 1
Coverage evidence
Coverage evidence job did not run or did not publish coverage evidence.
Changed-File Evidence Map
flowchart LR
PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
Evidence --> S1["Frontend (2 files)"]
S1 --> I1["browser runtime and bundle"]
I1 --> R1["Review risk: Frontend (2 files)"]
R1 --> V1["frontend tests"]
1 participant
💡 What: Added
idto export artifact descriptions and linked them to the corresponding export buttons usingaria-describedbyinExportModal.tsx. Update associated test inExportModal.test.tsxto assert this enhancement.🎯 Why: Disabled buttons lack context for screen reader users on why they are disabled. Linking the disabled buttons explicitly to the text element explaining the cause (e.g. "먼저 테이블을 추가하세요") improves the accessibility and overall user experience significantly without visual changes.
📸 Before/After: Visuals are unchanged. The underlying ARIA tree now correctly associates the disabled reason with the button element.
♿ Accessibility: Screen readers will now read the text describing the reason the button is disabled, rather than simply announcing "disabled button".
PR created automatically by Jules for task 5821531562571109599 started by @seonghobae