review: require a concrete failure_scenario on every finding#226
Open
jwbron wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
Conversation
Every finding (not just blocking ones) now carries a failure_scenario: the specific inputs or state and the wrong outcome they produce. The field is required in the structured finding schema (FINDING_SCHEMA_VERSION bumped to 2), emitted by every producer (label-shape reviewers and all 11 specialist lenses), and carried verbatim into claims.json. The claim-validator attacks exactly that stated scenario: confirmed means the named scenario occurs on the cited lines, and a scenario too vague to check caps at plausible. Every corpus fixture is migrated with a hand-written failure scenario, per the schema module's rule that a required field invalidates previously serialized findings.
🦋 Changeset detectedLatest commit: 8306d13 The changes in this PR will be included in the next version bump. This PR includes changesets to release 1 package
Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are. Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR |
khan-actions-bot
requested review from
a team,
jaredly and
jeresig
and removed request for
a team
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary
First of three PRs split out of #224 (stack: this PR, then #227 provenance gate, then #228 prompt disciplines). Each lands independently revertable; the three together are byte-identical to #224.
Every finding (not just blocking ones) now carries a concrete
failure_scenario: the specific inputs or state and the wrong outcome they produce. The field is required in the structured finding schema (FINDING_SCHEMA_VERSIONbumped to 2), emitted by every producer (label-shape reviewers and all 11 specialist lenses), and carried verbatim intoclaims.json. The claim-validator now attacks exactly that stated scenario: confirmed means the named scenario occurs on the cited lines, and a scenario too vague to check caps at plausible.FINDING_SCHEMA_VERSIONis now 2 (a required field invalidates previously serialized findings, per the schema module's own rule); every corpus fixture is migrated with a hand-written failure scenario.cc @jeresig
Testing
npx vitest run workflows/review: 410 tests green, including the smoke set.npx tsc --noEmitclean.