docs(policy): plan unified project guide compilation - #279
Merged
Conversation
|
Warning Review limit reached
Next review available in: 45 minutes You've used all free OSS reviews for now. Wait for the free limit to reset to keep reviewing this public repository. How can I continue?After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the To avoid repeated limits, reduce automatic review volume by pausing incremental auto-reviews earlier, using label-based review opt-in, excluding WIP or generated PR titles, or requesting reviews manually when the PR is ready. If your team needs uninterrupted high-volume reviews, an organization admin can enable usage-based reviews. How do review limits work?CodeRabbit enforces per-developer PR review limits for each organization. Most developers receive the normal plan review availability. For paid Pro and Pro+ PR reviews, CodeRabbit uses adaptive limits for sustained high-volume activity. When a developer's recent PR review activity reaches the 95th percentile or higher among CodeRabbit users, additional reviews become available more gradually as earlier reviews age out of the rolling window. Please refer docs for additional details. Review details⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: defaults Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro Plus Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (9)
📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughThe PR adds planning documentation for WS-POL-003. It defines unified Project Guide compilation, immutable provenance, typed checker boundaries, approval and lifecycle rules, eight inactive implementation chunks, risks, dependencies, and review evidence. It introduces no runtime, API, database, workflow, CI, or test changes. ChangesUnified Project Guide compilation
Estimated code review effort: 3 (Moderate) | ~20 minutes Possibly related issues
Possibly related PRs
Suggested reviewers: 🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5✅ Passed checks (5 passed)
✨ Finishing Touches🧪 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 |
Abiorh001
marked this pull request as ready for review
August 4, 2026 23:54
abiorh-claw
self-requested a review
August 5, 2026 00:09
abiorh-claw
previously approved these changes
Aug 5, 2026
Abiorh001
force-pushed
the
codex/ws-pol-003-unified-guide-planning
branch
from
August 5, 2026 02:35
22c93ff to
c08eafc
Compare
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 8
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
Inline comments:
In
@.agent-loop/initiatives/WS-POL-003-unified-project-guide-compilation/chunks/WS-POL-003-03-compilation-persistence-validator.md:
- Around line 28-32: Update the chunk contract’s current-compilation uniqueness
requirement to specify the database-level enforcement mechanism: define the
unique key or partial unique index over exact source, catalogue, and setup
generations, and require compare-and-swap semantics where applicable. Ensure the
constraint and concurrency tests verify that concurrent requests cannot create
two current compilations.
In
@.agent-loop/initiatives/WS-POL-003-unified-project-guide-compilation/chunks/WS-POL-003-04-initial-setup-cutover.md:
- Around line 23-24: Strengthen the setup generation contract around the
deterministic setup task to require a durable invocation key derived from the
immutable setup generation and compilation identifiers. Ensure provider calls
use idempotency or persist the result before any retry, and add a
timeout-after-acceptance test verifying retries reuse the saved result without
issuing another model invocation.
In
@.agent-loop/initiatives/WS-POL-003-unified-project-guide-compilation/chunks/WS-POL-003-05-approval-pre-submit-integration.md:
- Around line 17-20: Resolve the scope contradiction in the “Not allowed”
section: remove the broad exclusion of approval semantics, or narrow it to
unrelated approval behavior while explicitly allowing Project Manager approval
binding for the exact compilation, including hash binding, stale-approval
invalidation, and activation blocking.
In
@.agent-loop/initiatives/WS-POL-003-unified-project-guide-compilation/chunks/WS-POL-003-06-post-submit-deterministic-cutover.md:
- Around line 23-32: Update the post-submit acceptance and invalidation rules to
lock and revalidate the exact approval author identity (hash/ID) bound to the
selected proposal. Ensure any change to that stored approval identity
invalidates the proposal, while preserving the rule that a separate PM approval
may compile the proposal.
In
@.agent-loop/initiatives/WS-POL-003-unified-project-guide-compilation/chunks/WS-POL-003-07-single-checker-service-port.md:
- Around line 10-14: Clarify the evaluate_pre_submission and
evaluate_post_submission contracts so one logical attempt may involve bounded
retries or repair calls, while replay returns the existing canonical result
without rerunning members. Require a new attempt identity for any genuinely new
evaluation, and explicitly identify the repository transaction or persistence
boundary that owns and atomically preserves the canonical result.
In
@.agent-loop/initiatives/WS-POL-003-unified-project-guide-compilation/DECISIONS.md:
- Around line 38-41: Expand decision 15 in the WS-POL-003 contract artifact to
define the enforcement mechanism: specify the exact atomic claim, idempotency
key, run record, and transaction boundary used to serialize repair/requeue
retries. Ensure concurrent retries converge on the same deterministic run and
permit at most one business effect.
In
@.agent-loop/initiatives/WS-POL-003-unified-project-guide-compilation/INTENT.md:
- Around line 5-7: Define one explicit attempt contract across INTENT.md lines
5-7 and 18-20 and PLAN.md lines 5-7, 276-279, and 304-305: state whether
timeout, cancellation, infrastructure failure, invalid output, and unsafe output
consume the single provider call, whether retry starts a new setup generation or
is forbidden, and how attempt identity prevents duplicate accepted compilations.
Align the retry behavior, objective wording, and exactly-one-call/invalidation
tests to this same contract across all listed sites.
In
@.agent-loop/initiatives/WS-POL-003-unified-project-guide-compilation/PLAN.md:
- Around line 237-239: The persistence design must define how atomicity spans
the compilation write and all projection writes while each consumes its separate
action-specific PREP. Update PLAN.md lines 237-239 to specify one transaction
carrying all required PREPs with rollback semantics, or replace “atomically”
with an explicit compensation and recovery contract; update
WS-POL-003-03-compilation-persistence-validator.md lines 34-37 to describe the
matching PREP consumption and rollback behavior, without borrowing compilation
authority.
🪄 Autofix
Fix all unresolved CodeRabbit comments on this PR:
- Push a commit to this branch (recommended)
- Create a new PR with the fixes
ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration
Configuration used: defaults
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro Plus
Run ID: 5d4f3419-70da-4c6c-805e-6b70a7e3b64e
📒 Files selected for processing (17)
.agent-loop/initiatives/WS-POL-003-unified-project-guide-compilation/CHUNK_MAP.md.agent-loop/initiatives/WS-POL-003-unified-project-guide-compilation/DECISIONS.md.agent-loop/initiatives/WS-POL-003-unified-project-guide-compilation/DISCOVERY.md.agent-loop/initiatives/WS-POL-003-unified-project-guide-compilation/INTENT.md.agent-loop/initiatives/WS-POL-003-unified-project-guide-compilation/PLAN.md.agent-loop/initiatives/WS-POL-003-unified-project-guide-compilation/RISKS.md.agent-loop/initiatives/WS-POL-003-unified-project-guide-compilation/STATUS.md.agent-loop/initiatives/WS-POL-003-unified-project-guide-compilation/chunks/WS-POL-003-01-contract-catalogue-projection.md.agent-loop/initiatives/WS-POL-003-unified-project-guide-compilation/chunks/WS-POL-003-02-unified-agent-adapter.md.agent-loop/initiatives/WS-POL-003-unified-project-guide-compilation/chunks/WS-POL-003-03-compilation-persistence-validator.md.agent-loop/initiatives/WS-POL-003-unified-project-guide-compilation/chunks/WS-POL-003-04-initial-setup-cutover.md.agent-loop/initiatives/WS-POL-003-unified-project-guide-compilation/chunks/WS-POL-003-05-approval-pre-submit-integration.md.agent-loop/initiatives/WS-POL-003-unified-project-guide-compilation/chunks/WS-POL-003-06-post-submit-deterministic-cutover.md.agent-loop/initiatives/WS-POL-003-unified-project-guide-compilation/chunks/WS-POL-003-07-single-checker-service-port.md.agent-loop/initiatives/WS-POL-003-unified-project-guide-compilation/chunks/WS-POL-003-08-visibility-correction-cleanup.md.agent-loop/initiatives/WS-POL-003-unified-project-guide-compilation/reviews/WS-POL-003-PLAN-internal-review-evidence.md.agent-loop/initiatives/WS-POL-003-unified-project-guide-compilation/reviews/WS-POL-003-PLAN-pr-trust-bundle.md
…lanning' into codex/ws-pol-003-unified-guide-planning
abiorh-claw
self-requested a review
August 5, 2026 03:19
abiorh-claw
approved these changes
Aug 5, 2026
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.
WS-POL-003 Planning PR Trust Bundle
Chunk
WS-POL-003-PLAN— Unified Project Guide Compilation planning.Goal and human-approved intent
Replace three complete Project Guide inference passes with one bounded unified
compilation per immutable setup generation, while retaining separate canonical
policy objects, approvals, authorization boundaries, and checker ownership.
Provide one internal typed checker-service facade with one complete pre-submit
command at sealed-scratch custody and one complete post-submit command after
verified storage/binding. No caller selects or invokes individual checkers.
What changed and why
status, and eight bounded implementation contracts.
writer and durable CHECKER/POL as the post-submit owner.
persistence can start.
closed-world, and generation/hash bound.
The original draft had the right product direction but stale baseline,
ambiguous correction provenance, under-specified fixed-service authority, and
unclear phase execution/evidence ownership.
Design and scope control
Rejected alternatives include three repeated inference calls, one combined
canonical policy object, in-place edits to agent projections, broad compilation
authority, POL-local pre-submit maps, and per-checker product APIs.
Acceptance evidence and test delta
This is documentation/planning only. Markdown links, stale wording, and diff
integrity pass. There is no runtime test delta and no CI or coverage weakening.
Reviewer results and external review
Architecture, security, product/operations, and QA all pass with low residual
dependency-discipline risks after repairs. CodeRabbit and hosted CI are pending
on the PR head.
Remaining risks and follow-up
any action or chunk.
WS-POL-003-03.
PR, and human merge.
Human review focus
Human merge ownership
This PR must be merged only after explicit human approval. Merge authorizes the
plan record only; it does not start an implementation chunk.
Summary by CodeRabbit