Skip to content

docs: add nemoclaw debug command to CLI reference and troubleshooting#882

Open
clark-s-dev wants to merge 2 commits intoNVIDIA:mainfrom
clark-s-dev:docs/add-debug-command-reference
Open

docs: add nemoclaw debug command to CLI reference and troubleshooting#882
clark-s-dev wants to merge 2 commits intoNVIDIA:mainfrom
clark-s-dev:docs/add-debug-command-reference

Conversation

@clark-s-dev
Copy link

@clark-s-dev clark-s-dev commented Mar 25, 2026

Summary

Related Issue

Changes

Type of Change

  • Code change for a new feature, bug fix, or refactor.
  • Code change with doc updates.
  • Doc only. Prose changes without code sample modifications.
  • Doc only. Includes code sample changes.

Testing

  • npx prek run --all-files passes (or equivalently make check).
  • npm test passes.
  • make docs builds without warnings. (for doc-only changes)

Checklist

General

Code Changes

  • Formatters applied — npx prek run --all-files auto-fixes formatting (or make format for targeted runs).
  • Tests added or updated for new or changed behavior.
  • No secrets, API keys, or credentials committed.
  • Doc pages updated for any user-facing behavior changes (new commands, changed defaults, new features, bug fixes that contradict existing docs).

Doc Changes

  • Follows the style guide. Try running the update-docs agent skill to draft changes while complying with the style guide. For example, prompt your agent with "/update-docs catch up the docs for the new changes I made in this PR."
  • New pages include SPDX license header and frontmatter, if creating a new page.
  • Cross-references and links verified.

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Documentation
    • Documented new nemoclaw debug CLI for collecting consolidated diagnostics with configurable flags for quick runs, sandbox targeting, and outputting a compressed report for issue attachments.
    • Added troubleshooting guidance prompting users to run the debug command, review/redact sensitive data, optionally save the tarball for GitHub issues, and includes example remote-run invocation.

@coderabbitai
Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Mar 25, 2026

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉

ℹ️ Recent review info
⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 34ab53f1-e776-42df-9759-0adb50342474

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 8be6635 and a5c57e9.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)
  • docs/reference/commands.md
  • docs/reference/troubleshooting.md
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (2)
  • docs/reference/troubleshooting.md
  • docs/reference/commands.md

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

Documented a new CLI subcommand nemoclaw debug for collecting consolidated diagnostics (with redaction), added flags (--quick, --sandbox, --output), usage examples, and a troubleshooting tip recommending running the command before filing issues.

Changes

Cohort / File(s) Summary
Debug command docs
docs/reference/commands.md
Added nemoclaw debug reference: purpose, flags (--quick, --sandbox NAME, --output PATH), behavior, and example invocations (including remote script via `curl
Troubleshooting tip
docs/reference/troubleshooting.md
Inserted a "Collect diagnostics first" admonition instructing users to run nemoclaw debug, review redacted output, optionally save a tarball for GitHub issues, and consult the command reference.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~3 minutes

Poem

🐰 I hopped through logs both near and far,
Collected traces, GPU and container spar,
Packaged secrets gently, redacted with care,
A debug tarball for the issue to share. 🥕✨

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 3
✅ Passed checks (3 passed)
Check name Status Explanation
Description Check ✅ Passed Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check ✅ Passed The title directly and clearly describes the main change: adding documentation for the nemoclaw debug command to two specific documentation files (CLI reference and troubleshooting).
Docstring Coverage ✅ Passed No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.

✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.

✨ Finishing Touches
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
  • Create PR with unit tests

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.

Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 2

🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
docs/reference/troubleshooting.md (1)

27-29: Use a native tip admonition directive instead of generic admonition + class.

This callout should use MyST :::{tip} directly for consistency with the docs style.

As per coding guidelines, "Use MyST admonitions (:::{tip}, :::{note}, :::{warning}) for callouts, not bold text or blockquotes."

🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.

In `@docs/reference/troubleshooting.md` around lines 27 - 29, Replace the generic
MyST admonition block that uses ":::{admonition} :class: tip" with the native
MyST admonition directive ":::{tip}" directly; locate the block around the
"Collect diagnostics first" callout and change its opening marker to "::: {tip}"
(i.e., use the MyST tip admonition) and ensure the closing marker remains the
matching ":::".
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.

Inline comments:
In `@docs/reference/commands.md`:
- Around line 175-177: The description line that currently states "secrets
automatically redacted" overstates the behavior; update the command's
documentation string (the sentence in the diagnostics command description) to
say that known sensitive patterns are redacted or that automated redaction is
applied to common secrets, and explicitly advise users to review the output for
any remaining sensitive data so the text matches the implementation's behavior.

In `@docs/reference/troubleshooting.md`:
- Around line 30-31: The docs claim the report is redacted but the debug tool
(nemoclaw debug) / scripts/debug.sh only applies pattern-based redaction and
warns manual review; update the troubleshooting text to avoid implying full
secret scrubbing by changing the sentence to state the report is "partially
redacted" or "redacted for known patterns" and explicitly instruct users to
manually review and remove any sensitive data before sharing (retain the example
with `nemoclaw debug --output ...` and the GitHub issue link).

---

Nitpick comments:
In `@docs/reference/troubleshooting.md`:
- Around line 27-29: Replace the generic MyST admonition block that uses
":::{admonition} :class: tip" with the native MyST admonition directive
":::{tip}" directly; locate the block around the "Collect diagnostics first"
callout and change its opening marker to "::: {tip}" (i.e., use the MyST tip
admonition) and ensure the closing marker remains the matching ":::".

ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 70e57225-73d3-4b7d-afce-971df7c92db6

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 289a4b7 and 8be6635.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)
  • docs/reference/commands.md
  • docs/reference/troubleshooting.md

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.

2 participants