Skip to content

fix(skills): enforce executing-plans review gate (#41)#76

Open
ddddddddwp wants to merge 8 commits into
rpamis:masterfrom
ddddddddwp:fix/41-executing-plans-review
Open

fix(skills): enforce executing-plans review gate (#41)#76
ddddddddwp wants to merge 8 commits into
rpamis:masterfrom
ddddddddwp:fix/41-executing-plans-review

Conversation

@ddddddddwp
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@ddddddddwp ddddddddwp commented Jun 6, 2026

Fixes #41.

What changed

  • Added an executing-plans review gate to Chinese and English comet-build skill docs.
  • Required at least one code reviewer dispatch after all planned tasks complete and before the build -> verify guard runs.
  • Required CRITICAL review findings to be fixed before verify, and accepted non-CRITICAL findings to be recorded with rationale and impact scope.
  • Added prose regression assertions for the Chinese and English skill requirements.
  • Fixed the Lingma init E2E test fixture so the mocked Superpowers staging install creates the expected .claude/skills payload before copying to Lingma.

Why

The comet-build + executing-plans path could previously finish implementation and transition to verify without any mandatory independent review. That made the lightweight execution path weaker than intended and allowed review to be skipped.

Validation

  • npm run build
  • npx vitest run test/ts/skills.test.ts test/ts/init-e2e.test.ts
  • git diff --check origin/master...HEAD

Restores closed PR #70. The original PR could not be reopened because GitHub reports that the source repository for #70 had been deleted.

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • New Features

    • Mandatory review gate for executing-plans builds: at least one reviewer dispatched before verification; critical findings must be fixed; accepted non-critical findings must include recorded rationale and impact.
  • Documentation

    • Updated workflow docs, spec, design, plan, verification report, and task checklist to reflect the new review gate and exit conditions.
  • Tests

    • Extended tests to assert the executing-plans review dispatch and CRITICAL/non‑CRITICAL handling.

Astrolabe change: enforce-executing-plans-review

验证: npm run build; npx vitest run test/ts/init-e2e.test.ts; npx vitest run test/ts/skills.test.ts test/ts/comet-scripts.test.ts test/ts/init-e2e.test.ts; npx vitest run
Astrolabe change: enforce-executing-plans-review

验证: npm run build; npx vitest run
Astrolabe change: enforce-executing-plans-review

验证: openspec validate --all
@coderabbitai
Copy link
Copy Markdown

coderabbitai Bot commented Jun 6, 2026

Too many files changed? Review this PR in Change Stack to see how the pieces fit before you dive in.

Review Change Stack

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉

ℹ️ Recent review info
⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: defaults

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: b7312bb8-a175-4e09-bb9f-396ea35d273a

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 791e243 and 974ce23.

📒 Files selected for processing (3)
  • docs/superpowers/plans/2026-06-03-executing-plans-review-gate.md
  • openspec/changes/archive/2026-06-04-enforce-executing-plans-review/.astrolabe.yaml
  • openspec/changes/archive/2026-06-04-enforce-executing-plans-review/tasks.md
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (1)
  • docs/superpowers/plans/2026-06-03-executing-plans-review-gate.md
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (2)
  • openspec/changes/archive/2026-06-04-enforce-executing-plans-review/.astrolabe.yaml
  • openspec/changes/archive/2026-06-04-enforce-executing-plans-review/tasks.md

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

This PR enforces a mandatory code review gate for the executing-plans build mode in comet-build: dispatch at least one reviewer after task completion and before build→verify, require fixing CRITICAL findings, and record accepted non-CRITICAL findings in durable artifacts.

Changes

Executing-Plans Review Gate

Layer / File(s) Summary
OpenSpec requirement and design definition
openspec/changes/archive/2026-06-04-enforce-executing-plans-review/proposal.md, openspec/changes/archive/2026-06-04-enforce-executing-plans-review/design.md, openspec/changes/archive/2026-06-04-enforce-executing-plans-review/specs/comet-build-review-gate/spec.md, openspec/specs/comet-build-review-gate/spec.md
Proposal, design, and formal specification documents define the mandatory reviewer dispatch requirement when build_mode is executing-plans, with rules for resolving critical and recording non-critical review findings before the build→verify transition.
Chinese skill gate implementation
assets/skills-zh/comet-build/SKILL.md
Adds executing-plans review gate requirement specifying when reviewer dispatch must occur, ordering relative to build guard application, and handling rules for critical vs non-critical findings in the primary language skill.
English skill gate synchronization
assets/skills/comet-build/SKILL.md
Mirrors Chinese implementation with matching review gate semantics and exit condition validation requirements for the executing-plans build mode.
Skill regression test assertions
test/ts/skills.test.ts
Both Chinese and English workflow safeguard tests are extended to assert reviewer dispatch requirement, build→verify sequencing, and distinct handling for critical vs non-critical review findings when build_mode is executing-plans.
E2E test mock infrastructure
test/ts/init-e2e.test.ts
Test mocks are enhanced to stage skill directories, write SKILL.md files, and override home directory context for more realistic skill installation and invocation validation.
OpenSpec archival and handoff
openspec/changes/archive/2026-06-04-enforce-executing-plans-review/{.openspec.yaml,.astrolabe.yaml,.astrolabe/handoff/*,tasks.md}
Metadata, Astrolabe workflow configuration, and design-handoff context files package the proposal, design, tasks, and specification for archival with content hashes, verification references, and phase tracking.
Verification plan, design spec, and report
docs/superpowers/plans/2026-06-03-executing-plans-review-gate.md, docs/superpowers/specs/2026-06-03-executing-plans-review-gate-design.md, docs/superpowers/reports/2026-06-04-enforce-executing-plans-review-verify.md
Plan document outlines ordered implementation tasks; design spec specifies gate semantics, testing strategy, and scope boundaries; verification report documents completeness, test pass counts, requirement mapping, and passes all checks.

🎯 3 (Moderate) | ⏱️ ~25 minutes

🐰 A review gate now guards the build—
No more plans without a peer's keen eye.
Critical fixes must be made,
While accepting less-critical with grace,
Before verify takes the stage!

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 4 | ❌ 1

❌ Failed checks (1 warning)

Check name Status Explanation Resolution
Docstring Coverage ⚠️ Warning Docstring coverage is 0.00% which is insufficient. The required threshold is 80.00%. Write docstrings for the functions missing them to satisfy the coverage threshold.
✅ Passed checks (4 passed)
Check name Status Explanation
Description Check ✅ Passed Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check ✅ Passed The title 'fix(skills): enforce executing-plans review gate' directly describes the main change: enforcing a review gate requirement for the executing-plans build mode in the comet-build skill files.
Linked Issues check ✅ Passed The PR fully addresses issue #41 by enforcing a mandatory code reviewer dispatch requirement in the executing-plans build path, with proper handling of CRITICAL and non-CRITICAL findings.
Out of Scope Changes check ✅ Passed All changes directly support the review gate enforcement: skill documentation updates, test assertions for the new gate, supporting spec/design/plan documentation, and a test fixture fix for proper skill staging during verification.

✏️ 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.

@ddddddddwp ddddddddwp marked this pull request as ready for review June 6, 2026 09:54
@ddddddddwp
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

/gemini review

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@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: 3

🤖 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 `@docs/superpowers/plans/2026-06-03-executing-plans-review-gate.md`:
- Line 23: The heading "### Task 1: Add the Skill Safeguard Regression Test" is
an H3 under a top-level H1 with no H2 parent (MD001); fix by promoting the Task
header to an H2 (change "### Task 1: Add the Skill Safeguard Regression Test" to
"## Task 1: Add the Skill Safeguard Regression Test") or insert an appropriate
H2 parent section above it so the H3 has an H2 context; update the heading text
accordingly to preserve semantics and run the linter to confirm MD001 is
resolved.

In
`@openspec/changes/archive/2026-06-04-enforce-executing-plans-review/.astrolabe.yaml`:
- Line 15: Update the stale handoff_context value in .astrolabe.yaml so it
points to the archived location: replace the current
openspec/changes/enforce-executing-plans-review/.astrolabe/handoff/design-context.json
reference with the path under the archive
(openspec/changes/archive/2026-06-04-enforce-executing-plans-review/.astrolabe/handoff/design-context.json)
so consumers resolving the handoff_context key can find the real file; make this
change in the .astrolabe.yaml file where the handoff_context key is defined.

In `@openspec/changes/archive/2026-06-04-enforce-executing-plans-review/tasks.md`:
- Around line 2-3: Update the archived checklist so the two items are not
contradictory by making the first item describe a prior pending state and the
second item the completed follow-up; specifically, change the Line 2 text "Run
focused verification and record that English synchronization is pending user
confirmation." to a past-tense/chronological phrase such as "Ran focused
verification and recorded that English synchronization was pending user
confirmation at that step," and keep Line 3 "Sync the approved review gate to
`assets/skills/comet-build/SKILL.md` and cover it with English skill
assertions." as the completed action to make the final state unambiguous.
🪄 Autofix (Beta)

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

Run ID: 5c0b41b7-5d37-4079-830c-dff0132d2b3a

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 5e8a6d7 and 791e243.

📒 Files selected for processing (16)
  • assets/skills-zh/comet-build/SKILL.md
  • assets/skills/comet-build/SKILL.md
  • docs/superpowers/plans/2026-06-03-executing-plans-review-gate.md
  • docs/superpowers/reports/2026-06-04-enforce-executing-plans-review-verify.md
  • docs/superpowers/specs/2026-06-03-executing-plans-review-gate-design.md
  • openspec/changes/archive/2026-06-04-enforce-executing-plans-review/.astrolabe.yaml
  • openspec/changes/archive/2026-06-04-enforce-executing-plans-review/.astrolabe/handoff/design-context.json
  • openspec/changes/archive/2026-06-04-enforce-executing-plans-review/.astrolabe/handoff/design-context.md
  • openspec/changes/archive/2026-06-04-enforce-executing-plans-review/.openspec.yaml
  • openspec/changes/archive/2026-06-04-enforce-executing-plans-review/design.md
  • openspec/changes/archive/2026-06-04-enforce-executing-plans-review/proposal.md
  • openspec/changes/archive/2026-06-04-enforce-executing-plans-review/specs/comet-build-review-gate/spec.md
  • openspec/changes/archive/2026-06-04-enforce-executing-plans-review/tasks.md
  • openspec/specs/comet-build-review-gate/spec.md
  • test/ts/init-e2e.test.ts
  • test/ts/skills.test.ts

Comment thread docs/superpowers/plans/2026-06-03-executing-plans-review-gate.md Outdated
Comment thread openspec/changes/archive/2026-06-04-enforce-executing-plans-review/tasks.md Outdated
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.

feat: the review of the "executing-plans" path is too weak.

1 participant