Files
gstack/scripts/resolvers/fix-check.ts
T
Garry Tanandcapy-ai[bot] 148d28ea81 feat(ship): /ship and /autoplan size their review to the diff (GSTA-131) (#3527)
* wip(GSTA-131): review depth, fix-check transitions, dispatch counters, carry pregate, autoplan round policy

Co-authored-by: capy-ai[bot] <230910855+capy-ai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>

* wip(GSTA-131): reviewers stay at full effort; audits light

Co-authored-by: capy-ai[bot] <230910855+capy-ai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>

* feat(ship): Step 9 dispatches what gstack-review-plan plans; fix-check after below-floor fixes; cap two full passes plus one fix-check

Co-authored-by: capy-ai[bot] <230910855+capy-ai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>

* test: review-dispatch-compare has a free lane; review-depth fixtures registered free; resumed max_rounds case off the old default

Co-authored-by: capy-ai[bot] <230910855+capy-ai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>

* fix(GSTA-131): ship review pass-1 repairs: fix-check binds under its own skill, Step 11.5 accepts a fix-check or a planned adversarial skip, delta carry with a pregate, carry --pregate pinned to the checkout, quiet-after-cap revise regates, skill-dir markdown and rule docs classed code, gate signals from tests class up, plan fails closed on git errors, per-class compare ratios

Co-authored-by: capy-ai[bot] <230910855+capy-ai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>

* fix(GSTA-131): ship review pass-2 repairs: Step 11 follows the last full-pass plan, Important Rules restored, ship goldens regenerated, true per-class medians, review-policy transitions and once-per-invocation voices, docs/** assets stay docs-class, CLI and fix-check binding tests

Co-authored-by: capy-ai[bot] <230910855+capy-ai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>

* docs(changelog): GSTA-131 review depth, fix-check, delta /ship and autoplan rounds

Co-authored-by: capy-ai[bot] <230910855+capy-ai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>

* docs: ship-policy cap and counters, review-policy /review cycle cap, unattended passes (docs audit)

Co-authored-by: capy-ai[bot] <230910855+capy-ai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>

* fix(review): 400-word findings cap fits the /review size pins (five host pins lowered by 2); CHANGELOG max_rounds wording

Co-authored-by: capy-ai[bot] <230910855+capy-ai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>

* docs(changelog): gate integrity names the size-ledger entry and the lowered /review pins

Co-authored-by: capy-ai[bot] <230910855+capy-ai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>

* test: the round-budget case asserts the default through ROUNDS output only (pregate literals heuristic)

Co-authored-by: capy-ai[bot] <230910855+capy-ai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>

* test: curate ship-receipt-carry-pregate out of the Windows lane like its --pregate siblings

Co-authored-by: capy-ai[bot] <230910855+capy-ai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>

* docs(changelog): end the Windows curation sentence instead of a mid-sentence colon

Co-authored-by: capy-ai[bot] <230910855+capy-ai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>

* fix(ship): one decision each for the review-loop exits, the planned adversarial skip and Step 16's TODOS rerun (screen judge repair)

Co-authored-by: capy-ai[bot] <230910855+capy-ai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>

* fix(ship): fix-check repairs: pin the renamed Step 11 heading, keep the below-floor exit at the cap, name the plan run a repeat reuses, print the native skip on outside-only plans

Co-authored-by: capy-ai[bot] <230910855+capy-ai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>

---------

Co-authored-by: capy-ai[bot] <230910855+capy-ai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
2026-10-28 05:45:54 +00:00

26 lines
1.8 KiB
TypeScript

/**
* Fix-check prompt (docs/review-policy.md#transitions): the one reviewer /ship dispatches after a
* step whose fixes do not earn a full pass. It reads the fixes, never the whole diff. The parent
* writes every input in literally: a reviewer never sees the parent's shell.
*/
export interface FixCheckInput { fixList: string; touchedHunks: string; callers: string; testResults: string }
export const FIX_CHECK_INSTRUCTIONS = `You are the fix-check reviewer for a pre-landing review. An earlier review pass found
findings and the author fixed them. You check only those fixes: the fix list, the hunks the fixes
touched, the callers of every symbol the fixes changed, and the test results after the fixes.
Find any defect a fix introduced or left in place: a caller the change breaks, a guard that now
fails open (accepts what it refused) or fails closed (refuses what it accepted), a regression of
behaviour the code had before the fix, an error or unreadable state now read as success, a test
made weaker. Name the input or call site that reaches each defect.
Rate each finding against the blocking floor: CRITICAL only when it would fail a test, break
production, or lose data or secrets; everything else is INFORMATIONAL. Output one JSON object per
line, {"severity":"CRITICAL|INFORMATIONAL","path":"<file>","line":<n>,"summary":"<what breaks, for which input>"},
or the two words NO FINDINGS when the fixes are sound.`;
export function renderFixCheckPrompt(i: FixCheckInput): string {
return [FIX_CHECK_INSTRUCTIONS, '', '## Fix list', i.fixList.trim(), '', '## Touched hunks', '```diff', i.touchedHunks.trim(), '```', '',
'## Callers of changed symbols', i.callers.trim() || '(none found)', '', '## Test results after the fixes', i.testResults.trim()].join('\n') + '\n';
}