Attach Git provenance to user messages - #4375
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
π‘ Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 6ca7790c14
βΉοΈ About Codex in GitHub
Codex has been enabled to automatically review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with π.
When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".
π Dyadbot Code Review SummaryVerdict: π€ NOT SURE - Potential issues The core direction is sound: moving Git provenance out of assistant content and into an in-memory The issues below are all in the new carry-forward logic in Issues Summary
π’ Low Priority Notes (4 items)
Confidence notes: the diff is complete (not truncated), but I reviewed the new logic against the pre-merge state of Generated by Dyadbot persona-based code review |
π€ Claude Code Review SummaryPR Confidence: 4/5All trusted review threads are resolved and focused local checks pass; full CI is still running, and the Codex review job failed before review because its workflow credential could not refresh. Unresolved ThreadsNo unresolved threads Resolved Threads
Product Principle SuggestionsNo suggestions π€ Generated by Claude Code |
de41595 to
af240ef
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
π‘ Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: af240ef3b7
βΉοΈ About Codex in GitHub
Codex has been enabled to automatically review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with π.
When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".
π Dyadbot Code Review SummaryVerdict: π€ NOT SURE - Potential issues The core change in The issues below are all in the surrounding prompt/test surface rather than the handler logic. The diff was not truncated, so confidence in the code review is good; the Issues Summary
π’ Low Priority Notes (3 items)
Generated by Dyadbot persona-based code review |
- align Build-mode provenance guidance with user-message reminders\n- cover the shared guidance in the Build prompt test
π€ Claude Code Review SummaryPR Confidence: 5/5All trusted review feedback is addressed, the focused prompt test passes, and formatting, linting, and typechecks succeed. Unresolved ThreadsNo unresolved threads Resolved Threads
Product Principle SuggestionsNo suggestions π€ Generated by Claude Code |
π Dyadbot Code Review SummaryVerdict: β NO - Do NOT merge The core refactor in The blocking problem is prompt-side, not in the history builder: collapsing The diff was not truncated; all 10 changed files were reviewed. Issues Summary
π’ Low Priority Notes (4 items)
Generated by Dyadbot persona-based code review |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
π‘ Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: f7c9592b19
βΉοΈ About Codex in GitHub
Codex has been enabled to automatically review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with π.
When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".
π Dyadbot Code Review SummaryVerdict: π€ NOT SURE - Potential issues The core change is sound. The The issues below are both in the prompt layer, where the PR collapses the curated Build Issues Summary
π’ Low Priority Notes (5 items)
The diff was provided in full ( Generated by Dyadbot persona-based code review |
- Restore Build-specific Git provenance guidance without unavailable tools - Distinguish created commits from pre-turn no-commit provenance
π€ Claude Code Review SummaryPR Confidence: 5/5All trusted review threads are resolved, the focused prompt suite passes, and formatting, lint, and type checks are clean. Unresolved ThreadsNo unresolved threads Resolved Threads
Product Principle SuggestionsNo suggestions; the review findings were concrete capability and correctness issues rather than ambiguous product decisions. π€ Generated by Claude Code |
π Dyadbot Code Review SummaryVerdict: β NO - Do NOT merge The core refactor in The blocker is the The diff was provided in full (no truncation), so confidence in the code findings is high; the E2E finding is based on comparing the new baseline against the new prompt source rather than on an actual test run. Issues Summary
π’ Low Priority Notes (4 items)
Generated by Dyadbot persona-based code review |
π Playwright Test Resultsβ Some tests failed
Summary: 813 passed, 23 failed, 7 flaky, 302 skipped Failed Testsπ macOS
πͺ WindowsShow all 22 failures
π Re-run Failing Tests (macOS)Copy and paste to re-run all failing spec files locally: npm run e2e \
e2e-tests/local_agent_auto.spec.ts
|
Summary
Move assistant-turn Git provenance out of assistant content and into an in-memory reminder attached to the next user message. This keeps the metadata available to the model without encouraging it to reproduce assistant-only tags, and aligns the affected E2E contracts with the new history shape.
aiMessagesJsonunchanged; the reminder exists only in reconstructed model history.tool_resultblocks with queued user text as real user prompts while continuing to skip pure tool-result continuations.