feat(review): persist review id + correct ADR-0035 capture (poll, not webhook) — #144 part 1#161
Merged
Merged
Conversation
… mechanism (#144 part 1) ADR-0035 part 1 (the stated prerequisite — "do this now even before the feature ships"): on write-back, keep the GitHub review id we create so a later 👍/👎 feedback signal can correlate back to the run. - github.rs: create_pr_review returns PostedReview { id, html_url } (was just html_url); the create-review response carries the review object. - migration 0013 + reviews.github_review_id; upsert_review + ReviewRow thread it; finalize stores it. Also CORRECTS ADR-0035: verified against GitHub's webhook-events docs that GitHub does NOT emit reaction webhooks (no `reaction` event; issue_comment/ pull_request_review_comment fire on create/edit/delete, never on a reaction). So part 2's "subscribe to reaction events" is infeasible — capture must POLL the reactions REST API and reconcile (which also yields the un-react/"deleted" behaviour for free). Per-comment ids aren't in the create-review response either; they need a follow-up GET at capture time. control-plane 57 (pg17) green; fmt + clippy clean. The polling capture + review_feedback table + dashboard is the follow-up (part 2). Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
|
You have reached your Codex usage limits for code reviews. You can see your limits in the Codex usage dashboard. |
✅ AI Governance check passedThis PR declares AI usage, references a source of truth, and provides verification evidence. Thank you. |
![gemini-code-assist[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/956858?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Code Review
This pull request implements the first part of ADR-0035 by persisting the GitHub review ID when writing back reviews. It updates the ADR documentation to correct the feedback capture mechanism from webhooks to polling, adds a database migration to store github_review_id in the reviews table, and updates the database, HTTP internal handlers, and GitHub integration code to propagate and persist this ID. There are no review comments to address.
Important
The consumer version of Gemini Code Assist on GitHub is being sunset. Starting June 18, 2026, new organization installations will be blocked, and all code review activity will officially cease on July 17, 2026.
For more details on the timeline and next steps, please review the Help Documentation.
10 tasks
stephane-segning
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 22, 2026
…162) * feat(observability): persist the agent run transcript — backend (#143, ADR-0034) The runner records its run transcript (assistant reasoning + tool calls + per-turn token usage, and bounded tool results) and submits it to the control plane at run end — even on failure, so a failed run's reasoning is inspectable. The control plane stores it and serves a read API for the (future) dashboard timeline. UI deferred per scope. - runner: chat Completion now carries token `usage`; run_native_agent fills a transcript Vec the caller owns + submits best-effort (client.submit_ transcript); tool results truncated to 2 KiB. - control-plane: migration 0014 agent_transcript; replace_transcript (txn: a retry re-submit fully replaces) + get_transcript; ingest endpoint POST /internal/tasks/{id}/transcript; read GET /tasks/{id}/transcript (gated review:read). NOTE: migration numbered 0014 to sit after #144's 0013 — merge #161 first so prod's migration sequence has no gap. agent-runner 30 + control-plane 58 (pg17, incl. transcript test) green; fmt + clippy clean. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com> * fix(transcript): 404 on unknown task in ingest (Gemini #162) Resolve the task before replace_transcript so an unknown id is a clean 404 instead of a foreign-key 500 on insert — mirrors ingest_chunks/ingest_graph. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com> --------- Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
11 tasks
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
1 participant
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.
1. Summary
The unblocking prerequisite for #144 / ADR-0035 (review feedback 👍/👎), plus a verified correction to the ADR's capture mechanism.
create_pr_reviewnow returnsPostedReview { id, html_url }; migration0013addsreviews.github_review_id;upsert_review/ReviewRow/finalizethread it.reactionevent;issue_comment/pull_request_review_commentfire on create/edit/delete, never on a reaction). The ADR's "subscribe to reaction events" is infeasible — capture must poll the reactions REST API and reconcile (which yields the un-react/"deleted" case for free). Also noted: per-comment ids aren't in the create-review response; they need a follow-up GET at capture time.Source of truth: #144 / ADR-0035.
2. Intent
3. Scope
In Scope
github_review_id; ADR-0035 correction (webhook → poll).Out of Scope (the corrected part 2 — follow-up)
review_feedbacktable, per-comment id capture (follow-up GET), and the dashboard surface. These need a poller (control-plane background loop or the ADR-0028 jobs sidecar) + apps/web work — flagged for direction.4. Verification
5. Screenshots / Evidence
ADR-0035 amended in this PR with the verified correction (status line + Decision Outcome part 2).
6. Risk Assessment
7. AI Usage Declaration
AI was used for:
Human verification:
8. Reviewer Focus
🤖 Generated with Claude Code