feat(review-story): add reusable review story api - #24350
Conversation
![chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1144995?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 5e8a5b2c7c
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to 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 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
| ReviewTarget::UncommittedChanges => { | ||
| git_output( | ||
| cwd, | ||
| &["diff", "--no-ext-diff", "--find-renames", "HEAD", "--"], | ||
| ) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
For ReviewTarget::UncommittedChanges, the protocol contract is the whole working tree including staged, unstaged, and untracked files, but this command only reports tracked staged/unstaged changes. When a user's change set includes new untracked files (or only untracked files), the generated story omits them or reports no changes, and the fingerprint won't reflect them; please collect untracked-file evidence as well.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
| let mut parts = header.split_whitespace(); | ||
| let _diff = parts.next()?; | ||
| let _git = parts.next()?; | ||
| let _old = parts.next()?; | ||
| let new = parts.next()?; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
When a changed filename contains spaces, Git's default header looks like diff --git a/dir with space/file name.txt b/dir with space/file name.txt; splitting on whitespace makes the fourth token just with, so the anchor path, summary, prompt, and review focus point at a bogus file. Please parse the diff --git header in a way that preserves paths with spaces (or collect path metadata separately).
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
| @@ -0,0 +1,42 @@ | |||
| (eval):5: parse error near `end' | |||
| # Review Story v1 | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The repo-level AGENTS.md says not to add general product or user-facing documentation under docs/, except app-server API docs. This ADR is a general Review Story product/design document rather than app-server API documentation, so adding it here violates the documented placement rule; please move it to an allowed location or remove it.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
5e8a5b2 to
a881a98
Compare
fcoury-oai
changed the title
|
Closing this pull request because it has had no updates for more than 14 days. If you plan to continue working on it, feel free to reopen or open a new PR. |
1 participant
Why
As AI-generated changes become larger and faster to produce, reviewer time shifts from reading authored explanations to reconstructing intent from raw diffs. Current review surfaces are primarily file- and line-oriented; they do not provide a conceptual reading order for understanding a change.
Review Story is an incremental step toward a more semantic review workflow: it produces a reusable, persisted explanation artifact that organizes changed evidence into ordered, cohesive steps while preserving complete diff coverage.
This PR is intentionally limited to generation and persistence of completed story snapshots. It does not add interactive review, risk classification, CI integration, or feedback-memory loops.
What Changed
reviewStory/start,reviewStory/read, andreviewStory/listAPI surface plus snapshot update notifications and generated schemas.How to Test
reviewStory/startfor a non-empty change source and confirm the response contains an ordered completed snapshot with anchored steps.reviewStory/readandreviewStory/listand confirm the persisted snapshot is returned.Targeted tests:
just test -p codex-app-server-protocolpassed.just test -p codex-statepassed.just test -p codex-app-serverpassed outside the nested sandbox: 787 passed, 1 skipped.The Bazel-backed
just argument-comment-lintaggregate is blocked locally by the existing LLVM sanitizer-header glob failure; touched Rust literal callsites were inspected during implementation.Stack