[jonahgabriel]

DO NOT MERGE — THROWAWAY SEEDED-PROOF PR

Closed unmerged as soon as the guard result is captured; branch deleted after. Mirrors the omniclaude precedent omniclaude#1947 (closed unmerged 2026-07-26).

Purpose

OMN-15178 X4 residual: omnimarket seeded-proof parity. The required-check-skip-guard / check-skip-vectors context was flipped to REQUIRED on omnimarket dev (operator ruling 2026-07-26T07:25Z) on the strength of green runs alone. Green runs prove the guard runs; they do not prove it fires. This PR seeds a real violation to prove RED.

Seeded vector

.github/workflows/hostile-reviewer.yml, job hostile-review-gate (produces the REQUIRED Hostile Review Gate context, manifest skip_semantics: never): removed if: always() while keeping needs: [hostile-review].

That is the exact vector-5-ungated-needs-cascade shape (OMN-15057) — GitHub's implicit job-level if: is success() over needs:, so a failed upstream SKIPS the job, and a skipped job satisfies branch protection. This is the very regression OMN-15057 fixed on this file (live proof: omnimarket#1880, where 18 required gates went skipped).

Expected result

required-check-skip-guard / check-skip-vectors RED, naming [vector-5-ungated-needs-cascade] required context 'Hostile Review Gate'.

A local pre-run of the same validator against this branch already returns FAIL: 1 required-check skip vector(s) found with that exact finding.

Ticket

OMN-15178 — evidence comment posted on the ticket. No status flips.

[coderabbitai]

Warning

Review limit reached

You’ve reached a temporary PR review limit under our Fair Usage Limits Policy.

Your recent review volume is higher than typical usage, so adaptive limits are currently applied.

Next review available in: 26 minutes

Enable usage-based reviews in Billing to review now. Otherwise, wait until the next included review is available.
You're only billed for reviews past your plan's rate limits ($0.25/file).

How can I continue?

After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the @coderabbitai review command as a PR comment. Alternatively, push new commits to this PR.

To avoid repeated limits, reduce automatic review volume by pausing incremental auto-reviews earlier, using label-based review opt-in, excluding WIP or generated PR titles, or requesting reviews manually when the PR is ready. If your team needs uninterrupted high-volume reviews, an organization admin can enable usage-based reviews.

How do review limits work?

CodeRabbit enforces per-developer PR review limits for each organization. Most developers receive the normal plan review availability.

For paid Pro and Pro+ PR reviews, CodeRabbit uses adaptive limits for sustained high-volume activity. When a developer's recent PR review activity reaches the 95th percentile or higher among CodeRabbit users, additional reviews become available more gradually as earlier reviews age out of the rolling window.

Please refer docs for additional details.

Review details

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: defaults

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 62122ce1-bae1-4d4d-82f3-f88973bba497

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 9614b6e and e8235fb.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• .github/workflows/hostile-reviewer.yml

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Commit unit tests in branch jonah/omn-15178-seeded-proof-throwaway-omnimarket

---

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.}

[github-actions]

✅ Architectural Review — PASSED

Errors: 0
Warnings: 0

What this checks

Rule	Description
ARCH-TOPIC-001	No hardcoded Kafka topic strings in handler code
ARCH-DI-001	No event_bus=None bypass
ARCH-DI-002	No direct Handler instantiation outside workflow_runner/adapters
ARCH-DI-003	No reinvented DI containers
ARCH-TOPIC-002	contract.yaml topics follow `onex.{cmd

---

No architectural violations found.

Static architectural lint — no model inference (OMN-14176).

[jonahgabriel]

Seeded-proof captured — closing UNMERGED per plan. Guard went RED as designed: run https://github.com/OmniNode-ai/omnimarket/actions/runs/30269831694 named [vector-5-ungated-needs-cascade] required context 'Hostile Review Gate'. Branch deleted; dev is clean of the seed. Evidence recorded on OMN-15178.

[github-actions]

✅ Hostile Reviewer — PASSED

Blocking findings (critical/error): 0
Total findings: 0
Models succeeded: qwen3-review,qwen3-review-b

---

Gate semantics

Verdict	Meaning	Blocks merge?
passed	>=2 models succeeded, no critical/error findings	No
blocked	CRITICAL or ERROR findings found	Yes
degraded	Fewer than 2 models succeeded (infra unavailable/timeout)	Yes (OMN-15110)

Powered by omniintelligence.review_pairing.cli_review — node-based adversarial review via HandlerLlmCliSubprocess (OMN-8524)