Repository navigation
feat(contracts): backfill golden_path and dod_evidence for all 7 existing contracts [OMN-7430] - #138
Merged
jonahgabriel merged 2 commits intoApr 3, 2026
Conversation
…ting contracts [OMN-7430] All 7 contracts now have dod_evidence with executable checks derived from their Linear ticket requirements. 5 seam tickets have golden_path (OMN-3940, OMN-3944, OMN-3946, OMN-3947, OMN-5291). 2 non-applicable contracts have golden_path: null with comments (OMN-3943 internal reducer, OMN-5168 schema). Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughAdded golden_path scenarios and dod_evidence entries to multiple contract YAMLs, defining end-to-end input→output event mappings, fixture sources, correlation passthrough, schema/assertion checks, timeouts, and manual DoD checklists (pytest/mypy/CLI checks). No code/API signatures changed. Changes
Sequence Diagram(s)sequenceDiagram
participant Tester as Tester (fixture/runner)
participant KafkaIn as Kafka Input Topic
participant Service as Service / Consumer
participant KafkaOut as Kafka Output Topic
participant Validator as Schema/assertion check
Tester->>KafkaIn: publish message (fixture, correlation_id)
KafkaIn->>Service: deliver event/command
Service->>Validator: validate schema & assertions
alt assertions pass
Service->>KafkaOut: emit output event (propagate correlation_id)
KafkaOut->>Tester: tester observes expected topic & payload
else assertion fail
Service->>Tester: report failure / timeout
end
Estimated code review effort🎯 3 (Moderate) | ⏱️ ~20 minutes Poem
🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 3✅ Passed checks (3 passed)
✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings. ✨ Finishing Touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Comment |
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 2
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.
Inline comments:
In `@contracts/OMN-3946.yaml`:
- Around line 59-64: The DoD check named dod-002 currently uses check_type:
"file_exists" which only proves the file is present; change the check (in the
checks array for dod-002) to use check_type: "command" and supply a command that
actually parses ".github/workflows/artifact-reconciliation-webhook.yml" with a
YAML parser (for example yq, yamllint, or a small python script using PyYAML) so
the check fails on syntax errors; update the check_value to that command and
keep the descriptive text "GitHub Action workflow is syntactically valid" to
match the new behavior.
- Around line 71-73: The grep check under check_value uses the wrong key: change
the dict key from file to path so the grep check is {pattern: "SASL_SSL", path:
"scripts/publish_pr_webhook_event.py"}; update the entry referenced by
check_value in the contract (the grep check against
scripts/publish_pr_webhook_event.py) to use path instead of file so it conforms
to ModelTicketContract's expected grep schema.
🪄 Autofix (Beta)
Fix all unresolved CodeRabbit comments on this PR:
- Push a commit to this branch (recommended)
- Create a new PR with the fixes
ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration
Configuration used: defaults
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
Run ID: 19c1b852-d365-4f1f-b10c-59f04c375d22
📒 Files selected for processing (7)
contracts/OMN-3940.yamlcontracts/OMN-3943.yamlcontracts/OMN-3944.yamlcontracts/OMN-3946.yamlcontracts/OMN-3947.yamlcontracts/OMN-5168.yamlcontracts/OMN-5291.yaml
jonahgabriel
enabled auto-merge
April 3, 2026 17:00
jonahgabriel
changed the title
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
jonahgabriel
added this pull request to the merge queue
Apr 3, 2026
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 3
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.
Inline comments:
In `@contracts/OMN-5291.yaml`:
- Around line 40-41: The golden_path.input references an input topic
"onex.cmd.onex-change-control.validate-yaml.v1" and a fixture
"tests/fixtures/validate_yaml_trigger.json" that are not present in the Kafka
flow or repo; update the contract so the topic matches an existing, executable
Kafka topic used in the flow (or add a producer/route that emits to
"onex.cmd.onex-change-control.validate-yaml.v1") and ensure the fixture file
exists at tests/fixtures/validate_yaml_trigger.json (or change the fixture path
to the correct existing fixture); verify by running the golden path test that
the topic receives the message and the fixture is loadable.
- Around line 53-68: Add a new dod_evidence entry to this YAML to run the
validate-yaml CLI against the appropriate Pydantic schema: include a check with
check_type "command" and check_value "uv run validate-yaml --schema
ModelTicketContract <path-to-this-file>" (reference the existing dod_evidence
list and the ticket contract schema ModelTicketContract) so the contract file
explicitly records schema validation alongside the pytest and mypy checks.
- Around line 46-50: The contract currently references schema_name
"ModelGovernanceCheckCompleted" and asserts field "exit_code == 0", but the
emitter emits fields like "check_type", "target", "passed", "violation_count",
and "details"; update the schema_name and assertions to match the actual payload
— replace or rename "ModelGovernanceCheckCompleted" if wrong and remove the
"exit_code" assertion, then add assertions for the real fields (e.g., assert
"passed" is boolean or true/false as expected, "violation_count" is a
non-negative integer, "check_type" and "target" are strings, and "details"
exists/is an object or array) using the exact field names from the emitter so
the contract aligns with emitted events.
🪄 Autofix (Beta)
Fix all unresolved CodeRabbit comments on this PR:
- Push a commit to this branch (recommended)
- Create a new PR with the fixes
ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration
Configuration used: defaults
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
Run ID: d53d7ed3-76af-4516-9968-0bc18e2de4ce
📒 Files selected for processing (6)
contracts/OMN-3940.yamlcontracts/OMN-3943.yamlcontracts/OMN-3944.yamlcontracts/OMN-3946.yamlcontracts/OMN-5168.yamlcontracts/OMN-5291.yaml
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (2)
- contracts/OMN-5168.yaml
- contracts/OMN-3944.yaml
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (3)
- contracts/OMN-3943.yaml
- contracts/OMN-3946.yaml
- contracts/OMN-3940.yaml
Comment on lines
+40
to
+41
| topic: "onex.cmd.onex-change-control.validate-yaml.v1" | ||
| fixture: "tests/fixtures/validate_yaml_trigger.json" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
golden_path.input is currently non-executable
Line 40 references an input topic that is not represented in the current Kafka flow, and Line 41 references a fixture path that is missing. This makes the golden path unverifiable in practice.
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.
In `@contracts/OMN-5291.yaml` around lines 40 - 41, The golden_path.input
references an input topic "onex.cmd.onex-change-control.validate-yaml.v1" and a
fixture "tests/fixtures/validate_yaml_trigger.json" that are not present in the
Kafka flow or repo; update the contract so the topic matches an existing,
executable Kafka topic used in the flow (or add a producer/route that emits to
"onex.cmd.onex-change-control.validate-yaml.v1") and ensure the fixture file
exists at tests/fixtures/validate_yaml_trigger.json (or change the fixture path
to the correct existing fixture); verify by running the golden path test that
the topic receives the message and the fixture is loadable.
Comment on lines
+46
to
+50
| schema_name: "ModelGovernanceCheckCompleted" | ||
| assertions: | ||
| - field: "exit_code" | ||
| op: "eq" | ||
| value: 0 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
golden_path.output schema/assertion do not match emitted event payload
Line 46 uses ModelGovernanceCheckCompleted, and Lines 48-50 assert exit_code == 0, but the emitter payload uses fields like check_type, target, passed, violation_count, and details (no exit_code). This will cause false contract expectations.
Suggested contract fix
output:
topic: "onex.evt.onex-change-control.governance-check-completed.v1"
output_correlation_id_field: "correlation_id"
- schema_name: "ModelGovernanceCheckCompleted"
+ schema_name: "GovernanceCheckCompleted" # replace with the actual existing model name
assertions:
- - field: "exit_code"
- op: "eq"
- value: 0
+ - field: "passed"
+ op: "eq"
+ value: true
+ - field: "violation_count"
+ op: "eq"
+ value: 0📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
Suggested change
| schema_name: "ModelGovernanceCheckCompleted" | |
| assertions: | |
| - field: "exit_code" | |
| op: "eq" | |
| value: 0 | |
| schema_name: "GovernanceCheckCompleted" | |
| assertions: | |
| - field: "passed" | |
| op: "eq" | |
| value: true | |
| - field: "violation_count" | |
| op: "eq" | |
| value: 0 |
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.
In `@contracts/OMN-5291.yaml` around lines 46 - 50, The contract currently
references schema_name "ModelGovernanceCheckCompleted" and asserts field
"exit_code == 0", but the emitter emits fields like "check_type", "target",
"passed", "violation_count", and "details"; update the schema_name and
assertions to match the actual payload — replace or rename
"ModelGovernanceCheckCompleted" if wrong and remove the "exit_code" assertion,
then add assertions for the real fields (e.g., assert "passed" is boolean or
true/false as expected, "violation_count" is a non-negative integer,
"check_type" and "target" are strings, and "details" exists/is an object or
array) using the exact field names from the emitter so the contract aligns with
emitted events.
Comment on lines
+53
to
+68
| dod_evidence: | ||
| - id: "dod-001" | ||
| description: "Governance emitter unit tests pass" | ||
| source: "manual" | ||
| linear_dod_text: "Unit tests cover all three emit functions, verify topic names, envelope structure, | ||
| and silent no-op" | ||
| checks: | ||
| - check_type: "test_passes" | ||
| check_value: "uv run pytest tests/ -k 'emitter or governance' -v" | ||
| - id: "dod-002" | ||
| description: "mypy strict passes on kafka module" | ||
| source: "manual" | ||
| linear_dod_text: "mypy --strict passes on kafka/ module" | ||
| checks: | ||
| - check_type: "command" | ||
| check_value: "uv run mypy src/onex_change_control/kafka/ --strict" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Add explicit validate-yaml DoD evidence for schema compliance
The added dod_evidence only covers pytest and mypy. For this YAML artifact, include a validate-yaml CLI check against ModelTicketContract so contract compliance is explicitly evidenced.
Suggested DoD evidence addition
dod_evidence:
- id: "dod-001"
description: "Governance emitter unit tests pass"
@@
- id: "dod-002"
description: "mypy strict passes on kafka module"
@@
- check_type: "command"
check_value: "uv run mypy src/onex_change_control/kafka/ --strict"
+ - id: "dod-003"
+ description: "Contract validates via validate-yaml CLI"
+ source: "manual"
+ linear_dod_text: "OMN-5291 contract validates against ModelTicketContract"
+ checks:
+ - check_type: "command"
+ check_value: "uv run validate-yaml contracts/OMN-5291.yaml"As per coding guidelines, "{contracts,drift/day_close}/**/*.yaml: YAML artifact files must validate against the appropriate Pydantic schema (ModelTicketContract for ticket contracts, ModelDayClose for day close reports) using the validate-yaml CLI tool".
📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
Suggested change
| dod_evidence: | |
| - id: "dod-001" | |
| description: "Governance emitter unit tests pass" | |
| source: "manual" | |
| linear_dod_text: "Unit tests cover all three emit functions, verify topic names, envelope structure, | |
| and silent no-op" | |
| checks: | |
| - check_type: "test_passes" | |
| check_value: "uv run pytest tests/ -k 'emitter or governance' -v" | |
| - id: "dod-002" | |
| description: "mypy strict passes on kafka module" | |
| source: "manual" | |
| linear_dod_text: "mypy --strict passes on kafka/ module" | |
| checks: | |
| - check_type: "command" | |
| check_value: "uv run mypy src/onex_change_control/kafka/ --strict" | |
| dod_evidence: | |
| - id: "dod-001" | |
| description: "Governance emitter unit tests pass" | |
| source: "manual" | |
| linear_dod_text: "Unit tests cover all three emit functions, verify topic names, envelope structure, | |
| and silent no-op" | |
| checks: | |
| - check_type: "test_passes" | |
| check_value: "uv run pytest tests/ -k 'emitter or governance' -v" | |
| - id: "dod-002" | |
| description: "mypy strict passes on kafka module" | |
| source: "manual" | |
| linear_dod_text: "mypy --strict passes on kafka/ module" | |
| checks: | |
| - check_type: "command" | |
| check_value: "uv run mypy src/onex_change_control/kafka/ --strict" | |
| - id: "dod-003" | |
| description: "Contract validates via validate-yaml CLI" | |
| source: "manual" | |
| linear_dod_text: "OMN-5291 contract validates against ModelTicketContract" | |
| checks: | |
| - check_type: "command" | |
| check_value: "uv run validate-yaml contracts/OMN-5291.yaml" |
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.
In `@contracts/OMN-5291.yaml` around lines 53 - 68, Add a new dod_evidence entry
to this YAML to run the validate-yaml CLI against the appropriate Pydantic
schema: include a check with check_type "command" and check_value "uv run
validate-yaml --schema ModelTicketContract <path-to-this-file>" (reference the
existing dod_evidence list and the ticket contract schema ModelTicketContract)
so the contract file explicitly records schema validation alongside the pytest
and mypy checks.
jonahgabriel
deleted the
jonahgabriel/omn-7430-task-4-backfill-existing-7-contracts-with-golden_path-and
branch
April 3, 2026 17:36
2 tasks done
jonahgabriel
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 26, 2026
…elf-extending-agent fixes (#1689) Adds OCC contracts and receipt evidence for two onex-self-extending-agent tickets: - OMN-11827: max_tokens truncation fix (PRs #136 merged, #138 open) - OMN-12124: clean ADK auth error handling (PR #137 open) These contracts unblock the receipt gate on those PRs — both reference OCC#<this PR>.
This was referenced May 26, 2026
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.
Summary
dod_evidencecontaining executable checks [OMN-7430]golden_pathto 5 seam tickets (OMN-3940, OMN-3944, OMN-3946, OMN-3947, OMN-5291)ModelTicketContractTest plan
ModelTicketContract.model_validate()Part of epic OMN-7426
🤖 Generated with Claude Code
Summary by CodeRabbit