docs(adr): ADR-022 原則 1 を「生成 vs 確定」軸に再構築 / ADR-027 実測検証追記 - #64
Conversation
- ADR-022: interactive Claude Code と takt fix の使いにくさを解消するため、原則 1 を「生成禁止」から「草案生成 OK / 意図表現を含む既存 artifact の無断上書き NG」に再構築。3 条件 (可逆・事前ポリシー・意図不変) の緩和条項と承認ゲート表を追加 - ADR-022 の 2026-04-20 追記 (分離型 fix commit) を原則 1 の適用例として吸収 - ADR-027: 2026-04-14〜20 の 69 runs 実測集計を追記 (execute phase / 1-iter / 多 iter 別)。期待値 5m→2m は未達、stable 3m 23s の自己申告は実測 median と整合 - CLAUDE.md: Automated actor boundary のベタ書きセクションを削除 (ハーネスエンジニアリング方針: CLAUDE.md はリンクのみ、詳細は ADR 参照) - docs/todo.md: ADR-027 検証完了タスク削除、後続タスク繰り上げ、新 task (takt fix 最終 commit message 草案生成) 追加
|
Warning Rate limit exceeded
Your organization is not enrolled in usage-based pricing. Contact your admin to enable usage-based pricing to continue reviews beyond the rate limit, or try again in 40 minutes and 21 seconds. ⌛ How to resolve this issue?After the wait time has elapsed, a review can be triggered using the We recommend that you space out your commits to avoid hitting the rate limit. 🚦 How do rate limits work?CodeRabbit enforces hourly rate limits for each developer per organization. Our paid plans have higher rate limits than the trial, open-source and free plans. In all cases, we re-allow further reviews after a brief timeout. Please see our FAQ for further information. ℹ️ Review info⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: Organization UI Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (1)
📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughADR-022を「生成 vs 確認」モデルへ再定義し、アクタ別の承認ゲートと既存intent表現の上書き禁止を明確化。CLAUDE.mdから埋め込みの「Automated actor boundary」節を削除し、ADR-027とdocs/todo.mdを関連内容に合わせて更新。 Changes
Estimated code review effort🎯 3 (Moderate) | ⏱️ ~25 minutes Possibly related PRs
🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5✅ Passed checks (5 passed)
✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings. Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. 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: 1
🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
docs/adr/adr-027-push-review-simplicity-focus.md (1)
146-194: 実測集計の再現手順を1行だけ追記すると運用が安定しますこの節は有用です。将来の再検証のため、
meta.json/trace.mdの集計コマンド（またはスクリプトパス）を末尾に1行追加しておくのを推奨します。🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed. In `@docs/adr/adr-027-push-review-simplicity-focus.md` around lines 146 - 194, Add a single-line reproducibility note at the end of the "実測検証" section describing the exact aggregation command or script to reproduce the reported metrics (e.g., the command that reads `.takt/runs/*-pre-push-review/meta.json` and `trace.md` and generates `reports/architecture-review.md`/`reports/simplicity-review.md`), so future runs can be reproduced; mention the exact script or CLI invocation (script path or command) and any required working directory or env vars.
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.
Inline comments:
In `@docs/adr/adr-022-automation-responsibility-separation.md`:
- Line 128: Line 128 のインラインコードスパンに先頭/末尾の不必要な空白が含まれているため markdownlint(MD038)
警告が出ています；該当箇所のコードスパン（表示されているコマンド `jj describe -m
"<above>"`）のバッククォート内から先頭/末尾の空白を削除して `"<above>"` の前後に余分な空白が入らないようにしてください。
---
Nitpick comments:
In `@docs/adr/adr-027-push-review-simplicity-focus.md`:
- Around line 146-194: Add a single-line reproducibility note at the end of the
"実測検証" section describing the exact aggregation command or script to reproduce
the reported metrics (e.g., the command that reads
`.takt/runs/*-pre-push-review/meta.json` and `trace.md` and generates
`reports/architecture-review.md`/`reports/simplicity-review.md`), so future runs
can be reproduced; mention the exact script or CLI invocation (script path or
command) and any required working directory or env vars.
🪄 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: Organization UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
Run ID: 449247a8-94b8-48e0-a4e8-2e5eb977a1ba
📒 Files selected for processing (4)
CLAUDE.mddocs/adr/adr-022-automation-responsibility-separation.mddocs/adr/adr-027-push-review-simplicity-focus.mddocs/todo.md
💤 Files with no reviewable changes (1)
- CLAUDE.md
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
docs/adr/adr-022-automation-responsibility-separation.md (1)
117-117: fenced code block に言語指定を追加することを推奨Line 117 の fenced code block に言語指定がないため markdownlint(MD040) 警告が出ています。この block は対話例のため、``` の後に
textを追加することでレンダリングに影響なく警告を解消できます。♻️ 修正案
PR 作成フローの典型: -``` +```text [Claude] Proposed commit description:🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed. In `@docs/adr/adr-022-automation-responsibility-separation.md` at line 117, The fenced code block at the example interaction starting with the opening ``` (containing "[Claude]" and the proposed commit description) lacks a language tag and triggers markdownlint MD040; fix it by adding a language identifier (e.g., "text") immediately after the opening backticks in that fenced block so the block becomes ```text and removes the warning while preserving rendering.
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.
Inline comments:
In `@docs/adr/adr-022-automation-responsibility-separation.md`:
- Around line 167-168: Update the description of 原則 3 on line 168 to accurately
reference the full set of 緩和条項 defined in lines 81-86 by either (A) listing all
four conditions (可逆・事前ポリシー許可・意図不変・changesetがremote open PRに含まれていない) or (B)
keeping the three-condition wording but adding an explicit clause "when outside
a PR" to indicate the fourth condition applies to PRs; also cross-reference 原則 5
to make it clear that PR contexts are governed by that rule.
---
Nitpick comments:
In `@docs/adr/adr-022-automation-responsibility-separation.md`:
- Line 117: The fenced code block at the example interaction starting with the
opening ``` (containing "[Claude]" and the proposed commit description) lacks a
language tag and triggers markdownlint MD040; fix it by adding a language
identifier (e.g., "text") immediately after the opening backticks in that fenced
block so the block becomes ```text and removes the warning while preserving
rendering.
🪄 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: Organization UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
Run ID: 59a4fd58-98e6-47d5-9608-84ccfd79d827
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
docs/adr/adr-022-automation-responsibility-separation.mddocs/todo.md
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
- docs/todo.md
|
@coderabbitai review |
✅ Actions performedReview triggered.
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.
Inline comments:
In `@docs/adr/adr-022-automation-responsibility-separation.md`:
- Around line 117-149: Add a language specifier to the fenced code block that
starts with "[Claude]" and contains "Proposed commit description:" (the block
shown in the diff) so markdownlint MD040 is avoided; edit the fence from ``` to
```text (or another appropriate language) in
adr-022-automation-responsibility-separation.md around that snippet so the code
fence is explicitly language-tagged.
🪄 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: Organization UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
Run ID: e7343404-ae04-4018-9e23-d40ee21af9e1
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
docs/adr/adr-022-automation-responsibility-separation.md
… (task 6) (#67) takt fix が NoChange で空 fix commit を abandon した後、@ が stale な空 commit の上に残り、次の jj new がそこに積まれる問題を解消する。abandon 成功後に単一の非 trunk local bookmark を PR tip として解決し、jj new -r <tip> で @ を PR tip 直下に戻す。 以下は fail-safe で skip する: - bookmark 0 件 / 複数件 (stacked PR 想定) - @- が既に PR tip と一致 (redundant な空 commit を作らない) - jj new -r <tip> 自体の失敗 (ログのみで処理継続) 同じフローは takt 未完了経路 (monitor.rs:80) の abandon にも適用される。 関連: PR #64 / PR #66 で連続発生した事例 参照: ADR-022 原則 5 (PR 包含 changeset の不変性)
1 participant
Summary
Context
Why (ADR-022): 本セッションで
prepare-prskill が前提不成立で停止する症状が発生。原因は「ADR-022 が commit description 生成を禁止 / memory は OK」の乖離で、skill/reviewer は ADR を正とするため先行する memory 運用が機能しなかった。ユーザーからのフィードバック「Claude Code を完全自動ツール扱いしている」「生成と確定を区別していない」を受け、原則 1 を軸ごと再構築。加えて CLAUDE.md のベタ書きも ADR へのリンク一本化の方針に沿って整理。Why (ADR-027): todo.md task 1 (実測検証) の完了作業。
.takt/runs/*の 69 runs を集計し、期待値 (5m→2m) の達成可否を確認。結論は「未達、ただし stable 3m 23s の自己申告は実測 median と整合」。将来の性能 ADR で baseline/target を median に揃える方針を併記。Trigger: 本セッションで prepare-pr skill が前提不成立で停止したこと / ユーザーフィードバック 3 往復による policy 整理 / CLAUDE.md ベタ書き整理の指摘。
Scope decision: ADR-022 と ADR-027 は別トピックだが、本セッションの因果 (ADR-022 曖昧性が skill 停止を招き、その過程で ADR-027 検証も片付いた) を 1 PR に残すため bundle。どちらも docs only、review 負荷は小。
Validation
pnpm pushpre-push review:verdict=APPROVE(2026-04-21T08:49Z, 1 iteration, 6m 10s).takt/runs/20260421-084958-pre-push-review/reports/simplicity-review.mdで blocking issue なしを確認References
feedback_bookmark_auto_naming.md(新原則 1 の運用ポリシー源)Summary by CodeRabbit