ci(functional-tests): fix fullsend version check command

[ralphbean]

Summary

• fullsend version is not a valid subcommand — the CLI uses --version instead
• This has been failing on main since the functional tests workflow was introduced

Test plan

• functional-tests CI check passes on this PR

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

[qodo-code-review]

PR Summary by Qodo

Fix Fullsend version check in functional-tests workflow

🐞 Bug fix ⚙️ Configuration changes 🕐 Less than 5 minutes

AI Description

• Fix Fullsend CLI version check to use the supported --version flag.
• Unblock the functional-tests GitHub Actions workflow that has been failing on main.

High-Level Assessment

The change is the minimal and correct fix: use the CLI’s standard --version flag instead of a non-existent version subcommand. Alternatives like removing the version check would reduce visibility/debuggability without clear benefit.

Files changed (1) +1 / -1

Other (1) +1 / -1

functional-tests.ymlFix Fullsend CLI version check invocation +1/-1

Fix Fullsend CLI version check invocation

• Updates the workflow step that validates the installed 'fullsend' binary to use 'fullsend --version' instead of the invalid 'fullsend version' command. This prevents the functional-tests job from failing during setup.

.github/workflows/functional-tests.yml

[fullsend-ai-review]

🤖 Finished Review · ✅ Success · Started 6:34 PM UTC · Completed 6:39 PM UTC
Commit: 636965b · View workflow run →

[qodo-code-review]

Code Review by Qodo

🐞 Bugs (0) 📘 Rule violations (0) 📜 Skill insights (1)

Context used

✅ Compliance rules (platform): 55 rules

✅ Skills: 4 invoked

  code-review

  code-implementation

  pr-review

  docs-review

1. Protected workflow file modified 📜 Skill insight § Compliance

Description

This PR changes a file under the protected governance/infrastructure path .github/, which must
always receive explicit human review and must not be auto-approved. The PR description provides some
rationale, but the protected-path rule still requires raising a finding for this change.

Code

.github/workflows/functional-tests.yml[168]

+          fullsend --version

Relevance

⭐⭐ Medium

No accepted/rejected history for “.github requires explicit human review” finding; nearest
protected-path comment in PR29 was undetermined.

PR-#29
PR-#31

ⓘ Recommendations generated based on similar findings in past PRs

Evidence

PR Compliance ID 1538392 requires raising a finding whenever protected governance/infrastructure
paths (including .github/) are modified. The diff shows a change in
.github/workflows/functional-tests.yml at line 168.

.github/workflows/functional-tests.yml[168-168]
Skill: pr-review

Agent prompt

The issue below was found during a code review. Follow the provided context and guidance below and implement a solution

## Issue description
The PR modifies a protected governance/infrastructure path (`.github/workflows/...`). Per policy, this must be explicitly justified/authorized and receive human review (not auto-approval).

## Issue Context
Protected-path changes are higher-risk because they can alter CI behavior and repository governance controls.

## Fix Focus Areas
- .github/workflows/functional-tests.yml[168-168]

ⓘ Copy this prompt and use it to remediate the issue with your preferred AI generation tools

---

[qodo-code-review]

1. Protected workflow file modified 📜 Skill insight § Compliance

This PR changes a file under the protected governance/infrastructure path .github/, which must
always receive explicit human review and must not be auto-approved. The PR description provides some
rationale, but the protected-path rule still requires raising a finding for this change.

Agent Prompt

## Issue description
The PR modifies a protected governance/infrastructure path (`.github/workflows/...`). Per policy, this must be explicitly justified/authorized and receive human review (not auto-approval).

## Issue Context
Protected-path changes are higher-risk because they can alter CI behavior and repository governance controls.

## Fix Focus Areas
- .github/workflows/functional-tests.yml[168-168]

ⓘ Copy this prompt and use it to remediate the issue with your preferred AI generation tools

[fullsend-ai-retro]

🤖 Finished Retro · ✅ Success · Started 6:38 PM UTC · Completed 6:48 PM UTC
Commit: 636965b · View workflow run →

[fullsend-ai-review]

Review skipped — this PR is already merged.

The /fs-review command only reviews open pull requests.

_{Posted by fullsend post-review check}

[fullsend-ai-retro]

PR #73 was a trivial 1-line CI fix by ralphbean (human, using Claude Code) changing fullsend version to fullsend --version in the functional-tests workflow. The bug was introduced in PR #31, which had extensive review (10+ findings from fullsend review agent, 9 from qodo) but neither agent caught the invalid CLI subcommand. PR #73 was opened and self-merged in 3.5 minutes with zero review — the fullsend review agent ran for ~6 minutes but its analysis was discarded by post-review.sh upon detecting the PR was already merged. The fix was correct and minimal. Two improvement opportunities identified: (1) the review pipeline wasted tokens producing a result that was silently discarded on merge, and (2) the original incorrect CLI invocation was missed by both review agents on the PR that introduced it.

Proposals filed

• Post-review should deliver agent findings as informational comments on merged PRs instead of silently discarding them (in fullsend-ai/agents)
• Review agent missed incorrect CLI invocation (fullsend version instead of fullsend --version) on PR #31 (in fullsend-ai/agents)