t3772: wrap meta-instruction in HTML comment in opencode-config-agents template

[marcusquinn]

Summary

• Wraps the plain-text meta-instruction on line 1 of templates/opencode-config-agents.md in an HTML comment (<!-- ... -->) so AI agents don't misinterpret it as an instruction
• Addresses unactioned Gemini review feedback from PR feat: add runtime context hint to session greeting #419 (medium severity)
• The HIGH severity finding (UPDATE_AVAILABLE format mismatch) was already fixed in the original PR (commit ed8e0d2)

Closes #3772

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Chores
  • Updated configuration template formatting to modify an instruction reference.

[gemini-code-assist]

Summary of Changes

Hello, I'm Gemini Code Assist¹! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request enhances the clarity and robustness of AI agent interactions by enclosing a critical meta-instruction within an HTML comment in a template file. This change prevents AI agents from misinterpreting internal directives as actionable instructions, thereby improving the reliability of AI-driven DevOps capabilities and addressing previous review feedback.

Highlights

• Meta-instruction Wrapping: Wrapped a plain-text meta-instruction on line 1 of templates/opencode-config-agents.md within an HTML comment (<!-- ... -->) to prevent misinterpretation by AI agents.
• Addressing Review Feedback: Addressed unactioned medium severity Gemini review feedback from PR feat: add runtime context hint to session greeting #419, which concerned the misinterpretation of the meta-instruction.

Changelog

• templates/opencode-config-agents.md
  • Wrapped the initial meta-instruction in an HTML comment.
  • Addressed Gemini review feedback regarding meta-instruction interpretation.

Activity

• Addressed unactioned medium severity Gemini review feedback from PR feat: add runtime context hint to session greeting #419.
• Closed issue quality-debt: templates/opencode-config-agents.md — PR #419 review feedback (high) #3772.

Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature	Command	Description
Code Review	/gemini review	Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary	/gemini summary	Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment	@gemini-code-assist	Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments.
Help	/gemini help	Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩

[coderabbitai]

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉

ℹ️ Recent review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 91038d50-28ca-49c1-ab3d-60179d5d0993

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 568e4f2 and 50007c5.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• templates/opencode-config-agents.md

---

Walkthrough

Single-line change to templates/opencode-config-agents.md that wraps the first instruction line in a Markdown comment, preventing unintended AI agent interpretation. This addresses code review feedback from PR #419 without altering runtime behavior or logic.

Changes

Cohort / File(s)	Summary
Comment Conversion templates/opencode-config-agents.md	Wrapped developer instruction in Markdown comment (<!-- ... -->) to prevent AI agent misinterpretation, converting line 1 from plain text to properly formatted meta-instruction.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~2 minutes

Possibly related PRs

• PR #266: Both PRs touch the agent-instructions line for ~/.aidevops/agents/AGENTS.md—one disables the explicit template instruction while the other implements auto-loading via opencode.json.
• PR #117: Both PRs affect how AGENTS.md is handled for agent context—this PR disables adding ~/.aidevops/agents/AGENTS.md to context while the related PR adds guardrails and content to AGENTS.md.
• PR #2046: Both PRs affect how AGENTS.md is consumed—this PR disables the instruction while the related PR restructures/splits AGENTS.md for on-demand loading.

Suggested labels

code-reviews-actioned

Poem

A comment born from clarity's call,
Where plain text once stood proud in the hall,
Now wrapped in <!-- -->, a guardian's grace,
The agents won't stumble, they know their place. 📝✨

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5

✅ Passed checks (5 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Description Check	✅ Passed	Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check	✅ Passed	The title accurately describes the main change: wrapping a meta-instruction in an HTML comment in the opencode-config-agents template file.
Linked Issues check	✅ Passed	The PR addresses the medium-severity Gemini finding (wrapping plain-text meta-instruction in HTML comment) from issue #3772. The HIGH coderabbit finding was already resolved in commit ed8e0d2 as noted.
Out of Scope Changes check	✅ Passed	The change is tightly scoped: only one line modified (+1/-1) to wrap the meta-instruction in an HTML comment as required by issue #3772, with no unrelated alterations.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.

_{✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.}

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Post copyable unit tests in a comment
• Commit unit tests in branch chore/t3772-opencode-config-quality-debt

---

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.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

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

[github-actions]

🔍 Code Quality Report

�[0;35m[MONITOR]�[0m Code Review Monitoring Report

�[0;34m[INFO]�[0m Latest Quality Status:
SonarCloud: 0 bugs, 0 vulnerabilities, 366 code smells

�[0;34m[INFO]�[0m Recent monitoring activity:
Sun Mar 8 11:08:46 UTC 2026: Code review monitoring started
Sun Mar 8 11:08:47 UTC 2026: SonarCloud - Bugs: 0, Vulnerabilities: 0, Code Smells: 366

📈 Current Quality Metrics

• BUGS: 0
• CODE SMELLS: 366
• VULNERABILITIES: 0

Generated on: Sun Mar 8 11:08:49 UTC 2026

---

Generated by AI DevOps Framework Code Review Monitoring

[sonarqubecloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
0.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request wraps a meta-instruction within an HTML comment in templates/opencode-config-agents.md. This change correctly prevents AI agents from misinterpreting the line as a directive, while retaining it as a note for developers. The implementation is correct and no issues were found.

_{Note: Security Review has been skipped due to the limited scope of the PR.}