Document v1 external readiness gates - #369
Conversation
|
Warning Review limit reachedYou’ve reached a temporary PR review limit under our Fair Usage Limits Policy. Next review available in: 1 minute Enable usage-based reviews in Billing to review now. Otherwise, wait until the next included review is available. How can I continue?After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the 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 configurationConfiguration used: Organization UI Review profile: ASSERTIVE Plan: Pro Plus Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (4)
📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughThis PR adds a v1 external evaluation protocol and an independent security review brief. It updates related readiness documentation, links both documents from the README, and adds contract tests for required evidence and review requirements. ChangesV1 readiness evidence
Estimated code review effort: 3 (Moderate) | ~20 minutes Possibly related PRs
Poem
🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5✅ Passed checks (5 passed)
✨ Finishing Touches📝 Generate docstrings
🧪 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: 6
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
Inline comments:
In `@docs/independent-security-review.md`:
- Line 7: Update the review acceptance requirements in the baseline and
corresponding sections at lines 50–52 and 64 so every delta review,
high-severity verification, or accepted alternative explicitly requires approval
by the named independent reviewer. Remove wording that permits unnamed or
self-recorded acceptance, while preserving the existing documented evidence
requirements.
In `@docs/oauth-console-validation.md`:
- Line 44: Replace the future snapshot date with August 10, 2026 in
docs/oauth-console-validation.md lines 44-44 and docs/threat-model.md lines
126-126, ensuring both readiness status documents use the same actual snapshot
date.
- Around line 46-50: Update the readiness snapshot in the documentation to
include an explicit unaided-evaluator count, alongside the existing
external-user metrics, and set it consistently with the v1 closure gate
requirement. Extend tests/v1-readiness-docs-contract.test.ts to assert that this
metric is present and correctly reported.
In `@docs/v1-evaluation.md`:
- Around line 49-55: Update the evaluation instructions to invoke `miftah
test-profile` separately for each named profile, preserving the existing config
and validation checks. Revise the evidence template around the combined outcome
to provide one result field per profile rather than a single aggregate result.
- Line 133: Update the issue `#39` acceptance criterion in the v1 evaluation
documentation to explicitly make it the independent-review closure gate,
requiring reconciliation with the reviewed v1 target in
docs/independent-security-review.md; alternatively remove `#39` if that
relationship is not intended. Ensure provider evidence alone cannot satisfy or
close this gate.
In `@tests/v1-readiness-docs-contract.test.ts`:
- Around line 10-18: Add assertions to the “v1 readiness documentation contract”
test covering README.md and docs/independent-security-review.md, verifying each
contains the current packageVersion-pinned `@lubab/miftah` reference alongside the
existing documentation link checks. Reuse the test’s established version source
and preserve the existing assertions.
🪄 Autofix
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: ASSERTIVE
Plan: Pro Plus
Run ID: 568053f3-e809-4cc5-9cd2-0c59ec69d75e
📒 Files selected for processing (6)
README.mddocs/independent-security-review.mddocs/oauth-console-validation.mddocs/threat-model.mddocs/v1-evaluation.mdtests/v1-readiness-docs-contract.test.ts
1 participant
Summary
Why
The v1 milestone has strong implementation evidence, but its remaining acceptance criteria require comparable real-user outcomes and an independent security review. The evidence path was fragmented and did not define what counts as a completed workflow, a later return, an unaided evaluation, or a closure-grade external review.
This PR prepares those external workflows. It deliberately does not claim that any external gate is complete and does not auto-close the referenced issues.
Impact
Evaluators get one safe workflow and deidentified evidence template. A reviewer gets a concrete engagement handoff and remediation gate. Maintainers get version-aware documentation contracts and an explicit map from evidence to the v1 issues.
Validation
npm test— 144 test files passed, 1 skipped; 1,836 tests passed, 34 skippednpm run typechecknpm run lintRefs #25, #37, #39, #88, #202, #290
Summary by CodeRabbit
Documentation
Tests