Allow agent authoring tools to be reloaded after writes - #3733
Conversation
|
@codex review |
📦 Client bundle boundary
A server module in a client graph aborts hydration in the browser. New leaks fail CI; known leaks are tracked in |
|
Warning Review limit reached
Next review available in: 24 minutes 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: Repository UI Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro Plus Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (4)
No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉 ℹ️ Recent review info⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: Repository UI Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro Plus Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (3)
📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughThe agent runtime now supports deferred loading for guarded tools. Generate and stream loops can rediscover and execute guarded project-agent-write tools through tool search. Tests cover repeated discovery and execution. The API reference link points to the updated source line. ChangesDeferred tool exposure
Estimated code review effort: 3 (Moderate) | ~20 minutes Merge Risk: ⚪ Minimal · up to The change restores agent authoring tools through explicit search after a successful write while preserving the existing safety guard; no actionable merge-blocking risk remains after normal checks and review. Sequence Diagram(s)sequenceDiagram
participant GenerateOrStream
participant FinalResponseGuard
participant ToolSearch
participant AgentTool
GenerateOrStream->>FinalResponseGuard: apply deferred exposure
FinalResponseGuard->>ToolSearch: expose tool search
GenerateOrStream->>ToolSearch: search for guarded tool
ToolSearch->>AgentTool: reload project-agent-write tool
ToolSearch-->>GenerateOrStream: return reloaded tool
GenerateOrStream->>FinalResponseGuard: disable guard after reload
Possibly related PRs
Suggested reviewers: 🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 4 | ❌ 1❌ Failed checks (1 warning)
✅ Passed checks (4 passed)
✨ Finishing Touches 💡 1📝 Generate docstrings 💡
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Comment |
![chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1144995?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 5d687ae58e
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
|
@codex review |
|
Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Hooray! Reviewed commit: ℹ️ About Codex in GitHubYour team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍. Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback". |
|
The failed coverage shard exposed a related hosted-boundary regression: pre-write deferred tool names entered the first provider prompt. I reproduced it locally, scoped deferred inventory synchronization to the post-write guard, and verified the exact failing hosted test plus the original review regressions. The four focused files pass 45 tests and 74 BDD steps, type checking passes, generated docs are current, and the repository lint gate is green. @codex review |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 8e66008e7a
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
|
@codex review |
|
Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Breezy! Reviewed commit: ℹ️ About Codex in GitHubYour team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍. Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback". |
1 participant
Summary
create_agentandupdate_agentunavailable immediately after a successful agent writetool_searchreload an agent authoring tool for the next stepRoot cause
The post-write guard passed both tool names as excluded tools and then removed them from the visible, deferred, and authorized exposure sets. In deferred mode,
tool_searchsearches only the deferred set, so the model could not recover either authoring tool after the first successful write.Red-green evidence
tool_searchcould not expose the requested authoring tooltool_searchitselfupdate_agentaftercreate_agent, covering both guarded authoring toolsVerification
deno task lint:cigit diff --checkCloses veryfront/veryfront-issue-inbox#463
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Bug Fixes
Documentation