Skip to content

Add walkthrough artifact generation#58

Open
ivanmilevtues wants to merge 2 commits into
mainfrom
agent/add-walkthrough-artifact
Open

Add walkthrough artifact generation#58
ivanmilevtues wants to merge 2 commits into
mainfrom
agent/add-walkthrough-artifact

Conversation

@ivanmilevtues

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

What changed

  • Adds an opt-in walkthrough_url review-mode input for the paid walkthrough Lambda.
  • Invokes the Lambda only after the PR analysis artifact is uploaded and the sticky review comment has been posted.
  • Uploads the returned walkthrough.json as a codeboarding-walkthrough-<pr>-<sha> Actions artifact and exposes its URL as walkthrough_artifact_url.
  • Documents the required license, secret, and actions: read permission.

Why

Consumers need the walkthrough generated from the completed CodeBoarding review and retained alongside the existing PR analysis artifact.

Validation

  • uv run pytest (178 passed)
  • YAML parse of action.yml
  • git diff --check

@ivanmilevtues ivanmilevtues marked this pull request as ready for review July 15, 2026 21:45
@codeboarding-review

codeboarding-review Bot commented Jul 15, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Architecture review · no architectural changes

graph LR
    n_Analysis_Orchestrator["Analysis Orchestrator"]
    n_Visual_Diffing_Rendering_Engine["Visual Diffing #38; Rendering Engine"]
    n_Documentation_CTA_Generator["Documentation #38; CTA Generator"]
    n_Telemetry_Feedback_Provider["Telemetry #38; Feedback Provider"]
    n_Analysis_Orchestrator -- "Orchestrates structural comparison and visualiz…" --> n_Visual_Diffing_Rendering_Engine
    n_Analysis_Orchestrator -- "Provides health metrics for navigation context" --> n_Documentation_CTA_Generator
    n_Analysis_Orchestrator -- "Reports execution status and quota metrics" --> n_Telemetry_Feedback_Provider
    n_Visual_Diffing_Rendering_Engine -- "Supplies visual context for component documenta…" --> n_Documentation_CTA_Generator
    n_Documentation_CTA_Generator -- "Resolves symbol-to-file mappings for deep-linki…" --> n_Visual_Diffing_Rendering_Engine
    classDef added fill:#1f883d,stroke:#0b5d23,color:#ffffff;
    classDef modified fill:#bf8700,stroke:#7d4e00,color:#ffffff;
    classDef deleted fill:#cf222e,stroke:#82071e,color:#ffffff,stroke-dasharray:5 3;
Loading

Colors indicate component changes compared to target branch main: 🟩 Added · 🟨 Modified · 🟥 Removed

Download the PR analysis artifacts from this workflow artifact.


⚠️ 1 architecture issue found — open CodeBoarding to explore them.

Explore this PR’s architecture in your browser or VS Code.

codeboarding-action · run 29453088149

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 70d2c8f334

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".

Comment thread action.yml
Comment on lines +1418 to +1425
python3 - "$PR_URL" <<'PY' | curl --fail-with-body --silent --show-error \
--retry 3 --retry-all-errors --max-time 900 \
-X POST "$endpoint" \
-H "Authorization: Bearer $LICENSE_KEY" \
-H "X-GitHub-Token: $GITHUB_TOKEN" \
-H "Content-Type: application/json" \
--data @- \
--output "$WALKTHROUGH_PATH"

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

P2 Badge Preserve review comment when walkthrough fails

When walkthrough_url is configured and this Lambda call returns non-2xx/times out or the response fails JSON validation, the step fails after the review artifact and sticky architecture comment have already been published. Because the existing failure() handler later rewrites the same sticky header with the generic “architecture diff couldn't be generated” message, a walkthrough outage hides a successful review; make this optional post-processing non-fatal or keep the failure comment scoped to pre-comment analysis failures.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant