fix(docs): hide pr-review signal in the manual publishing snippet too - #687
Merged
Merged
Conversation
PR #686 hid the [SIGNAL:pr-review] record behind an HTML comment in publish_review_signal.py (the automated agent-docs-review.yml path) but left the manual/interactive publishing snippet documented in review-docs-pr/SKILL.md rendering the same record under a visible "## Review signal" heading. A review published via that documented path (i.e. not through the GitHub Actions workflow) still leaked the machine-readable signal into GitHub's rendered PR body. Wrap the signal in an HTML comment in the documented snippet too, matching publish_review_signal.py's format, and add a regression test that extracts the documented snippet and runs it to guard against the two paths drifting out of sync again.
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.
|
hongyi-chen
marked this pull request as ready for review
September 8, 2026 05:18
hongyi-chen
enabled auto-merge (squash)
September 8, 2026 05:18
Contributor
|
I'm starting a first review of this pull request. You can view the conversation on Warp. I completed the review and no human review was requested for this pull request. Comment Powered by Oz |
![warp-for-oss[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/3450139?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Overview
This PR hides the manual docs-review signal behind an HTML comment, adds a regression test that executes the documented publishing snippet, and wires that test into CI.
Concerns
- No blocking concerns found. The changed snippet matches the automated hidden-signal format, the regression test exercises the manual publishing path, and the security pass did not identify a new exposure.
- No approved or repository spec context was available for implementation drift checks.
Verdict
Found: 0 critical, 0 important, 0 suggestions
Approve
Comment /warp-agent-review on this pull request to retrigger a review (up to 3 times on the same pull request).
Powered by Oz
hongyi-chen
approved these changes
Sep 8, 2026
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary
Follow-up to #686. That PR hid the
[SIGNAL:pr-review]record behind an HTML comment inpublish_review_signal.py(the automatedagent-docs-review.ymlpath), but left the manual/interactive publishing snippet documented inreview-docs-pr/SKILL.md("Publishing a GitHub review") rendering the same record under a visible## Review signalheading. Any review published through that documented manual path (i.e. not through the GitHub Actions workflow) still leaks the machine-readable signal into GitHub's rendered PR body — the exact behavior #686 set out to fix.Linear: QUALITY-2013
Changes
[SIGNAL:pr-review]record in the manual publishing snippet in an HTML comment and removes its visible## Review signalheading, matchingpublish_review_signal.py.review-docs-pr/test_publishing_snippet.py) that extracts the documented snippet fromSKILL.mdand runs it against a stub, confirming the signal is hidden and still parseable. Verified this test fails against the pre-fix snippet and passes after the fix.docs-technical-referencesjob).Validation
python3 .agents/skills/review-docs-pr/test_publishing_snippet.py— passed (3 tests).python3 .agents/skills/doc_quality_policy/test_verify_review_signal.py— passed (14 tests).python3 .agents/skills/doc_quality_policy/test_publish_review_signal.py— passed (4 tests).doc_quality_policytest suite — passed.python3 .agents/skills/style_lint/style_lint.py --changed— no issues.