ci(e2e): renew exact model-drift budget transition by rsliter · Pull Request #12849 · NVIDIA/NemoClaw

rsliter · 2026-10-08T18:00:55Z

Outcome

Renew the exact assertion-budget exception for PR #12769 after main reduced the concurrent-gateway assertion inventory. The exception continues to permit only the approved four-point increase for same-name OpenClaw model-change recreation.

Reason

The original prerequisite #12776 matched the previous whole-file budget hashes. Main's seven-assertion reduction in #12608 changed those hashes, so the exact-match guard correctly rejected the updated candidate. The changed-model regression contract has not expanded.

Related issues

Refs #12667. Prerequisite for #12769.

Changes

Update only PR #12769's base and candidate budget hashes and its explanation. Preserve all other exceptions, all assertion counts, and the exact PR identity and digest checks. Remove this exception after #12769 merges.

Verification

Existing growth-guardrail parser tests: 58 passed, including exact-transition acceptance and rejection cases.
Independently computed hashes match canonical main 888e95d0ad01db264575181a620923e568c343c7 (budget unchanged from c518e121d23c616da1b083c44c9eb504fb419ebd) and PR candidate a377d75342b1db1c6cbe230300373c14822ecd0a; all sibling exception entries are unchanged.
git diff --check passed. The diff contains no secrets, API keys, or credentials.
Publication validation and CLI, plugin, and JavaScript configuration TypeScript hooks passed during the guarded normal push.

Signed-off-by: Rebecca Sliter 571084+rsliter@users.noreply.github.com

Summary by CodeRabbit

Chores
- Updated automated validation records to reflect a revised approved limit while preserving previously accepted adjustments. The records also clarify the conditions associated with the approval. These changes affect validation tracking only; they do not change product functionality or user-facing behavior.

Signed-off-by: Rebecca Sliter <571084+rsliter@users.noreply.github.com>

copy-pr-bot · 2026-10-08T18:00:59Z

Auto-sync is disabled for draft pull requests in this repository. Workflows must be run manually.

Contributors can view more details about this message here.

coderabbitai · 2026-10-08T18:01:05Z

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉

ℹ️ Recent review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Repository: NVIDIA/NemoClaw/.coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Enterprise
Run ID: 059072cc-6e6e-42e7-95f6-a9a3c798c392

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between fe18648 and 283c731.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

ci/e2e-assertion-growth-exceptions.json

🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)

ci/e2e-assertion-growth-exceptions.json

Included review availability: This review used your included allowance. Your plan provides up to 12 included reviews per hour; 11 remain after this review.

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

The PR updates the policy comment and both budget digests for the PR #12769 E2E assertion-growth exception. The exception record retains its PR number.

Changes

E2E assertion budget exception

Layer / File(s)	Summary
Update the exception record `ci/e2e-assertion-growth-exceptions.json`	The comment documents the revised per-file budget, preserved assertion changes, and exception conditions. Both budget digests are updated.

Priority: ⬇️ Low

Estimated code review effort: 1 (Trivial) | ~5 minutes

Change: Other

Suggested reviewers: ericksoa

Merge Risk: ⚪ Minimal · up to 283c7

No actionable issue was established for this exception update. The separate #12769 candidate budget could not be verified from this checkout.

🚥 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 clearly and concisely describes the renewal of the exact model-drift assertion-budget exception, which is the main change in the pull request.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check. Docstring coverage is scoped to functions touched by this diff. Analyzed 0 functions across 0…
Linked Issues check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Out of Scope Changes check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

Commit to this branch
Create a new PR

Autopilot · Keep fixing CodeRabbit findings and required CI, and resolving merge conflicts

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

github-code-quality · 2026-10-08T18:02:48Z

Code Coverage Overview

Languages: TypeScript

TypeScript / code-coverage/plugin

The overall line coverage in commit 283c731 in the codex/12667-budget-r... branch is 97%. The line coverage in commit 63002cd in the main branch is 96%.

Show a line coverage summary of the most impacted files.

File	`main` 63002cd	`codex/12667-budget-r...` 283c731	+/-
`nemoclaw/src/onboard/config.ts`	98%	96%	-2%
`nemoclaw/src/index.ts`	94%	93%	-1%
`nemoclaw/src/bl...print/runner.ts`	95%	95%	0%
`nemoclaw/src/bl...ime-identity.ts`	97%	97%	0%
`nemoclaw/src/bl...t-management.ts`	100%	100%	0%
`nemoclaw/src/co.../config-show.ts`	100%	100%	0%
`nemoclaw/src/commands/slash.ts`	100%	100%	0%
`nemoclaw/src/on...native-route.ts`	0%	100%	+100%

TypeScript / code-coverage/cli

The overall line coverage in commit 283c731 in the codex/12667-budget-r... branch is 86%. The line coverage in commit 63002cd in the main branch is 84%.

Show a line coverage summary of the most impacted files.

File	`main` 63002cd	`codex/12667-budget-r...` 283c731	+/-
`src/lib/onboard.ts`	62%	46%	-16%
`src/lib/onboard...rchestration.ts`	41%	32%	-9%
`src/lib/state/sandbox.ts`	92%	84%	-8%
`src/lib/actions...ess-recovery.ts`	65%	78%	+13%
`src/lib/inferen...file/cleanup.ts`	73%	88%	+15%
`src/lib/state/l...diness-lease.ts`	66%	82%	+16%
`src/lib/inferen...ollama/proxy.ts`	41%	61%	+20%
`src/lib/onboard.../application.ts`	55%	84%	+29%
`src/lib/inferen...nvidia/index.ts`	0%	84%	+84%
`src/lib/onboard...ternal-image.ts`	0%	91%	+91%

_{Updated October 08, 2026 19:10 UTC}

github-actions · 2026-10-08T18:26:17Z

PR Review Advisor finished for commit fe18648. Include the Advisor findings in the complete PR feedback collection. Verify and group valid findings before repair.

Request review only when Require no Advisor blockers is green.

All previous runs

copy-pr-bot · 2026-10-08T18:46:23Z

This pull request requires additional validation before any workflows can run on NVIDIA's runners.

Pull request vetters can view their responsibilities here.

Contributors can view more details about this message here.

rsliter · 2026-10-08T18:51:01Z

/ok to test 283c731

## Outcome PR #12769 can retain its approved model-change assertions after integrating the restoration-probe accounting merged in #12767. This prerequisite renews only its exact budget digest pair. ## Reason The merged probe accounting changed the base budget bytes, invalidating the exception renewed in #12849. The independent growth check requires matching trusted base policy. ### Related issues Refs #12667. Prerequisite for #12769. ## Changes Update only the #12769 exception and its explanation. Preserve the concurrent-gateway assertion reduction, the new live-file and restoration-probe metrics, and every other PR entry. The model-change transition remains four additional assertion points and six additional expectations. This PR changes no tests, budget limits, or enforcement code. ## Verification - Existing growth-guardrail parser suite: 58 tests passed. - Compared the proposed budget with canonical main: only the previously approved double-onboard metrics change. - Verified both SHA-256 digests from the budget bytes and confirmed that other exception entries are unchanged. - Installed publication validation and CLI, plugin, and checked-JavaScript compiler checks passed through credential-isolated hooks. - The diff contains no secrets, API keys, or credentials. --- Signed-off-by: Rebecca Sliter <571084+rsliter@users.noreply.github.com>  ## Summary by CodeRabbit * **Chores** * Updated automated check records to reflect the latest merged changes and revised validation baselines. No end-user-facing behavior changed.  Co-authored-by: Rebecca Sliter <571084+rsliter@users.noreply.github.com>

ci(e2e): renew exact model-drift budget transition

fe18648

Signed-off-by: Rebecca Sliter <571084+rsliter@users.noreply.github.com>

rsliter self-assigned this Oct 8, 2026

rsliter marked this pull request as ready for review October 8, 2026 18:04

merge: resolve conflicts with main

283c731

prekshivyas approved these changes Oct 8, 2026

View reviewed changes

prekshivyas merged commit c831833 into main Oct 8, 2026
67 checks passed

prekshivyas deleted the codex/12667-budget-renewal branch October 8, 2026 19:58

github-actions Bot added the v0.0.132 label Oct 8, 2026

This was referenced Oct 8, 2026

fix(onboard): check selection drift before fresh sandbox reuse #12769

Merged

ci(e2e): renew model-drift budget after restoration probes #12871

Merged

wscurran added area: ci CI workflows, checks, release automation, or GitHub Actions area: e2e End-to-end tests, nightly failures, or validation infrastructure chore Build, CI, dependency, or tooling maintenance labels Oct 13, 2026

Navigation Menu

Repository navigation

ci(e2e): renew exact model-drift budget transition - #12849

ci(e2e): renew exact model-drift budget transition#12849
prekshivyas merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
codex/12667-budget-renewal

rsliter commented Oct 8, 2026 •

edited by coderabbitai Bot

Loading

Uh oh!

copy-pr-bot Bot commented Oct 8, 2026

Uh oh!

coderabbitai Bot commented Oct 8, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Walkthrough

Changes

Uh oh!

github-code-quality Bot commented Oct 8, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Oct 8, 2026

Uh oh!

copy-pr-bot Bot commented Oct 8, 2026

Uh oh!

rsliter commented Oct 8, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Uh oh!

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

Conversation

rsliter commented Oct 8, 2026 • edited by coderabbitai Bot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Outcome

Reason

Related issues

Changes

Verification

Summary by CodeRabbit

Uh oh!

copy-pr-bot Bot commented Oct 8, 2026

Uh oh!

coderabbitai Bot commented Oct 8, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Walkthrough

Changes

Uh oh!

github-code-quality Bot commented Oct 8, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Code Coverage Overview

TypeScript / code-coverage/plugin

TypeScript / code-coverage/cli

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Oct 8, 2026

Uh oh!

copy-pr-bot Bot commented Oct 8, 2026

Uh oh!

rsliter commented Oct 8, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Uh oh!

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

rsliter commented Oct 8, 2026 •

edited by coderabbitai Bot

Loading

coderabbitai Bot commented Oct 8, 2026 •

edited

Loading

github-code-quality Bot commented Oct 8, 2026 •

edited

Loading