Fix review verdict consistency for rejected findings - #144
Merged
Conversation
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Reviews now derive verdict and presentation state only from final structured findings, so suppressed, misanchored, deduplicated, or resolved claims cannot reappear as stale summary prose or a synthetic no-verdict error. The review path also uses an authoritative UTC date, preserves bounded evidence across repository context and large diffs, rejects unverifiable diff forms before provider contact, and accounts for JSON-escaped request size without exceeding model or transport limits.
The complete local gate passes both default and all-feature Rust matrices, the RustSec audit, GNU and musl release builds, installer tests, the full evaluator suite, admission verification, and all 70 mock benchmark cases.