Skip to content

Report the Documented Command's Result, Not Only Its Failure - #1035

Merged
ptr727 merged 1 commit into
developfrom
fix-779-report-actual-result
Aug 27, 2026
Merged

Report the Documented Command's Result, Not Only Its Failure#1035
ptr727 merged 1 commit into
developfrom
fix-779-report-actual-result

Conversation

@ptr727

@ptr727 ptr727 commented Aug 27, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

The Verification Discipline bullet added by #1033 read as always reporting a failure, even where the OPERATIONS.md-documented command succeeds. State the actual result instead.

Addresses a CodeRabbit finding on the #1034 promotion PR.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Documentation
    • Clarified verification guidance for lint-only Python script profiles.
    • Specified how to report expected test-runner launch failures versus missing test requirements.

The Verification Discipline bullet added by #1033 read as always
reporting a failure, even where the OPERATIONS.md-documented command
succeeds. State the actual result instead, per CodeRabbit's review on
#1034.
@qodo-code-review

Copy link
Copy Markdown

PR Summary by Qodo

Clarify Reporting of Documented Verification Results

📝 Documentation 🕐 Less than 5 minutes

Grey Divider

AI Description

• Require reporting the documented verification command’s actual result.
• Avoid implying that the repository-prescribed command must fail.
High-Level Assessment

The targeted wording change is optimal because it removes the incorrect failure-only implication while preserving the existing verification guidance and examples.

Files changed (1) +1 / -1

Documentation (1) +1 / -1
GOVERNANCE.mdReport the documented command’s actual result +1/-1

Report the documented command’s actual result

• Rewords the Verification Discipline guidance to report whether the OPERATIONS.md-prescribed command succeeds or fails, rather than assuming it fails. The distinction from a guessed generic command remains explicit.

GOVERNANCE.md

@coderabbitai

coderabbitai Bot commented Aug 27, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Review Change Stack

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉

ℹ️ Recent review info
⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: ASSERTIVE

Plan: Pro Plus

Run ID: 8d132348-79d0-4628-be31-0b5cef7a2e57

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 3e29583 and 5fcd60e.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • GOVERNANCE.md

Included review availability: Your plan provides up to 10 included reviews per hour; 6 remain after this review.


📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

The governance rule now states that a failing uv run pytest spawn is expected for lint-only Python Scripts profiles. Reports must state the documented command’s actual result.

Changes

Verification reporting

Layer / File(s) Summary
Verification Discipline rule update
GOVERNANCE.md
Clarifies the expected uv run pytest spawn failure and requires reporting the command’s actual result.

Estimated code review effort: 1 (Trivial) | ~2 minutes

Merge Risk: ⚪ Minimal · up to 5fcd6

This localized documentation change reports the documented command's actual result instead of always reporting failure, with no actionable merge-blocking risk remaining.

🚥 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 main change: report the documented command's result instead of reporting only failure.
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.
Full details: Docstring Coverage

Explanation

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 files. (1 skipped: 1 unsupported.)

✨ Finishing Touches
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
  • Create PR with unit tests
  • Commit unit tests in branch fix-779-report-actual-result

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

@qodo-code-review

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Code Review by Qodo

🐞 Bugs (0) 📘 Rule violations (0) 📎 Requirement gaps (0)

Grey Divider

Great, no issues found!

Qodo reviewed your code and found no material issues that require review

Grey Divider

Tip of the day
💡 Did you know, you can ask Qodo to dismiss a finding you disagree with, with your reason on record

More tips ↗ | Customize Qodo ↗ | Qodo docs ↗

Grey Divider

Qodo Logo

@ptr727
ptr727 merged commit 74509a2 into develop Aug 27, 2026
8 checks passed
@ptr727
ptr727 deleted the fix-779-report-actual-result branch August 27, 2026 01:27
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