Skip to content

docs: update renamed repo references in AGENTS.md - #210

Open
seonghobae wants to merge 2 commits into
masterfrom
docs/agents-rename-sweep
Open

docs: update renamed repo references in AGENTS.md#210
seonghobae wants to merge 2 commits into
masterfrom
docs/agents-rename-sweep

Conversation

@seonghobae

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Docs-only sweep: AGENTS.md ecosystem/sibling-component lists still referenced pre-rename repo names. Per ContextualWisdomLab/.github docs/CWL-MASTER-CONTEXT.md, the renames are:

  • cwl-idpkeyverse
  • waf-ids-ai-socwardnet
  • cwl-editorinkspan

This PR updates the stale name(s) in AGENTS.md only. No code changes.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

@coderabbitai

coderabbitai Bot commented Aug 4, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Warning

Review limit reached

@seonghobae, you've reached your PR review limit, so we couldn't start this review.

Next review available in: 29 minutes

Enable usage-based reviews in Billing to review now. Otherwise, wait until the next included review is available.
You're only billed for reviews past your plan's rate limits ($0.25/file).

How can I continue?

After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the @coderabbitai review command as a PR comment. Alternatively, push new commits to this PR.

To avoid repeated limits, reduce automatic review volume by pausing incremental auto-reviews earlier, using label-based review opt-in, excluding WIP or generated PR titles, or requesting reviews manually when the PR is ready. If your team needs uninterrupted high-volume reviews, an organization admin can enable usage-based reviews.

How do review limits work?

CodeRabbit enforces per-developer PR review limits for each organization. Most developers receive the normal plan review availability.

For paid Pro and Pro+ PR reviews, CodeRabbit uses adaptive limits for sustained high-volume activity. When a developer's recent PR review activity reaches the 95th percentile or higher among CodeRabbit users, additional reviews become available more gradually as earlier reviews age out of the rolling window.

Please refer docs for additional details.

Review details
⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro Plus

Run ID: 2fdfc859-5f7c-444b-8897-445e9969460e

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 35e4498 and 73c59bd.

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

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

@seonghobae
seonghobae enabled auto-merge August 4, 2026 07:33
Folds the remaining ecosystem-name correction into this sweep so a single
PR owns AGENTS.md per repo. keyverse (was cwl-idp) is the central
passwordless IdP; feelanet-adfs is the employer ADFS SSO integration
library it federates, per .github/docs/CWL-MASTER-CONTEXT.md.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>

@opencode-agent opencode-agent Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Pull request overview

OpenCode could not approve from deterministic current-head evidence because GitHub Checks have failed.

Findings

1. HIGH Current-head GitHub Checks - Fix failed required checks before approval

  • Problem: Failed same-head checks remain for 73c59bd09758913dc0927f158bac58d60a9d539d.
  • Root cause: The model-unavailable evidence fallback is allowed only when peer GitHub Checks are complete and clean.
  • Fix: Read and fix the failed check logs below, then rerun the current-head checks.
  • Regression test: Keep the model-unavailable fallback gated on an empty failed-check rollup.

Failed checks:

Changed-File Evidence Map

flowchart LR
  PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
  Evidence --> S1["Changed file: AGENTS.md"]
  S1 --> I1["repository behavior"]
  I1 --> R1["Review risk: Changed file: AGENTS.md"]
  R1 --> V1["required checks"]
Loading

@opencode-agent

opencode-agent Bot commented Aug 6, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

OpenCode Review Overview

  • Head SHA: 73c59bd09758913dc0927f158bac58d60a9d539d
  • Workflow run: 31099714779
  • Workflow attempt: 1
  • Gate result: REQUEST_CHANGES (approval step)

Pull request overview

OpenCode could not approve from deterministic current-head evidence because GitHub Checks have failed.

Findings

1. HIGH Current-head GitHub Checks - Fix failed required checks before approval

  • Problem: Failed same-head checks remain for 73c59bd09758913dc0927f158bac58d60a9d539d.
  • Root cause: The model-unavailable evidence fallback is allowed only when peer GitHub Checks are complete and clean.
  • Fix: Read and fix the failed check logs below, then rerun the current-head checks.
  • Regression test: Keep the model-unavailable fallback gated on an empty failed-check rollup.

Failed checks:

Changed-File Evidence Map

flowchart LR
  PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
  Evidence --> S1["Changed file: AGENTS.md"]
  S1 --> I1["repository behavior"]
  I1 --> R1["Review risk: Changed file: AGENTS.md"]
  R1 --> V1["required checks"]
Loading

@opencode-agent
opencode-agent Bot disabled auto-merge August 6, 2026 14:33
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