Tighten PR sous-chef nudge heuristics: 4-per-run cap, deterministic prioritization, and safe review-thread resolution#44805
Merged
Conversation
Co-authored-by: pelikhan <4175913+pelikhan@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: pelikhan <4175913+pelikhan@users.noreply.github.com>
Copilot
AI
changed the title
Update PR sous-chef heuristics for nudges and review-thread resolution
Tighten PR sous-chef nudge heuristics: 4-per-run cap, deterministic prioritization, and safe review-thread resolution
Jul 10, 2026
Copilot created this pull request from a session on behalf of
pelikhan
July 10, 2026 17:14
View session
Contributor
|
Hey The PR is focused, well-described, includes contract test coverage in
|
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull request overview
Adds bounded, prioritized PR nudging and automated review-thread resolution.
Changes:
- Caps nudges at four and defines deterministic prioritization.
- Adds safe-output thread resolution and reporting.
- Extends workflow contract assertions and recompiles the workflow.
Show a summary per file
| File | Description |
|---|---|
.github/workflows/pr-sous-chef.md |
Updates workflow behavior and safe outputs. |
.github/workflows/pr-sous-chef.lock.yml |
Regenerates the compiled workflow. |
pkg/cli/pr_sous_chef_workflow_contract_test.go |
Extends contract checks. |
Review details
Tip
Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.
- Files reviewed: 3/3 changed files
- Comments generated: 4
- Review effort level: Medium
Comment on lines
+272
to
+276
| 5. Prioritize which PRs to nudge, in this order: | ||
| - `mergeStateStatus == "CONFLICTING"` first (explicit merge-conflict unblock request). | ||
| - PRs with unresolved review threads where at least one thread already has a follow-up response from the PR author or `@copilot` but remains unresolved. | ||
| - Remaining PRs by most-recent `updatedAt`. | ||
| If two PRs are still tied, prioritize the lower PR number first for deterministic behavior and stable reruns. |
| ```bash | ||
| safeoutputs resolve_pull_request_review_thread --thread_id PRRT_kwDOABCD1234 | ||
| ``` | ||
| - If resolving one thread fails, append `{pr_number: <N>, skip_reason: "resolve_review_thread_failed", thread_id: "<thread-id>"}` to the run-summary `skipped` array and continue with remaining thread IDs; do not fail the run solely because one resolution attempt failed. |
| 4. **Dismiss stale `github-actions[bot]` blocking reviews when all PR review threads are resolved** | ||
| - **Slash-command guard**: If triggered via the `/souschef` slash command (`pull_request_comment` event), skip this dismissal step entirely — slash-command runs are acknowledgment nudges and must not perform automated review cleanup. | ||
| - For `schedule` and `workflow_dispatch` runs, use the `dismiss_reviews` list returned by the `pr-processor` sub-agent. The sub-agent populates this list only when ALL review threads on the PR are resolved; leave reviews untouched if any thread remains unresolved. | ||
| - For `schedule` and `workflow_dispatch` runs, use the `dismiss_reviews` list returned by the `pr-processor` sub-agent. The sub-agent populates this list only when ALL review threads on the PR are resolved (including threads resolved in step 3); leave reviews untouched if any thread remains unresolved. |
| assert.Contains(t, text, "Process all eligible PRs per run.", "Workflow should require processing all eligible PRs") | ||
| assert.Contains(t, text, "Process at most 4 nudges per run.", "Workflow should cap nudges per run") | ||
| assert.Contains(t, text, "add-comment:\n max: 4", "Workflow should hard-cap add_comment safe-output calls to 4 per run") | ||
| assert.Contains(t, text, "Prioritize which PRs to nudge, in this order:", "Workflow should define deterministic PR prioritization for nudges") |
This was referenced Jul 10, 2026
Contributor
|
🎉 This pull request is included in a new release. Release: |
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
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.
PR sous-chef could over-nudge and re-nudge low-signal targets, and it did not explicitly resolve review threads that already had responses. This update constrains nudge volume, prioritizes the highest-value PRs first, and adds safe-output-driven thread resolution before stale-review dismissal.
Nudge budget and ordering
mergeStateStatus == CONFLICTING@copilotfollow-up repliesupdatedAtdesc, then PR number asc for stable tiesRepeat-nudge suppression
marker + @copilot), with the existing conflict-state exception.Safe-output review-thread resolution
resolve-pull-request-review-threadto workflow safe-outputs.@copilot.skippedentries.Run-report accounting
resolved_review_threadsto run summary counters.github-actions[bot]blocking reviews contingent on all threads being resolved (including newly resolved ones).Contract coverage updates
pr_sous_chef_workflow_contract_test.goassertions for: