Agent Persona Exploration - 2026-11-12

Abierto Apto para principiantes
  • ¿Algo no está bien?
#77,188 0 comentarios 0 reacciones 0 asignados Ver en GitHub

Los mantenedores suelen responder en 1 día

Nadie ha tomado este issue todavía.

Evaluación

Dificultad
2/5
Tiempo estimado
1-3 horas
Aptitud para principiantes
72/100
Tipo de issue
Documentación
Claridad
Bien especificado
Estado de actividad
Activo
Stack tecnológico
github-actions, go
Área
ci-cd, devtools

Línea de trabajo

Empieza con las tres recomendaciones del issue: .github/aw/network.md y las indicaciones alrededor de las líneas 103 y 255 de .github/aw/create-agentic-workflow.md. Lee esas secciones y compáralas con los hallazgos anteriores; estará listo cuando la documentación cubra ejemplos de búsqueda en el registro, preprocesamiento determinista para comprobaciones estructurales y la inclusión de valores predeterminados en los resúmenes de prompts.

Escrito por el modelo de indexación a partir del texto del issue.

Descripción

agent-research cookie
Persona Overview
  • Agent: agentic-workflows
  • Personas This Run: Frontend Developer, DevOps Engineer, QA Tester
  • Rotation: all 9 personas are now covered, so the rotation resets next run
  • Scenarios Tested: 4 of 6 generated (FE-5, DO-5, DO-6, QA-5); FE-6 and QA-6 were not tested
  • Invocation: one persona-evaluator run; all 4 scenarios returned recommendations
  • Average Quality Score: 4.5/5.0
  • Run: §43248107250
Key Findings
  • Triggers were correct in all four recommendations: pull_request with path filters for PR reviews, and schedule plus workflow_dispatch for the scheduled check. Trigger appropriateness averaged 5.0.
  • All four used read-only permissions, no edit tool, pull_request rather than pull_request_target, and COMMENT-level reviews that do not block PRs.
  • The weakest dimensions were completeness (4.0) and prompt clarity (4.25). Defaults the agent chose (exemption matching, the 48-hour cron rule, Go subtest rules) were written in the notes but often missing from the prompt summary.
  • DO-6 was the only over-broad network suggestion. It hardcoded four registries, although the containers ecosystem already covers GHCR and Docker Hub.
  • No scenario averaged below 4.4.
Top Patterns
  1. Triggers: pull_request with paths: filters (3 of 4); schedule plus workflow_dispatch (1 of 4).
  2. Tools: github gh-proxy and bash in all four. Shell commands handled file listing, test scanning, and CLI lookups.
  3. Safe outputs: review comments (FE-5, QA-5), a rolling add-comment with hide-older-comments (DO-6), and create-issue with close-older-issues (DO-5). noop appeared in all four.
View Scenario Scores
Scenario Task Trigger Tools Security Prompt Completeness Avg
FE-5 Storybook story gap on component PRs 5 5 5 4 4 4.6
DO-5 Scheduled workflows silent for 48h 5 5 5 4 4 4.6
DO-6 Unpinned Dockerfile base images 5 4 4 5 4 4.4
QA-5 Test functions with no assertions 5 4 5 4 4 4.4
View High Quality Responses
  • FE-5 (4.6): Inline COMMENT-level review per component missing a story, honors the exemption list, caps at max: 25, and calls noop when nothing is missing. Read-only, no network.
  • DO-5 (4.6): Treats disabled workflow states as out of scope and marks crons longer than 48 hours as not evaluated rather than stale. close-older-issues with a key dedupes the tracking issue.
View Areas for Improvement
  • DO-6: Hardcodes quay.io, gcr.io, mcr.microsoft.com, and public.ecr.aws. The same response says to limit hosts to registries the repo names. It also assumes crane or docker buildx is available without checking, and does not say whether to pin the index digest or a per-platform digest.
  • QA-5: Detects test functions with grep/awk, which is brittle for Go and TypeScript. The Go subtest and t.Skip-only rules appear only in the notes.
  • FE-5, DO-5, QA-5: Exemption matching, the story file pattern, and the 48-hour cron rule are labelled defaults in the notes but missing from the prompt summaries.
Recommendations
  1. .github/aw/network.md: Add a worked example for registry-backed lookups. Prefer ecosystem identifiers such as containers, and add FQDNs only for registries that the repository files actually name.
  2. .github/aw/create-agentic-workflow.md: For structural checks (test-function detection, digest resolution), recommend deterministic steps: that write to /tmp/gh-aw/ so the agent only formats results. The guidance at line 255 covers this only for large-data preprocessing.
  3. .github/aw/create-agentic-workflow.md: Line 103 already asks for labelled Default: values. Require that they also appear in the prompt summary, not only in the notes.

References:

Generated by 🎭 Agent Persona Explorer · claude · routed: haiku55 xhigh · ~6 AIC · ⌖ ~2 AIC · ⊞ 7.6K · ◷

Lenguaje dominante
Go
Estrellas
5.6k
Forks
625
Merge medio
5 h 39 min
PR fusionados (30 d)
796

Preparar el entorno

Abrir en Codespaces

Inicia el contenedor de desarrollo del proyecto en tu navegador, con tu propia cuenta de GitHub.

Primeros pasos

  1. Lee el issue completo y luego la guía de contribución del proyecto.
  2. Comenta en el issue que vas a ocuparte — evita que dos personas hagan lo mismo.
  3. Haz un fork del repositorio y trabaja en una rama.
  4. Abre un pull request que haga referencia al número del issue.

Más de github/gh-aw

Todos los issues de github/gh-aw

Issues similares

Más issues de Go

Recibe los nuevos issues en tu correo

Un resumen breve de issues de GitHub para principiantes.