Agent Persona Exploration - 2026-11-06

Aperta Adatta ai principianti
  • Qualcosa non va?
#75,451 0 commenti 0 reazioni 0 assegnatari Vedi su GitHub

I maintainer di solito rispondono entro 1 giorno

Nessuno ha ancora preso questa issue.

Valutazione

Difficoltà
2/5
Tempo stimato
1-3 ore
Idoneità per principianti
72/100
Tipo di issue
Documentazione
Chiarezza
Specificata chiaramente
Stato di attività
Attiva
Stack tecnologico
github-actions, go, markdown
Ambito
devtools, documentation

Direzione di ricerca

Inizia da .github/aw/create-agentic-workflow.md, .github/aw/create-agentic-workflow-trigger-details.md, .github/aw/triggers.md e .github/aw/safe-outputs-content.md oppure .github/aw/pr-reviewer.md, come indicato nelle raccomandazioni. Leggi le indicazioni pertinenti sulla progettazione dei workflow e confrontale con le lacune descritte in questo report: aggiungi valori predefiniti concreti e fonti per soglie e baseline, indicazioni per l’output delle PR che dipende dal deploy e il compromesso relativo ai commenti di review. Il lavoro è concluso quando queste raccomandazioni sono riportate nella documentazione pertinente.

Scritto dal modello di indicizzazione a partire dal testo della issue.

Descrizione

agent-research
Persona Overview
  • Agent: agentic-workflows (via persona-evaluator sub-agent)
  • Personas This Run: Backend Engineer, Frontend Developer, DevOps Engineer
  • Scenarios Tested: 4 of 6 generated (BE-1, FE-1, DO-1, DO-2); BE-2 and FE-2 were not tested this run
  • Average Quality Score: 4.4/5.0 (previous run 4.45/5.0)
  • Rotation: all nine personas are now explored, so history resets for the next run
Key Findings
  • All four invocations succeeded, so no scoring is unavailable.
  • No insecure configuration was suggested. Every design used read-only scopes, an empty network allowlist (FE-1 optionally one preview host), and an intentional safe-output type.
  • Triggers were precise: path-filtered pull_request (BE-1, FE-1), a guarded workflow_run (DO-1), and schedule plus workflow_dispatch (DO-2).
  • The weakest area is undefined thresholds and baselines. BE-1, FE-1 and DO-2 each flagged a missing source (large-table list, base-branch bundle stats, minimum sample size), but none built a default into the recommendation. DO-2 suggested a 5-run floor in its notes and left it out of the design.
  • Two design risks: pull_request can race a preview deploy (FE-1), and a formal review reposts on every push (BE-1).
Top Patterns
  1. Triggers: path-scoped pull_request (2 of 4), guarded workflow_run (1), schedule with workflow_dispatch (1).
  2. Tools: github in gh-proxy mode in all four; bash only for reading files or logs; deterministic pre-steps for aggregation (FE-1, DO-2).
  3. Security: network.allowed: [] in all four, read-only permissions, untrusted-input handling in all four, and a fixed update-issue target in DO-2.
View High Quality Responses (Top 3)
  • DO-1 (4.6): workflow_run guards are exact (conclusion == failure, event == push, head_branch == main). The design never checks out head-branch code. The dedup key is per failure signature, which avoids reopening one unresolved incident daily.
  • DO-2 (4.6): Pre-step aggregation leaves the agent to ranking and formatting. A hard-coded target stops it choosing its write destination. Assumed defaults (failure = failure, timed_out, startup_failure; cancelled and skipped excluded) are stated explicitly.
  • BE-1 (4.4): Path-scoped trigger and COMMENT-only review, with no approve or request-changes. It flagged that large tables has no source and that one review comment is ambiguous.
View Areas for Improvement (Top 3)
  • FE-1 (4.0): pull_request can fire before the preview deploy finishes. The workflow_run alternative was offered, not chosen. The base-branch stats source is unstated, so the bundle delta has no baseline. There is no growth threshold, and the paths filter misses lockfile and config changes that alter bundle size.
  • DO-1 (4.6): The log-read path is ambiguous. The design suggests gh run view --log-failed in bash while also listing the actions toolset. Several decisions (timed_out/cancelled, per-signature vs per-run, assignee) went back to the user rather than being defaulted.
  • DO-2 (4.6): No minimum sample size, so 1 failed of 1 run reads as 100%. The failure-rate:<window-id> dedup key is redundant with latest-only replacement.
  • BE-1 (4.4): A formal review posts again on every push. A rolling add-comment with hide-older-comments would keep one visible comment.
Recommendations
  1. Update .github/aw/create-agentic-workflow.md so designs that depend on a threshold or baseline (large-table list, base-branch metrics, minimum sample size) put a concrete default and its source in the recommendation, not only in open questions. BE-1, FE-1 and DO-2 each flagged the gap without filling it.
  2. Update .github/aw/create-agentic-workflow-trigger-details.md and .github/aw/triggers.md with a decision rule: when PR output depends on a sibling deploy or artifact, default to workflow_run with a fork-safety guard instead of pull_request. FE-1 found the race but offered the fix as an alternative.
  3. Update .github/aw/safe-outputs-content.md or .github/aw/pr-reviewer.md to explain the trade-off when a user asks for one review comment: a formal submit-pull-request-review posts a new review per push, while a rolling add-comment with hide-older-comments keeps one visible comment. BE-1 raised this without resolving it.

References: §42243338716

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code]((claude.com/redacted)

Generated by 🎭 Agent Persona Explorer · claude · routed: haiku55 xhigh · ~7 AIC · ⌖ ~2 AIC · ⊞ 6.6K · ◷

Lingua principale
Go
Stelle
5.6k
Fork
615
Merge medio
5h 51m
PR unite (30g)
793

Preparare l'ambiente

Apri in Codespaces

Avvia il container di sviluppo del progetto nel browser, con il tuo account GitHub.

Come iniziare

  1. Leggi tutta la issue e poi la guida ai contributi del progetto.
  2. Commenta sulla issue per dire che te ne occupi tu — evita che due persone facciano lo stesso lavoro.
  3. Fai un fork del repository e lavora su un branch.
  4. Apri una pull request che faccia riferimento al numero della issue.

Altre issue di github/gh-aw

Tutte le issue di github/gh-aw

Issue simili

Altre issue su Go

Ricevi le nuove issue nella tua casella

Un breve riepilogo di issue GitHub adatte ai principianti.