Agent Persona Exploration - 2026-11-07

オープン 初心者向け
  • 何か問題がありますか？
#75,702 コメント 0 件 リアクション 0 件 担当者 0 名 GitHub で見る

メンテナーはふだん 1 日以内に返信

まだ誰も着手していません。

評価

難易度
2/5
見積もり時間
1〜3時間
初心者へのやさしさ
74/100
issue の種類
ドキュメント
明瞭さ
明確に書かれている
活発さ
活発
技術スタック
github-actions, yaml
領域
devtools

調査の方向性

.github/aw/create-agentic-workflow.mdから始め、入力の処理に関するガイダンスを.github/aw/workflow-constraints.mdと比較します。次に.github/aw/report.mdを読み、ゼロ件の場合の別個の推奨事項を確認します。このissueでは、ドキュメントに3点を追加するよう求めています。信頼できない入力の処理、スケジュール実行されたレポートが空の場合の既定値、初回実行時のベースラインとフォークPRへの書き戻し制限に関するチェックです。関連するガイダンスですべての推奨事項に対応したら完了です。

索引モデルが issue の本文から書いたものです。

説明

agent-research
Persona Overview
  • Agent: agentic-workflows, evaluated through the persona-evaluator sub-agent
  • Personas This Run: Program Manager, Designer, Legal / Compliance
  • Selection: explored-personas.json was empty, so all nine personas were eligible. These three non-technical personas had only the fixed Nov 4 baseline and no rotation coverage.
  • Scenarios Tested: 4 of 6 generated (PGM-1, DSG-2, LEG-3, LEG-4; PGM-2 and DSG-3 not tested)
  • Average Quality Score: 4.7/5.0 (previous run 4.4)
Key Findings
  • All four responses proposed read-only scopes, empty network allowlists, and explicit safe-outputs. No scenario scored below 4.6.
  • LEG-3 was the strongest response. It reads the approved license header from the base branch, so a PR cannot approve its own header change.
  • Two of four responses (PGM-1, DSG-2) parse free-text issue or PR bodies without flagging them as untrusted. Earlier high-scoring runs did flag this (DO-1, FE-1).
  • The entry-point guidance the evaluator reads (create-agentic-workflow.md) has no untrusted-input clause, though other .github/aw/ files mention untrusted content.
  • Scores are the parent evaluator judgement. The rise from 4.4 may partly reflect rubric drift rather than agent change.
Top Patterns
  1. Triggers: path-scoped pull_request for PR checks (tokens/*.json, src/**), and weekly schedule plus workflow_dispatch for reports.
  2. Tools: github in gh-proxy mode, with bash for deterministic work (WCAG contrast math, JSON diff run as python3 -I or jq).
  3. Security: read-only scopes, network.allowed: [], rolling comments with hide-older-comments, and a dedup key on every issue.
View High Quality Responses (Top 2-3)
  • LEG-3 (4.8): Filters to added files because paths: also matches modified and deleted ones. Splits results into pass, fail, and uncertain, and leaves uncertain cases to humans.
  • LEG-4 (4.8): Omits close-older-issues so unreviewed license flags stay open. Runs the diff in an isolated, no-network Python process.
  • DSG-2 (4.6): Recomputes contrast ratios from hex values instead of trusting claimed results. Flags tokens that no text pair references as unverifiable.
View Areas for Improvement (Top 2-3)
  • Untrusted input (PGM-1, DSG-2): Neither response labels issue or PR body text as data. Other .github/aw/ files mention untrusted content, such as workflow-constraints.md, but create-agentic-workflow.md does not reference it.
  • Empty-result policy (PGM-1): The response asked whether a zero-blocker week should post a status or noop. report.md defines noop only for zero-event windows, which leaves status digests ambiguous.
  • Diff-workflow edge cases (LEG-4, LEG-3): No first-run behaviour when no prior licenses.json exists. Fork-PR limits on add-comment and add-labels are not mentioned.
Recommendations
  1. Add an untrusted-input clause to .github/aw/create-agentic-workflow.md. Point it at the existing guidance and require authors to state that issue, PR, and comment text is data, not instructions, whenever a workflow parses it.
  2. In .github/aw/report.md, set a default for zero-result scheduled status reports (post a no-items line or noop) beside the zero-event rule.
  3. In .github/aw/create-agentic-workflow.md, add two checks for compliance-style workflows: first-run baseline behaviour for diff-based schedules, and fork-PR write-back limits for PR review workflows.
View Run Notes
  • Rotation state mismatch: explored-personas.json was empty at the start, yet the Nov 5 and Nov 6 results files cover six other personas (Information Worker, Product Manager, QA Tester, Backend Engineer, Frontend Developer, DevOps Engineer). This run appended its three personas to the empty list, as the spec says. The next run may therefore re-include earlier personas.
  • Invocation: one persona-evaluator call covered all four scenarios, and all four succeeded. The sub-agent proposed no workflow files and created none.
  • Stored: scenarios in scenarios-42386527774.json, structured records in results-42386527774.json.

References: §42386527774 · §42243338716

Generated by 🎭 Agent Persona Explorer · claude · routed: haiku55 xhigh · ~6 AIC · ⌖ ~2 AIC · ⊞ 6.7K · ◷

主要言語
Go
スター
5.6k
フォーク
615
平均マージ
5時間 44分
マージ済み PR（30日）
808

環境構築

Codespaces で開く

このプロジェクトの開発コンテナを、あなたの GitHub アカウントでブラウザ上に起動します。

はじめの一歩

  1. issue を最後まで読み、次にプロジェクトのコントリビューションガイドを読みます。
  2. 着手することを issue にコメントします — 二人が同じ作業をするのを防げます。
  3. リポジトリをフォークし、ブランチを切って変更します。
  4. issue 番号を参照したプルリクエストを送ります。

github/gh-aw のほかの issue

github/gh-aw の issue をすべて見る

似ている issue

Go の issue をもっと見る

新しい issue をメールで受け取る

初心者向けの GitHub issue を短くまとめたダイジェスト。