Hacktoberfest 2026：维护者为十月标记出来的 issue，仍然开放、适合新手。 浏览 Hacktoberfest issue

Expose DMN rule documentation and policy sources in the builder

未关闭
  • 哪里不对？
#563 0 条评论 0 个 reaction 已指派 0 人 在 GitHub 查看

维护者通常 1 天内回复

还没有人认领这个 Issue。

评估

难度
5/5
预计耗时
一周以上
新手友好度
35/100
Issue 类型
功能
描述清晰度
描述清楚
活跃度
活跃
技术栈
java, python
领域
backend-api-design, documentation, full-stack

调研方向

Start with .agents/skills/references/dmn-documentation.md, existing documented DMN models, and bin/library/load-library-metadata.py; trace how ModelRegistry extracts model descriptions and how builder-api stores and refreshes library metadata. Then follow the frontend library benefit/check views. Done means documentation and named sources reach the author details view with provenance, safe text rendering, older-metadata handling, and the specified round-trip, refresh, and frontend tests.

由索引模型根据 Issue 内容生成。

描述

Library benefits and checks now carry their rule documentation in DMN descriptions, KIE documentation links (kie:attachment), shared type/BKM descriptions, and selective diagram text annotations. The builder currently receives model summaries and input/composition metadata, but authors cannot inspect the detailed rules, policy sources, review/effective dates, or known limitations without opening the DMN files.

Expose this documentation in the builder using the DMN as the source of truth. For example, an author selecting PECO CAP should be able to read why re-entry requires provider approval and open the cited handbook/order. Senior Citizen Tax Freeze should visibly disclose that its current model omits the program's income check.

Scope

  • Extend library discovery/OpenAPI metadata to represent model and decision documentation, named source links, and relevant annotations. Include descriptions for parameters and shared input types/fields, with references to their owning model/element rather than copying a separate policy document into every benefit.
  • Carry this metadata through bin/library/load-library-metadata.py, builder-api library metadata storage/refresh, and frontend library benefit/check views.
  • Provide a readable documentation/details view when choosing or reviewing library benefits and checks. Show rule interpretation, boundaries and unknown-input behavior, policy review/effective dates when present, named clickable sources, and implementation limitations.
  • Preserve provenance (model path, element ID, library version) so imported benefits/checks can identify their documentation source. Define refresh behavior and handle older metadata that lacks documentation.
  • Render descriptions as text and support the named documentation URLs without treating arbitrary DMN text as executable HTML.

Implementation notes

  • DMN 1.6 uses dmn:description; KIE Tools 10.2 links use dmn:extensionElements/kie:attachment with name and url. Notes use standard dmn:textAnnotation and optional associations to the relevant node.
  • ModelRegistry currently extracts only the model description. Inspect the original DMN XML for KIE extensions: the default Java engine marshaller skips extension children without registered converters, so extracting only the compiled runtime model can lose source links. The KIE Tools 10.2 editor marshaller preserves them.
  • Keep this read-only author documentation separate from executable decisions, applicant answers and eligibility results. Do not introduce an evaluated documentation decision.
  • The repository convention is .agents/skills/references/dmn-documentation.md; use existing documented models as fixtures, including shared fields and associated annotations.

Acceptance criteria

  • Benefit/check details show their DMN documentation and named policy sources without manually maintained duplicate content.
  • Shared input/parameter explanations are reachable from the relevant author workflow, with provenance intact.
  • Important caveats remain discoverable, including PECO CAP provider review and the current Senior Citizen Tax Freeze income gap.
  • Metadata round-trip/refresh tests cover root and decision links, shared type descriptions, associated annotations and models with no documentation.
  • Frontend tests cover readable details, source links, missing metadata and refresh behavior.

Related: #341 (library-check documentation), #549 (utility benefit models). This is distinct from #553/#554: those introduce applicant-facing application/help next steps and copy them into screeners; this issue exposes model/rule documentation for screener authors.

主要语言
Java
星标
16
派生
5
平均合并
14 小时 34 分钟
30 天内合并 PR
23

环境准备

在 Codespaces 中打开

在浏览器里用你自己的 GitHub 账号启动这个项目的开发容器。

  • 没有 Dockerfile 或 Docker Compose 文件
  • 有 Pull Request 模板
  • 没有贡献指南

从这里开始

  1. 先读完整个 Issue，再读项目的贡献指南。
  2. 在 Issue 下留言说明你要接手 —— 这能避免两个人做同样的事。
  3. Fork 仓库，在一个分支上完成修改。
  4. 提交 Pull Request，并在描述里引用这个 Issue 编号。

CodeForPhilly/benefit-decision-toolkit 的其他 Issue

查看 CodeForPhilly/benefit-decision-toolkit 的全部 Issue

相似的 Issue

更多 Java Issue

把新 issue 发到你的邮箱

精选适合新手参与的 GitHub issue 摘要。