[deep-research] Deep Research: Pattern Library Analysis (2026-09-28 snapshot)

这是对 patterns/manifest.json 和 patterns/archetypes/*.json 的只读摘要，不是要求修改代码。首先检查这些已提交的输入，并根据它们核实报告中的计数或发现；issue 说明所有文件都已成功解析。完成意味着将分析记录在运行日志中，而不修改仓库文件。

Read-only analysis of the committed pattern library (patterns/manifest.json + patterns/archetypes/*.json), generated 2026-09-28 from 563 source repos / 345 active workflows / 929 total workflows scanned. No repository writes were made; this issue is purely a summary for the run log.

Archetype coverage (32 files, 31 user-facing + hidden custom)

Empirical archetypes (count > 0), by success rate:

Curated archetypes with no measured runs yet (count: 0, retained per policy): accessibility-expert, agent-cost-tracker, backlog-drip, batched-ci-doctor, ci-failure-triage, code-health-auditor, community-digest, contribution-guidelines-checker, issue-hierarchy-manager, link-checker, linter-applier, linter-miner, linter-refiner, linter-workflows, nitpick-reviewer, performance-nut, pr-fix-assistant, pr-iteration-loop, repo-qa-assistant, security-scanner, user-simulator (21 archetypes).

custom (count: 469, 49% baseline) is excluded from the wizard's HOW-step archetype cards but kept as a supporting profile/match target.

Configuration defaults

• No pinned default model (model: null) — premium models only selected deliberately.
• Timeout defaults by trigger: schedule 30 min; issues, push, slash_command, workflow_run, discussion, pull_request all 15 min (archetypes may override upward).
• Prompt size sweet spot: 3,000–8,000 bytes.

Trigger combinations (curated, 15 tracked)

All 15 tracked combos are marked "Recommended"; 13 of 15 hit 90–100% success. Notable:

• permissions+schedule and lone reaction — 100% (n=20 each).
• issues+reaction+stop-after — 100% (n=13).
• bots+permissions+skip-if-match, manual-approval+pull_request+roles, cron+env+name+schedule+steps, etc. — 100% (n=10 each).
• No sub-90% combo appears in this curated top-15 "Recommended" list.

Configuration profiles (archetype × trigger × safe-outputs detail, 20 entries)

Highlights of best/worst within archetype:

• custom: schedule+skip-if-match → create-pull-request = 93.0% (n=43, best in dataset); schedule → create-issue = 53.6% (n=69); pull_request → add-comment = 60.0% (n=30).
• status-report: schedule+stop-after → create-discussion = 97.5% (n=40, near-best overall) vs. plain schedule → create-issue = 47.1% (n=87) vs. adding mentions/allowed-github-references → 33.6% (n=143, degrades further).
• repo-maintainer: permissions+reaction+slash_command+steps (rich safe-outputs incl. push-to-pull-request-branch) = 90.0% (n=30) vs. reaction+schedule+slash_command (no permissions/steps scoping) = 41.0% (n=39).
• issue-triage: issues+reaction → add-comment+add-labels = 83.3% (n=24); issue_comment+issues → add-comment/messages/noop = 80.0% (n=30).
• pr-review: pull_request → add-comment or review-comment variants = 71.4% (n=21 each) vs. slash_command → review-comment/messages = 20.0% (n=20).
• dependency-monitor: schedule → create-pull-request = 36.4% (n=176, largest sample in the whole profile set, still underperforms).
• documentation-updater: schedule → create-pull-request = 56.7% (n=30) vs. push → create-pull-request = 26.7% (n=30).
• code-improvement: workflow_run → add-comment+create-issue = 21.7% (n=23, best code-improvement profile, still poor); schedule+skip-if-match → create-pull-request = 12.0% (n=83); stop-after+workflow_run (broad safe-output set) = 0.0% (n=20, confirms workflow_run chaining anti-pattern).

Anti-patterns (20 named, all 0% success, each seen in exactly 1 repo)

All are singleton-repo failures, clustered around: documentation/doc-sync variants (documentation-updater, documentation-audit, update-docs, doc-sync, docs-sync, daily-repo-status ×2, localize-pt, news-translate), broad unscoped mandates (dependabot-remediation, breaking-change-checker, ci-doctor, csharp-guideline-improver), issue-triage/pr-review singleton failures, a duplicate "update-github-info" pattern (seen in 2 different repos), and two Imperia360-specific patterns (imperia-market-prices, imperia-cross-auditor). degraded_workflows was an empty array in this manifest snapshot.

Research findings

• Bimodal outcomes: 38% of workflows always succeed, 21% always fail, 41% mixed — averages are misleading.
• DO NOT constraints: workflows with explicit boundary instructions are 61% more likely to be healthy (p=0.009).
• Slash commands: act as dispatchers routing to target workflows via workflow_dispatch; their own execution metrics are recorded under the dispatched run, not the dispatcher.
• workflow_run risk: chaining via workflow_run has only 13–16% success rate — prefer pre-steps or schedule, confirmed by the 0% code-improvement workflow_run+stop-after profile above.
• Pre-steps help: workflows with pre-steps show +13pp internal and +5pp community activity.
• Prompt size matters: active workflows have 35–48% larger prompts than inactive ones.
• Template clones are fragile: ~32% of workflows are unmodified template copies, which underperform customized workflows.

Data integrity note

patterns/manifest.json is present and valid, and references all 32 archetype files under patterns/archetypes/, all of which parsed successfully and contained analyzable pattern data (either empirical success_rate/count data or curated defaults with count: 0). No missing-or-invalid-input condition was encountered.

This is a read-only reporting workflow; no code, workflow, or pattern files were modified.

Generated by 🔬 Deep Research · copilot · auto · 26.7 AIC · ⌖ 5.45 AIC · ⊞ 5.9K · ◷