Repository navigation
Say what a non-interactive agent should do at the scope check (for discussion) - #54
Open
anakanemison wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
anakanemison
force-pushed
the
mschaller/d2-non-interactive-scope-check
branch
from
October 26, 2026 13:30
4204123 to
97855bd
Compare
…scussion) The scope check tells the agent to surface custom commands, codegen and non-system find_package uses "and confirm before proceeding". In a non-interactive run there is nobody to confirm with. The skill does not say what to do instead, so the agent proceeds and the findings the gate exists to surface are not recorded anywhere. Measured in any2bazel-lab: the gate was passed in 13 of 13 applicable non-interactive runs on small projects, and in every larger- project run but one (which stopped with a correct scope report). The outcomes were mostly good; what was lost is the audit trail. Adds the fallback the proposal suggests: if no one can answer, record the findings and the decision taken in any2bazel.json under "scope_findings" (record-only; config.load ignores unknown keys; listed with the other fields) and proceed, unless the not-yet-supported list applies, where the stop holds even unattended. The fallback replaces the confirmation, not the stop, so for an item on that list no answer still means stop and report. In the lab's later runs with this change, every migrating agent recorded its scope findings, and the YugabyteDB agent stopped with a scope report. This is a proposal for discussion: whether an unanswerable gate should become "record and proceed", or stay a stop the agent is expected to honor, is the maintainers' design call. Lab-Proposal: P4 Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
anakanemison
force-pushed
the
mschaller/d2-non-interactive-scope-check
branch
from
November 2, 2026 17:50
97855bd to
344acab
Compare
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The scope check says to confirm findings before proceeding, which a non-interactive agent cannot do. The fallback: record the findings and the decision under
scope_findingsin any2bazel.json (record-only) and proceed, except where the not-yet-supported list applies, where the stop holds.In any2bazel-lab, unattended agents passed the gate in every applicable run but one, and the findings were recorded nowhere. In later runs, every migrating agent recorded its scope findings, and the YugabyteDB agent stopped with a scope report. For discussion: "record and proceed" versus a stop is the maintainers' design call.
Stacked on #53 (tracking issue: #35).
pytest tests/: 186 passed (132 onmain). Lab proposal: P4.🤖 Generated with Claude Code