Skip to content

fix: return five-field rows from list_reviews - #191

Merged
fengjiachun merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
fix/list-reviews-compact-rows
Oct 18, 2026
Merged

fengjiachun merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
fix/list-reviews-compact-rows

Conversation

@fengjiachun

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

list_reviews returned publicReview for every review: requirement, scope, rounds, findings, resolutions, rereview decisions, errata, carried findings and history. Against a store of 1133 reviews the unfiltered result was 18,997,767 bytes. The MCP SDK stdio transport caps one message at 10 MB, and in agent transcripts from 2026-09-10 to 2026-10-17 none of 24 author calls got a usable inline result; four failed with "Connection closed".

Change

  • listReviews returns one row per review with exactly id, status, repository_path, the latest round's head_sha, and updated_at. The status filter, reviewer-provider filter and newest-first sort by updated_at are unchanged; no inputs are added.
  • listPendingReviews returns those rows directly. The destructure that stripped rationale, reconstructed_intent and intent_comparison is gone, since a row cannot carry them.
  • The list_reviews description now states what a row carries and points to get_review_summary / get_review for details. docs/reference.md is regenerated.

Only these two MCP tools call listReviews / listPendingReviews; the reviewer skills use the pending list only to select a review_id before open_review.

Verification

  • New smoke test: three stored reviews whose update order matches neither id order. It pins newest-first by updated_at, the latest round's head_sha, and the five sorted keys. Four mutants each turn it red: no sort, sort by id, first round's head_sha, and the full ledger.
  • Existing core tests for provider filtering and for pending rows without rationale pass unchanged.
  • npm test, npm audit --omit=dev, npm run build, npm run verify:build.

list_reviews pushed the whole public ledger of every review. Against a
store of 1133 reviews the unfiltered result was about 19 MB, past the
10 MB stdio message limit: none of 24 recorded author calls got a
usable inline result, and four closed the connection.

Each row now carries id, status, repository_path, the latest round's
head_sha, and updated_at; details come from get_review_summary or
get_review. list_pending_reviews returns the same rows, so the
destructure that stripped rationale and intent texts has nothing left
to strip.
@fengjiachun
fengjiachun marked this pull request as ready for review October 18, 2026 03:16
@fengjiachun

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner Author

@codex review

When you finish, append exactly this marker to the review summary:

@chatgpt-codex-connector

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot commented Oct 18, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codex Review Summary

This comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.

Review Status Commit Review trigger
📝 Code Review ✅ Completed 2026-10-18T03:27:16.543302Z 5c087bc Manual request
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review" or "@codex security review".

Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings.

@chatgpt-codex-connector

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. What shall we delve into next?

Reviewed commit: 5c087bcfee

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

@fengjiachun
fengjiachun merged commit a965270 into main Oct 18, 2026
2 checks passed
@fengjiachun
fengjiachun deleted the fix/list-reviews-compact-rows branch October 18, 2026 04:11
@fengjiachun fengjiachun mentioned this pull request Oct 18, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant