Add runtime evidence policy and remove misleading test checks#115
Conversation
|
Warning Review limit reached
More reviews will be available in 48 minutes and 55 seconds. Learn how PR review limits work. Your organization has used up its prepaid credits, and credit purchases are no longer available. Enable the review add-on in the billing tab to keep reviews running — you're only billed for reviews past your plan's rate limits ($0.25/file). ⌛ How to resolve this issue?After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the To avoid repeated limits, reduce automatic review volume by pausing incremental auto-reviews earlier, using label-based review opt-in, excluding WIP or generated PR titles, or requesting reviews manually when the PR is ready. If your team needs uninterrupted high-volume reviews, an organization admin can enable usage-based credits. 🚦 How do rate limits work?CodeRabbit enforces per-developer PR review limits for each organization. Most developers receive the normal plan refill rate. For paid Pro and Pro+ PR reviews, CodeRabbit uses adaptive limits for sustained high-volume activity. When a developer's recent PR review activity reaches the 95th percentile or higher among CodeRabbit users, the refill rate gradually slows as usage increases. The highest same-day bursts are limited more strictly. Please see our Fair Usage Limits Policy for further information. ℹ️ Review info⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml Review profile: ASSERTIVE Plan: Pro Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (2)
📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughIntroduces a ChangesRuntime Evidence Policy, clean-logs Tooling, and Test Realism
Estimated code review effort🎯 3 (Moderate) | ⏱️ ~25 minutes Possibly related PRs
🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 4 | ❌ 1❌ Failed checks (1 warning)
✅ Passed checks (4 passed)
✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings. ✨ Finishing Touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
Inline comments:
In `@logs/README.md`:
- Line 9: The README.md file at line 9 references the script
`scripts/clean_logs.sh` which is being removed in this PR as part of the
no-shell-scripts packaging contract. Update the line to reference the make
command instead by replacing the text that says "Run `scripts/clean_logs.sh`
before manual smoke tests and debug sessions" with "Run `make clean-logs` before
manual smoke tests and debug sessions" to maintain an accurate reference in the
documentation.
🪄 Autofix (Beta)
Fix all unresolved CodeRabbit comments on this PR:
- Push a commit to this branch (recommended)
- Create a new PR with the fixes
ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration
Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: ASSERTIVE
Plan: Pro
Run ID: 2adc362d-954a-4817-bfaf-579e454b1d97
📒 Files selected for processing (14)
.claude/agents/runtime-engineer.md.codex/roles/runtime-engineer.md.codex/runbooks/runtime.md.gitignoreAGENTS.mdCLAUDE.mdCODEX.mdMakefiledocs/testing-reality-policy.mdlogs/README-logs.mdlogs/README.mdtests/services/test_privileged_action_service.pytests/ui/test_pysh_console_panel.pytests/ui/test_terminal_panel_reservation.py
💤 Files with no reviewable changes (2)
- logs/README-logs.md
- tests/services/test_privileged_action_service.py
|



This PR adds runtime evidence discipline for ECLI development and removes/reworks misleading tests that provided false confidence.
Changes:
Validation:
Non-goals:
Summary by CodeRabbit
Documentation
Tests
Chores
make clean-logscommand for clearing runtime logs before testing sessions.