Skip to content

fix(workflows): normalize report headers to h3+ and add progressive disclosure #24201

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
pelikhan merged 2 commits into from
Apr 3, 2026
Merged

fix(workflows): normalize report headers to h3+ and add progressive disclosure #24201

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
ea9c6ee
Initial plan
Copilot Apr 3, 2026
6f23683
fix: normalize report formatting to h3+ headers in workflow templates
Copilot Apr 3, 2026
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion .github/workflows/daily-safe-output-optimizer.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -219,7 +219,7 @@ Use the cache memory folder `/tmp/gh-aw/cache-memory/` to build persistent knowl
**Issue Structure:**

```markdown
# Improve [Tool Name] Description to Prevent Agent Errors
### Improve [Tool Name] Description to Prevent Agent Errors

### Summary

Comment on lines +222 to 225
Copy link

Copilot AI Apr 3, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

In this issue body template, the first header acts like a report title (h3). To match the repo’s report formatting convention (e.g., .github/workflows/ci-doctor.md:247-252 and .github/workflows/copilot-pr-merged-report.md:149-152), the subsequent sections (like “Summary”) should be one level deeper (####) or the title header should be removed entirely (since the GitHub issue title already serves as the document title).

See below for a potential fix:

#### Summary

Analysis of the last 24 hours of workflow runs identified **[N] errors** where agents incorrectly used the `[tool_name]` safe output tool. The workflow prompts appear correct, indicating the tool description needs improvement.

<details>
<summary><b>🔍 Error Analysis Details</b></summary>

#### Error Analysis

##### Error Pattern 1: [Description]

Copilot uses AI. Check for mistakes.
Expand Down
30 changes: 19 additions & 11 deletions .github/workflows/dev-hawk.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -138,7 +138,7 @@ You monitor "Dev" workflow completions on copilot/* branches (workflow_dispatch

**Success:**
```markdown
# ✅ Dev Hawk Report - Success
### ✅ Dev Hawk Report - Success
**Workflow**: [#${{ github.event.workflow_run.run_number }}](${{ github.event.workflow_run.html_url }})
- Status: ${{ github.event.workflow_run.conclusion }}
- Commit: ${{ github.event.workflow_run.head_sha }}
Expand All @@ -148,30 +148,34 @@ Dev workflow completed successfully! 🎉

**Failure (with root cause identified):**
```markdown
# ⚠️ Dev Hawk Report - Failure Analysis
### ⚠️ Dev Hawk Report - Failure Analysis
**Workflow**: [#${{ github.event.workflow_run.run_number }}](${{ github.event.workflow_run.html_url }})
- Status: ${{ github.event.workflow_run.conclusion }}
- Commit: ${{ github.event.workflow_run.head_sha }}

## Root Cause Analysis
#### Root Cause Analysis
[Detailed explanation of what went wrong, correlating audit errors with PR changes]

### Affected Files
##### Affected Files
- `path/to/file.ext` - [Specific issue found]
- `path/to/another.ext` - [Another issue if applicable]

## Error Details
<details>
<summary><b>🔍 Error Details</b></summary>

```
[Key error messages from audit]
```

## Agent Task Created
</details>

#### Agent Task Created
🤖 I've created an agent task for Copilot to fix this issue:
- Task: [Agent Task URL or ID]

The task includes detailed instructions on what needs to be fixed and how to verify the solution.

## Manual Review
#### Manual Review
If you prefer to fix this manually:
- [ ] [Specific fix step 1]
- [ ] [Specific fix step 2]
Expand All @@ -180,18 +184,22 @@ If you prefer to fix this manually:

**Failure (without clear root cause):**
```markdown
# ⚠️ Dev Hawk Report - Failure
### ⚠️ Dev Hawk Report - Failure
**Workflow**: [#${{ github.event.workflow_run.run_number }}](${{ github.event.workflow_run.html_url }})
- Status: ${{ github.event.workflow_run.conclusion }}
- Commit: ${{ github.event.workflow_run.head_sha }}

## Analysis Summary
#### Analysis Summary
[Summary of failure from audit]

## Key Errors
<details>
<summary><b>🔍 Key Errors</b></summary>

[Error messages and patterns found]

## Investigation Needed
</details>

#### Investigation Needed
I couldn't automatically determine the exact root cause. This may require:
- [ ] Manual review of the error logs
- [ ] Deeper investigation of [specific area]
Expand Down
32 changes: 16 additions & 16 deletions .github/workflows/pr-nitpick-reviewer.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -171,7 +171,7 @@ For each nitpick found, decide on the appropriate output type:
**Format:**
```json
{
"body": "## Overall Observations\n\nI noticed a few patterns across the PR:\n\n1. **Naming consistency**: Consider standardizing variable naming...\n2. **Good practices**: Excellent use of early returns!\n\nSee inline review comments for specific suggestions."
"body": "### Overall Observations\n\nI noticed a few patterns across the PR:\n\n1. **Naming consistency**: Consider standardizing variable naming...\n2. **Good practices**: Excellent use of early returns!\n\nSee inline review comments for specific suggestions."
}
```

Expand All @@ -192,66 +192,66 @@ Create a comprehensive markdown report using the imported `reporting.md` format:
**Report Structure:**

```markdown
# PR Nitpick Review Summary - [DATE]
### PR Nitpick Review Summary - [DATE]

Brief overview of the review findings and key patterns observed.

<details>
<summary><b>Full Review Report</b></summary>

## Pull Request Overview
#### Pull Request Overview

- **PR #**: ${{ github.event.pull_request.number }}
- **Title**: ${{ github.event.pull_request.title }}
- **Triggered by**: ${{ github.actor }}
- **Files Changed**: [count]
- **Lines Added/Removed**: +[additions] -[deletions]

## Nitpick Categories
#### Nitpick Categories

### 1. Naming and Conventions ([count] issues)
##### 1. Naming and Conventions ([count] issues)
[List of specific issues with file references]

### 2. Code Structure ([count] issues)
##### 2. Code Structure ([count] issues)
[List of specific issues]

### 3. Comments and Documentation ([count] issues)
##### 3. Comments and Documentation ([count] issues)
[List of specific issues]

### 4. Best Practices ([count] issues)
##### 4. Best Practices ([count] issues)
[List of specific issues]

## Pattern Analysis
#### Pattern Analysis

### Recurring Themes
##### Recurring Themes
- **Theme 1**: [Description and frequency]
- **Theme 2**: [Description and frequency]

### Historical Context
##### Historical Context
[If cache memory available, compare to previous reviews]

| Review Date | PR # | Nitpick Count | Common Themes |
|-------------|------|---------------|---------------|
| [today] | [#] | [count] | [themes] |
| [previous] | [#] | [count] | [themes] |

## Positive Highlights
#### Positive Highlights

Things done well in this PR:
- ✅ [Specific good practice observed]
- ✅ [Another good practice]

## Recommendations
#### Recommendations

### For This PR
##### For This PR
1. [Specific actionable item]
2. [Another actionable item]

### For Future PRs
##### For Future PRs
1. [General guidance for team]
2. [Pattern to watch for]

## Learning Resources
#### Learning Resources

[If applicable, links to style guides, best practices, etc.]

Expand Down
Loading