Let ACP validation choose PR test plans

[osolmaz]

Summary

• move the bug and feature validation nodes back into ACP so the model chooses and runs the validation plan itself
• remove the hardcoded runtime helpers that inferred tests from changed test files and auto-ran installs
• update the PR-triage README and regression test so the executable flow and markdown stay aligned

Validation

• pnpm run build:test && node --test dist-test/test/pr-triage-example.test.js
• pnpm run check:docs
• pnpm run check

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 3a59842f95

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".

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Prevent blocked validation from routing to judge_refactor

This schema now allows contradictory outputs where validation is not proven but the flow still advances, e.g. {"route":"judge_refactor","validation_result":"blocked"}. Because the workflow switches only on route, a malformed ACP response can bypass the validation gate and continue into refactor/review with an unproven fix. The previous action-based implementation always forced non-proven outcomes to escalation, so this is a regression in safety for autonomous triage (the same pattern is also present in the feature-validation prompt).

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.