mirror of
https://github.com/Sea-Haven-Industries/open-swe.git
synced 2026-09-30 19:43:15 +00:00
3 commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Johannes du Plessis
|
82852f9eda
|
feat: tune reviewer for precision — web/wiki tools + recalibrated prompt (#1312)
* feat: tune reviewer for precision — web/wiki tools + recalibrated prompt Reviewer agent now has web_search, fetch_url, and http_request alongside the finding tools, so it can verify library semantics and consult the DeepWiki auto-generated wiki for public repos (https://deepwiki.com/<owner>/<repo>) before flagging cross-file or architectural concerns. Prompt rewritten to push precision over recall: - explicit severity ladder pushing reviews toward bimodal high/low instead of defaulting to medium - ≤200-char description target (gold set averages ~186 chars; we were at ~436) - mandatory docs / wiki / code lookup before flagging concurrency, security, or perf — the three categories that dominated false positives - "do not flag" list covering compiler/linter-catchable nits, speculative claims without a concrete attacker/interleaving/scale, style preferences the codebase doesn't share, and test-quality nits on non-test diffs - smart file-selection guidance for large PRs (deprioritize generated / vendored / pure-rename hunks) Eval config switched to openai:gpt-5.5 + high reasoning effort for the next benchmark run. * trim prompt * subagent prompting * confidence ratings * added medium * enforce confidence threshold * . * reviewer: precision-tuned prompt + drop confidence gate Rewrites the reviewer system prompt around a defensibility bar (anchor + failure mode + maintainer wouldn't say "not a bug"), an explicit do-not-file list (style nits, speculation, scope-policing, same-bug fan-out), and a checklist of 10 bug archetypes drawn from a per-PR audit of the eval golden set. The audit showed 145 FPs in the last eval split ~28% speculative, ~26% style-nit, ~31% real-but-unscored (mostly same-archetype fan-out); the new prompt targets each class directly. Confidence is still recorded on every finding for post-hoc calibration but no longer gates publication — the audit showed the gate was a no-op (agent self-rated 65% of findings "high" regardless), and the prompt's defensibility bar is the actual discipline. Drops CONFIDENCE_ORDER, CONFIDENCE_THRESHOLD, the confidence_threshold kwarg on filter_findings_for_publish, the confidence_filtered score_mode, and the min_confidence kwarg on the eval target's _extract_comments — all dead once the gate is gone. Also removes the "informational" severity tier from the Severity enum, SEVERITY_ORDER, and all validators / tests / docstrings. It was reserved for FYI observations the dataset never rewards. * benchmax * adding google provider * slight steering * tuning * more tuning * fix * cleanup * reducing overfitting * Add per-repo review style profiles and inject them into the reviewer. Dashboard users can analyze historical PR review feedback per repository, edit the resulting style guide, and have it loaded from LangGraph Store at reviewer runtime (including Martian eval runs) keyed by owner/name. Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com> * Fix review style job errors leaking exception details to clients. Return generic dashboard messages while logging full stack traces server-side. Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com> --------- Co-authored-by: open-swe[bot] <open-swe@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com> |
||
|
Johannes du Plessis
|
0212a60f10
|
feat(open-swe): cap reviewer suggestions at 4 lines (#1262)
* feat(open-swe): cap reviewer suggestions at 4 lines Long suggestion blocks read as the reviewer rewriting the code rather than flagging an issue, which clutters PR comments. Steer the reviewer toward description-only findings for non-trivial fixes, and enforce the cap in `add_finding` / `update_finding` so suggestions over 4 lines are dropped (the finding itself still publishes). * fix(open-swe): don't clobber prior suggestion on over-cap update `update_finding` was setting `suggestion=None` whenever clip_suggestion dropped the input, which silently wiped any existing suggestion on the finding. Distinguish the three cases: empty string clears, valid value sets, over-cap value is rejected without touching the stored field. |
||
|
Johannes du Plessis
|
378b95266e
|
feat: implement reviewer findings, publish_review, and watch mode (#1253)
* feat: implement reviewer findings, publish_review, and watch mode
Build out the reviewer agent end-to-end against the design in
REVIEWER_DESIGN.md:
- Findings as first-class state on the reviewer thread metadata
(`agent/reviewer_findings.py`): Finding TypedDict with start_line/end_line
ranges, suggestion text for ```suggestion blocks, github_review_comment_id
for cross-run reconciliation, diff_hunk for UI rendering. Thread-level
metadata gets `kind=reviewer`, `pr`, `last_reviewed_sha`, `watch` so a
future frontend can list reviewer threads via the langgraph SDK.
- Diff utilities (`agent/reviewer_diff.py`): parse_unified_diff,
compute_diff_line_set for in-diff validation, extract_diff_hunk for
caching the hunk on a Finding, compute_diff_in_sandbox for SHA-to-SHA
diffs against the prepped repo.
- Tools: `add_finding` (validates against the diff line set so out-of-diff
ranges fail at creation, not at GitHub-publish), `update_finding`,
`list_findings`, `publish_review`. The reviewer agent's tool list is
swapped from `[]` (direct shell `gh api` calls) to these four.
- Publish path (`agent/reviewer_publish.py` + `agent/tools/publish_review.py`):
one POST /reviews call with body + inline comments + ```suggestion blocks,
per-comment IDs stored back on findings, GraphQL `resolveReviewThread`
fired for findings transitioning open->resolved on a re-review.
- Reviewer graph: deterministic clone-or-fetch + checkout in the factory
before the agent's first model call (warm- and cold-path symmetric);
computed diff and in-diff line set passed via runnable config; system
prompt rewritten for the single-evolving-findings model, severity ladder,
in-diff-only discipline, and watch-mode reconciliation flow.
- Watch mode in webapp.py: `push` event + `pull_request` closed/reopened
added to supported events. New `process_github_push_event` resolves the
open PR for the pushed branch, gates on the reviewer thread's `watch`
flag, builds a re-review configurable, and triggers a run on the same
canonical thread. `process_github_pr_close` toggles watch on
closed/reopened. `set_reviewer_thread_metadata` is called on first
review to install `kind=reviewer` + PR identity + watch=True.
- Eval harness: target.py now extracts `add_finding` calls (mapped to the
legacy {file, line, body, severity} shape the judge expects) and passes
the right configurable so the prep step has base/head SHAs.
- Tests: new unit suites for findings helpers, diff parsing, finding tools,
publish rendering + GraphQL resolve, and watch-mode webhook handlers
(push triggers re-review only when watching, idempotent on unchanged
head SHA, PR close disables watch). Updated existing reviewer-webhook
tests to mock `set_reviewer_thread_metadata`.
- REVIEWER_EVAL_PLAN.md removed per user request; folded relevant context
into REVIEWER_DESIGN.md.
* fix(reviewer): correct git diff flags, scope, dedup, and review-comments URL
Address PR #1253 review findings:
- compute_diff_in_sandbox dropped the invalid `--no-prefix=false` flag
(`option no-prefix takes no value` — every prep run was failing
silently and the agent saw an empty diff).
- compute_diff_in_sandbox grew a `merge_base` flag. First-review path
now uses three-dot `base...head` (the merge-base diff GitHub renders
on Files-changed) so we don't pick up changes that landed on the base
branch after the PR diverged. Re-review delta keeps two-dot
`last_reviewed_sha..head` since that's exactly the new commits.
- publish_review skips findings that already carry
`github_review_comment_id`. Without this, watched re-reviews
re-posted every previously surfaced finding, and only the most-recent
duplicate's id would later resolve when the issue got addressed.
- fetch_review_comments URL now includes `{pull_number}` —
`/repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/{pr_number}/reviews/{review_id}/comments`
is the canonical endpoint; the old form 404s, so comment ids were
never stored and watch-mode resolution couldn't run.
Three new tests cover: three-dot vs two-dot wiring, no `--no-prefix`
flag in the executed command, and that publish_review does not re-post
findings whose `github_review_comment_id` is set.
* fix(reviewer): default publish cap from 15 to 4
A clean PR with one critical issue padded out by three lower-severity
findings is fine; fifteen is review spam. The agent can override per
call when a PR genuinely warrants more.
|