Skip to content

Harden tooling and epistemic boundaries - #104

Merged
kmosoti merged 3 commits into
mainfrom
refactor/typed-contract-boundaries
Jul 28, 2026
Merged

Harden tooling and epistemic boundaries#104
kmosoti merged 3 commits into
mainfrom
refactor/typed-contract-boundaries

Conversation

@kmosoti

@kmosoti kmosoti commented Jul 27, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

Summary

  • add strict Pydantic v2 tooling-surface contracts and JSON inspection for Codex and AGY
  • expand epistemic review to nine dimensions guarding stale provenance, circular assurance, and order sensitivity
  • close SQLite connections explicitly and treat ResourceWarning as an error
  • add pinned ast-grep structural naming rules and negative CI probes while preserving real compatibility revisions
  • keep release-evidence automation absent

Why

Generated or source-bound evidence and generation-labelled structure allowed stale context and historical implementation language to leak into incremental work. This replaces that with current-run provenance, machine-readable provider boundaries, explicit resource ownership, and structural CI checks.

Verification

  • uv lock --check
  • ast-grep repository scan plus three negative probes
  • uv run ruff format --check .
  • uv run ruff check .
  • architecture fitness: 8 passed
  • uv run ty check
  • full suite: 576 passed, 1 opt-in skipped, 86.07% coverage, no warnings
  • rootless Podman acceptance: 1 passed
  • direct Codex adversarial review: pass
  • final AGY adversarial review: pass

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 97db8c9ddd

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".

Comment thread src/blackcell/orchestration/review.py

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: bac30c7149

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".

Comment thread src/blackcell/gateway/tooling.py
@kmosoti

kmosoti commented Jul 28, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner Author

@codex review

@chatgpt-codex-connector

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Breezy!

Reviewed commit: 477d18b40e

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".

@kmosoti
kmosoti merged commit 6a963cb into main Jul 28, 2026
2 checks passed
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