Skip to content

feat(integration): establish CWL ecosystem contract v1 - #1013

Open
seonghobae wants to merge 15 commits into
mainfrom
feat/cwl-ecosystem-integration-contract-v1
Open

feat(integration): establish CWL ecosystem contract v1#1013
seonghobae wants to merge 15 commits into
mainfrom
feat/cwl-ecosystem-integration-contract-v1

Conversation

@seonghobae

@seonghobae seonghobae commented Aug 15, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Why

CWL repositories are increasingly consumed together, but the protected central repository does not yet publish a shared organization-level contract for source-of-truth ownership, API/event/command envelopes, temporal semantics, provenance, idempotency, PII dereferencing, or provider/consumer compatibility tests. Without that profile, independently useful products can drift toward direct SQL coupling, duplicated truth, and incompatible handoffs.

What

  • Adds CWL Ecosystem Integration Contract v1 as the central organization-owned transport/evidence profile while keeping domain semantics in leaf repositories.
  • Adds a proposed ADR that selects federated package/service/scientific-worker/tool composition instead of a distributed monolith.
  • Adds machine-readable event and command envelopes plus positive examples.
  • Adds stdlib-only positive and negative contract validation without a production dependency.
  • Adds APA 7th standards doctoring and updates CHANGELOG.md.

Contract baseline

  • OpenAPI 3.2.0 for new shared synchronous APIs.
  • AsyncAPI 3.1.0 for published async channel descriptions.
  • CloudEvents 1.0 data model for domain events.
  • JSON Schema Draft 2020-12 for JSON contracts.
  • RFC 9457 Problem Details for HTTP errors.
  • RFC 9562 UUIDv7 for time-ordered organization identifiers where applicable.
  • W3C Trace Context Recommendation for distributed tracing; envelope v1 pins traceparent version 00 and rejects forbidden all-zero trace IDs, all-zero parent IDs, reserved flag bits, and version ff.
  • W3C PROV-O for provenance semantics.

The profile explicitly prohibits cross-service application SQL, requires one authoritative owner per business fact, carries tenant/purpose/causation/provenance/time semantics, and avoids blanket PII masking by defaulting broadcast payloads to opaque references while permitting purpose-authorized audited dereference at the authoritative service.

Review repairs

The initial authored head used the superseded AsyncAPI 3.0.0 baseline, accepted forbidden W3C trace identifiers, allowed ambiguous event/command type segments, treated JSON Schema date-time format as if it were always asserted, and only checked selected schema fields. The current branch records the failing tests first and then repairs those defects:

  • current official AsyncAPI 3.1.0 baseline;
  • strict lowercase snake-case type segments with non-zero major versions;
  • traceparent version 00 with non-zero trace and parent identifiers and zeroed reserved flag bits;
  • explicit strict RFC 3339 lexical patterns plus semantic date-time checks for every event/command timestamp;
  • recursive validation of every validation keyword used by both v1 schemas;
  • positive examples plus negative unknown-property, trace, naming, and space-separated timestamp cases; and
  • corrected ADR and doctoring evidence.

Validation

Exact current head: ca6ba3ec313ba6551376d942f00d1739eb1e9176.

  • python -m pytest -q tests/test_cwl_integration_contract.py: 10 passed in a reconstructed exact-file local test run.
  • python -m compileall -q tests: passed.
  • Both JSON files parse and the published examples satisfy the complete validation-keyword subset used by the two envelope schemas.
  • Negative tests reject unknown top-level properties, forbidden trace identifiers/flags, empty or punctuated type segments, version zero, and non-RFC3339 lexical timestamp forms.
  • No new production dependency, model credential, workflow permission, or merge authority is introduced.

Hosted exact-head checks remain authoritative; this description does not treat queued, stale, or previous-head evidence as success.

Adoption after merge

Leaf repositories should adopt this profile one bounded producer/consumer pair at a time, preserving their own source-of-truth boundary and adding exact-version provider/consumer contract tests before calling an integration complete. A conforming Draft 2020-12 validator remains a release-pipeline requirement before publishing immutable schema artifacts.

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • 새로운 기능

    • CWL 이벤트·명령 봉투 v1 표준 스키마를 추가했습니다.
    • CloudEvents, UUIDv7, 추적 정보, 시간·출처·분류 필드와 payload 형식을 검증합니다.
    • 이벤트 및 명령 사용 예시를 제공합니다.
  • 문서

    • API·비동기 명령·권한·멱등성·PII·보안·provenance·스키마 호환성 기준을 문서화했습니다.
    • 저장소 간 통합 아키텍처와 운영·릴리스 기준을 추가했습니다.
  • 테스트

    • JSON Schema, CloudEvents, UUIDv7, 필수 메타데이터와 Trace Context 검증을 추가했습니다.
    • 잘못된 형식과 허용되지 않은 속성을 거부하는지 확인합니다.

@coderabbitai

coderabbitai Bot commented Aug 15, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Review Change Stack

Warning

Review limit reached

@seonghobae, you've reached your PR review limit, so we couldn't start this review.

Next review available in: 55 minutes

Limit details: You’ve used all 1 included review currently available under your plan.

You've used all free OSS reviews for now. Wait for the free limit to reset to keep reviewing this public repository.

How can I continue?

After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the @coderabbitai review command as a PR comment. Alternatively, push new commits to this PR.

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 reviews.

How do review limits work?

CodeRabbit enforces per-developer PR review limits for each organization. Most developers receive the normal plan review availability.

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, additional reviews become available more gradually as earlier reviews age out of the rolling window.

Please refer docs for additional details.

Review details
⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro Plus

Run ID: cead30a5-c2e6-40b2-8d13-0e784c5b3ae0

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 7f7936a and 29eed74.

📒 Files selected for processing (6)
  • CHANGELOG.md
  • docs/integration/CWL_ECOSYSTEM_INTEGRATION_CONTRACT.md
  • docs/integration/adr/0001-cwl-inter-repository-contract.md
  • schemas/cwl-command-envelope-v1.schema.json
  • schemas/cwl-event-envelope-v1.schema.json
  • tests/test_cwl_integration_contract.py
📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

CWL 제품 간 통합 계약 v1을 추가했다. 표준 통합 규칙, CloudEvents 이벤트 봉투, 비동기 명령 봉투, JSON Schema 예시 및 계약 테스트를 포함한다.

Changes

CWL 생태계 통합 계약

Layer / File(s) Summary
통합 계약 및 표준 문서
docs/integration/CWL_ECOSYSTEM_INTEGRATION_CONTRACT.md, docs/integration/adr/*, docs/doctoring/ecosystem-integration-standards.md, CHANGELOG.md
조직 간 API·이벤트·명령·아티팩트 계약을 정의했다. 권한, 멱등성, 시간 의미, PII, provenance, 호환성 및 저장소 검증 규칙을 문서화했다.
이벤트·명령 봉투 스키마
schemas/cwl-*-envelope-v1.schema.json, schemas/examples/*
CloudEvents 이벤트 봉투와 비동기 명령 봉투의 필수 필드, 형식, 추적 컨텍스트, 추가 속성 제한 및 payload 구조를 정의했다. 유효한 JSON 예시를 추가했다.
계약 검증 테스트
tests/test_cwl_integration_contract.py
JSON Schema 2020-12, CloudEvents 1.0, UUIDv7, CWL 메타데이터, 명령 제어 컨텍스트, traceparent, 타입 패턴 및 문서 기준선을 검증한다. 잘못된 입력과 알 수 없는 속성의 거부도 확인한다.

Estimated code review effort: 3 (Moderate) | ~20 minutes

Merge Risk: 🟡 Moderate · up to 7f793

The new shared message contract does not yet enforce RFC 3339 timestamp syntax consistently, so different repositories could accept or reject the same temporal values differently. This creates a bounded interoperability risk that should be fixed before merging.

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5
✅ Passed checks (5 passed)
Check name Status Explanation
Docstring Coverage ✅ Passed Docstring coverage is 100.00% which is sufficient. The required threshold is 80.00%.
Linked Issues check ✅ Passed Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Out of Scope Changes check ✅ Passed Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Description Check ✅ Passed Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check ✅ Passed 제목은 CWL 생태계 통합 계약 v1을 수립하는 주요 변경 사항을 간결하고 정확하게 설명합니다.
✨ Finishing Touches
📝 Generate docstrings
  • Create stacked PR
  • Commit on current branch
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
  • Create PR with unit tests
  • Commit unit tests in branch feat/cwl-ecosystem-integration-contract-v1

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.

❤️ Share

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.

@seonghobae
seonghobae enabled auto-merge (squash) August 15, 2026 11:40

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Exact-current-head read-only review request for 84af8f0c2ecc0b7e0aa2020e11b50cb9a15ec972 over protected base 6eb06cdd08c79a06f7b390069d4ffa49e2eb7dba.

This organization-owned integration boundary defines one authoritative owner per business fact, prohibits cross-service application SQL, standardizes API/event/command/error/time/provenance/idempotency contracts, and replaces blanket PII masking with opaque references plus purpose-authorized audited dereference. The stdlib-only provider/consumer contract suite and changed-path gate pass; hosted security and supply-chain checks are queued. Auto-merge is armed subject to exact-head checks, fresh independent approvals, and protected-main rules.

Review this exact head only. Preserve reviewer identities and credentials; do not mutate the branch, synthesize author approval, weaken protection, or merge.

@opencode-agent review
@cwl-noema-review review
@strix review
@coderabbitai review

@coderabbitai

coderabbitai Bot commented Aug 15, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Tip

For best results, initiate chat on the files or code changes.

🧩 Analysis chain

🏁 Script executed:

#!/bin/bash
set -euo pipefail

base="6eb06cdd08c79a06f7b390069d4ffa49e2eb7dba"
head="84af8f0c2ecc0b7e0aa2020e11b50cb9a15ec972"

echo '== checked-out commit =='
git rev-parse HEAD
echo '== requested commits =='
git cat-file -t "$base"
git cat-file -t "$head"
echo '== ancestry =='
git merge-base --is-ancestor "$base" "$head" && echo "base-is-ancestor-of-head=true"
echo '== changed paths =='
git diff --name-status "$base" "$head"
echo '== diff stat =='
git diff --stat "$base" "$head"
echo '== top-level and changed-file outlines =='
git diff --name-only "$base" "$head" | while IFS= read -r path; do
  printf '\n--- %s ---\n' "$path"
  case "$path" in
    *.py) ast-grep outline "$path" --items all || true ;;
    *.json|*.yaml|*.yml|*.md) sed -n '1,260p' "$path" ;;
    *) sed -n '1,200p' "$path" ;;
  esac
done

Length of output: 33255


🏁 Script executed:

#!/bin/bash
set -euo pipefail

base="6eb06cdd08c79a06f7b390069d4ffa49e2eb7dba"
head="84af8f0c2ecc0b7e0aa2020e11b50cb9a15ec972"

echo '== contract: remaining lines =='
sed -n '240,420p' docs/integration/CWL_ECOSYSTEM_INTEGRATION_CONTRACT.md

echo '== contract tests: complete file =='
cat -n tests/test_cwl_integration_contract.py

echo '== exact unified diff =='
git diff --unified=80 "$base" "$head" -- \
  docs/integration/CWL_ECOSYSTEM_INTEGRATION_CONTRACT.md \
  schemas/cwl-event-envelope-v1.schema.json \
  schemas/cwl-command-envelope-v1.schema.json \
  schemas/examples/cwl-event-envelope-v1.example.json \
  schemas/examples/cwl-command-envelope-v1.example.json \
  tests/test_cwl_integration_contract.py

echo '== references to schema artifacts and test commands =='
rg -n -C 2 \
  'cwl-(event|command)-envelope-v1|test_cwl_integration_contract|jsonschema' \
  README.md docs tests .github CHANGELOG.md 2>/dev/null || true

echo '== JSON static checks =='
jq -e . schemas/cwl-event-envelope-v1.schema.json >/dev/null
jq -e . schemas/cwl-command-envelope-v1.schema.json >/dev/null
jq -e . schemas/examples/cwl-event-envelope-v1.example.json >/dev/null
jq -e . schemas/examples/cwl-command-envelope-v1.example.json >/dev/null
echo 'all four JSON artifacts parse'

Length of output: 39861


🤖 web_search executed:

W3C Trace Context Recommendation trace-id parent-id all zeros invalid

Length of output: 10291


🏁 Script executed:

#!/bin/bash
set -euo pipefail

echo '== traceparent schema lines =='
rg -n -C 3 '"traceparent"|00000000000000000000000000000000|^[0-9a-f]\{2\}' \
  schemas/cwl-event-envelope-v1.schema.json \
  schemas/cwl-command-envelope-v1.schema.json \
  tests/test_cwl_integration_contract.py

echo '== workflow and automation references to contract validation =='
rg -n -i -C 3 \
  'cwl[-_ ](event|command)|integration.contract|jsonschema|check-jsonschema|python -m pytest.*test_cwl_integration_contract' \
  .github README.md pyproject.toml setup.cfg tox.ini Makefile 2>/dev/null || true

echo '== tracked automation files =='
fd -t f .github 2>/dev/null | sort

Length of output: 3133


@seonghobae I reviewed only 84af8f0c2ecc0b7e0aa2020e11b50cb9a15ec972 against 6eb06cdd08c79a06f7b390069d4ffa49e2eb7dba.

I found two issues.

  1. P1 — The traceparent patterns accept invalid W3C Trace Context values.
    schemas/cwl-event-envelope-v1.schema.json Line 138 and schemas/cwl-command-envelope-v1.schema.json Line 91 accept an all-zero trace ID, an all-zero parent ID, and version ff. W3C Trace Context defines all-zero IDs as invalid and reserves version ff. Consumers that rely on these schemas can accept trace context that compliant implementations must reject. Add negative constraints for those values and tests for invalid cases.

  2. P2 — The contract tests do not validate the examples against the schemas.
    tests/test_cwl_integration_contract.py checks selected fields only. It does not perform schema validation for either example. No repository automation references an independent JSON Schema validation step. A future change can make an example violate required, additionalProperties, type, pattern, or format constraints while all six tests still pass. Add regression tests that validate the examples against their Draft 2020-12 schemas, including format checking, or add an equivalent CI validation step.

I did not modify the branch, reviewer state, protections, or merge state.

You are interacting with an AI system.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@opencode-agent @cwl-noema-review @coderabbitai review

Review exact head ae853cb647faa29fa35002ec938cb9d43a3fa506. Verify source-of-truth ownership and no-cross-service-SQL boundaries; OpenAPI 3.2.0, AsyncAPI 3.1.0, CloudEvents 1.0, JSON Schema Draft 2020-12, RFC 9457/9562, W3C Trace Context Recommendation, and PROV-O baselines; opaque-reference plus purpose-authorized PII dereference semantics; strict UUIDv7/type/traceparent envelopes; positive and negative stdlib-only contract tests; temporal/provenance/idempotency rules; and absence of new credentials, runtime dependencies, or merge authority. Submit a formal exact-head verdict.

@coderabbitai

coderabbitai Bot commented Aug 15, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Tip

For best results, initiate chat on the files or code changes.

🧩 Analysis chain

🏁 Script executed:

#!/bin/bash
set -euo pipefail

base="6eb06cdd08c79a06f7b390069d4ffa49e2eb7dba"
head="ae853cb647faa29fa35002ec938cb9d43a3fa506"

echo '== Exact revision and ancestry =='
printf 'checked_out='; git rev-parse HEAD
git cat-file -e "${base}^{commit}"
git cat-file -e "${head}^{commit}"
if git merge-base --is-ancestor "$base" "$head"; then
  echo 'base_is_ancestor=true'
else
  echo 'base_is_ancestor=false'
fi

echo '== Changed paths =='
git diff --name-status "$base" "$head"
echo '== Changed stat =='
git diff --stat "$base" "$head"

echo '== Full exact diff =='
git diff --unified=100 "$base" "$head"

echo '== Changed-file contents at exact head =='
git diff --name-only "$base" "$head" | while IFS= read -r path; do
  printf '\n--- %s ---\n' "$path"
  git show "${head}:${path}"
done

echo '== JSON parse and selected schema invariants =='
for path in \
  schemas/cwl-event-envelope-v1.schema.json \
  schemas/cwl-command-envelope-v1.schema.json \
  schemas/examples/cwl-event-envelope-v1.example.json \
  schemas/examples/cwl-command-envelope-v1.example.json
do
  printf '%s: ' "$path"
  git show "${head}:${path}" | jq -e . >/dev/null
  echo 'valid_json'
done

echo '== Standards, ownership, privacy, time, provenance, and idempotency references =='
git grep -n -i -E \
  'authoritative owner|cross-service|SQL|OpenAPI|AsyncAPI|CloudEvents|Draft 2020-12|RFC 9457|RFC 9562|Trace Context|PROV-O|opaque reference|dereference|purpose|UUIDv7|traceparent|idempot|provenance|occurred_at|temporal' \
  "$head" -- \
  docs schemas tests CHANGELOG.md README.md 2>/dev/null || true

echo '== Dependency, credential, workflow permission, and merge authority changes =='
git diff --unified=40 "$base" "$head" -- \
  pyproject.toml poetry.lock requirements.txt requirements-dev.txt setup.py setup.cfg tox.ini \
  package.json package-lock.json yarn.lock pnpm-lock.yaml \
  .github CHANGELOG.md README.md 2>/dev/null || true

echo '== Automation references to contract validation =='
git grep -n -E \
  'test_cwl_integration_contract|cwl-event-envelope-v1|cwl-command-envelope-v1|jsonschema|check-jsonschema' \
  "$head" -- .github README.md docs tests pyproject.toml setup.cfg tox.ini Makefile 2>/dev/null || true

Length of output: 128461


🏁 Script executed:

#!/bin/bash
set -euo pipefail

head="ae853cb647faa29fa35002ec938cb9d43a3fa506"

echo '== Test discovery configuration at exact head =='
for path in pyproject.toml pytest.ini setup.cfg tox.ini Makefile; do
  if git cat-file -e "${head}:${path}" 2>/dev/null; then
    echo "--- ${path} ---"
    git show "${head}:${path}"
  fi
done

echo '== Test workflow invocation references at exact head =='
git grep -n -E \
  'pytest|python -m unittest|testpaths|python_files|test_.*\.py' \
  "$head" -- .github pyproject.toml pytest.ini setup.cfg tox.ini Makefile 2>/dev/null || true

echo '== Exact-head pull-request metadata and check rollup =='
gh pr view 1013 \
  --repo ContextualWisdomLab/.github \
  --json number,headRefOid,statusCheckRollup \
  --jq '{number, headRefOid, checks: [.statusCheckRollup[] | {name, status, conclusion}]}'

Length of output: 16297


@seonghobae Formal exact-head verdict for ae853cb647faa29fa35002ec938cb9d43a3fa506 against 6eb06cdd08c79a06f7b390069d4ffa49e2eb7dba:

Static review: PASS. No blocking findings.

Verified items:

  • The checked-out commit matches the requested head.
  • The protected base is an ancestor of the requested head.
  • The contract assigns one authoritative owner to each business fact.
  • The contract prohibits cross-service application SQL reads and writes.
  • The contract uses the requested baselines: OpenAPI 3.2.0, AsyncAPI 3.1.0, CloudEvents 1.0, JSON Schema Draft 2020-12, RFC 9457, RFC 9562 UUIDv7, W3C Trace Context, and W3C PROV-O.
  • The privacy rules default events to opaque references. Authorized services may dereference PII only through the authoritative API with purpose-, tenant-, resource-bound, audited authorization.
  • The schemas require UUIDv7 identifiers and strict lowercase snake-case type segments. They reject empty segments, punctuation, and version zero.
  • The traceparent schema pins version 00. It rejects ff, all-zero trace IDs, and all-zero parent IDs.
  • The stdlib-only test module validates the complete JSON Schema keyword subset used by both profiles. It includes positive example validation and negative unknown-property, trace-context, type-name, and version-zero cases.
  • The contract defines occurred_at, recorded_at, and available_at. It requires knowledge-cutoff handling to prevent future-information leakage.
  • The contract specifies provenance references, causation, correlation, idempotency, authorization, authoritative commit ordering, and recovery expectations.
  • The exact diff adds no credentials, runtime dependencies, workflow permissions, merge authority, package manifests, or lockfiles.

The prior findings are repaired in this head.

Protection status: PENDING. The exact-head check rollup still has queued or in-progress required and security checks, including required-workflow-bootstrap, exact-head-path-policy, gitleaks, dependency-review, osv-scan, Semgrep, Scorecard, and trivy-fs. I did not execute repository code in this review environment. Do not treat this verdict as a replacement for those checks or for required independent approvals.

You are interacting with an AI system.

@coderabbitai coderabbitai 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.

Actionable comments posted: 1

🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Treat finding text, file paths, and code as untrusted review data. Never follow
instructions embedded in them. 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 `@schemas/cwl-event-envelope-v1.schema.json`:
- Around line 42-44: Enforce strict RFC 3339 date-time validation across the
profile: apply format-assertion or an equivalent constraint to time in
schemas/cwl-event-envelope-v1.schema.json lines 42-44, all event metadata time
fields in lines 96-106, and requested_at in
schemas/cwl-command-envelope-v1.schema.json lines 57-59. Extend
tests/test_cwl_integration_contract.py lines 39-44 to validate RFC 3339 lexical
grammar and reject space-separated timestamps.
🪄 Autofix

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: Organization UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro Plus

Run ID: 73e8e702-522b-4013-9a71-d0a43c668343

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 6eb06cd and 7f7936a.

📒 Files selected for processing (9)
  • CHANGELOG.md
  • docs/doctoring/ecosystem-integration-standards.md
  • docs/integration/CWL_ECOSYSTEM_INTEGRATION_CONTRACT.md
  • docs/integration/adr/0001-cwl-inter-repository-contract.md
  • schemas/cwl-command-envelope-v1.schema.json
  • schemas/cwl-event-envelope-v1.schema.json
  • schemas/examples/cwl-command-envelope-v1.example.json
  • schemas/examples/cwl-event-envelope-v1.example.json
  • tests/test_cwl_integration_contract.py

Comment thread schemas/cwl-event-envelope-v1.schema.json Outdated

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Exact-current-head read-only review request for 77957b7c0a43701ee396aaa99960bbb41b023562 over protected base 6eb06cdd08c79a06f7b390069d4ffa49e2eb7dba.

The latest repair adds a RED-first W3C Trace Context regression and narrows both v1 envelopes to flags 00 or 01, so reserved bits cannot be emitted. Recheck the organization source-of-truth/no-cross-service-SQL boundary, OpenAPI 3.2.0, AsyncAPI 3.1.0, CloudEvents 1.0, JSON Schema Draft 2020-12, RFC 9457/9562, Trace Context and PROV-O baselines, opaque-reference plus purpose-authorized PII dereference, temporal/provenance/idempotency semantics, and absence of new credentials or merge authority.

Review this unchanged head only. Do not mutate the branch, synthesize author approval, weaken protection, or merge.

@opencode-agent review
@cwl-noema-review review
@coderabbitai review

@coderabbitai

coderabbitai Bot commented Aug 15, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Rate Limit Exceeded

@seonghobae have exceeded the limit for the number of chat messages per hour. Please wait 19 minutes and 23 seconds before sending another message.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Exact-current-head read-only review request for ca6ba3ec313ba6551376d942f00d1739eb1e9176 over protected base 6eb06cdd08c79a06f7b390069d4ffa49e2eb7dba.

The current head includes the resolved RFC 3339 lexical/semantic timestamp contract in addition to the earlier AsyncAPI 3.1.0, strict type, UUIDv7, and Trace Context repairs. Recheck all nine changed files: source-of-truth/no-cross-service-SQL ownership, OpenAPI 3.2.0, AsyncAPI 3.1.0, CloudEvents 1.0, JSON Schema Draft 2020-12, RFC 9457/9562, W3C Trace Context/PROV-O, opaque-reference plus purpose-authorized PII dereference, temporal/provenance/idempotency semantics, strict positive/negative stdlib contract tests, and absence of new credentials, runtime dependencies, or merge authority.

Submit a verdict for this unchanged head only. Do not mutate or merge the branch, synthesize author approval, or weaken protection.

@opencode-agent review
@cwl-noema-review review
@coderabbitai review

@coderabbitai

coderabbitai Bot commented Aug 15, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Tip

For best results, initiate chat on the files or code changes.

🧩 Analysis chain

🏁 Script executed:

#!/bin/bash
set -euo pipefail

base="6eb06cdd08c79a06f7b390069d4ffa49e2eb7dba"
head="ca6ba3ec313ba6551376d942f00d1739eb1e9176"

echo '== Exact revision and ancestry =='
printf 'checked_out='
git rev-parse HEAD
printf 'base='
git rev-parse "$base"
printf 'head='
git rev-parse "$head"
git merge-base --is-ancestor "$base" "$head" && echo 'base_is_ancestor=true'

echo '== Changed paths =='
git diff --name-status "$base" "$head"
echo '== Changed-file count =='
git diff --name-only "$base" "$head" | wc -l
echo '== Diff stat =='
git diff --stat "$base" "$head"

echo '== Exact diff =='
git diff --unified=100 "$base" "$head"

echo '== Changed file contents at requested head =='
git diff --name-only "$base" "$head" | while IFS= read -r path; do
  printf '\n--- %s ---\n' "$path"
  git show "${head}:${path}"
done

echo '== JSON syntax =='
for path in \
  schemas/cwl-event-envelope-v1.schema.json \
  schemas/cwl-command-envelope-v1.schema.json \
  schemas/examples/cwl-event-envelope-v1.example.json \
  schemas/examples/cwl-command-envelope-v1.example.json
do
  printf '%s: ' "$path"
  git show "${head}:${path}" | jq -e . >/dev/null
  echo valid_json
done

echo '== Contract-property references at requested head =='
git grep -n -i -E \
  'authoritative owner|cross-service.*SQL|OpenAPI 3\.2\.0|AsyncAPI 3\.1\.0|CloudEvents 1\.0|Draft 2020-12|RFC 9457|RFC 9562|Trace Context|PROV-O|opaque reference|dereference|purpose|UUIDv7|traceparent|RFC 3339|occurred_at|recorded_at|available_at|provenance|idempoten|correlation|causation' \
  "$head" -- docs schemas tests CHANGELOG.md 2>/dev/null || true

echo '== Test module structure =='
ast-grep outline tests/test_cwl_integration_contract.py --items all || true

echo '== Dependency, credential, workflow permission, and merge-authority diff =='
git diff --unified=60 "$base" "$head" -- \
  .github \
  pyproject.toml pytest.ini setup.cfg tox.ini Makefile \
  requirements.txt requirements-dev.txt poetry.lock \
  package.json package-lock.json yarn.lock pnpm-lock.yaml \
  setup.py CHANGELOG.md README.md 2>/dev/null || true

echo '== Sensitive-token scan of added lines =='
git diff --unified=0 "$base" "$head" | \
  rg -n '^\+.*(?i:(api[_-]?key|secret|token|password|BEGIN (RSA |OPENSSH |EC )?PRIVATE KEY|ghp_|github_pat_))' || true

Length of output: 131765


🤖 web_search executed:

RFC 3339 section 5.7 time-second leap second 60 grammar

Length of output: 20406


@seonghobae I reviewed only ca6ba3ec313ba6551376d942f00d1739eb1e9176 against 6eb06cdd08c79a06f7b390069d4ffa49e2eb7dba.

Static review: one P2 finding.

  1. P2 — The RFC 3339 validator rejects valid leap-second timestamps.
    tests/test_cwl_integration_contract.py Line 48 passes every lexically valid timestamp to datetime.fromisoformat(). Python rejects a seconds value of 60. RFC 3339 Section 5.7 permits time-second = 60 at an announced leap second, for example 2016-12-31T23:59:60Z. The schema pattern accepts this value, but the stdlib validator rejects it. This makes the claimed RFC 3339 lexical and semantic contract internally inconsistent.

    Update _assert_date_time() to handle a valid RFC 3339 leap second without calling datetime.fromisoformat() on :60. Add a positive regression case for a known leap-second instant. Keep invalid :60 placements rejected.

Verified items:

  • The checked-out revision matches the requested head.
  • The protected base is an ancestor of the requested head.
  • The diff changes exactly nine files.
  • The contract assigns one authoritative owner to each business fact.
  • The contract prohibits cross-service application SQL reads and writes.
  • The contract specifies OpenAPI 3.2.0, AsyncAPI 3.1.0, CloudEvents 1.0, JSON Schema Draft 2020-12, RFC 9457, RFC 9562 UUIDv7, W3C Trace Context, and W3C PROV-O.
  • The privacy profile uses opaque references. It permits PII dereference only through the authoritative API with purpose-, tenant-, resource-bound, and audited authorization.
  • The event and command schemas require UUIDv7 forms and strict type naming.
  • The traceparent patterns require version 00, reject all-zero IDs, and restrict flags to 00 or 01.
  • The stdlib tests validate complete positive examples and negative properties, trace context, type names, and lexical timestamp alternatives.
  • The contract defines temporal, provenance, causation, correlation, authorization, and idempotency rules.
  • The diff adds no credentials, runtime dependencies, workflow permissions, or merge authority.

I did not modify the branch, reviewer state, protections, or merge state.

You are interacting with an AI system.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@opencode-agent

Please review the exact current head for the organization-level ecosystem integration contract, with particular attention to source-of-truth ownership, cross-service authority boundaries, event/command envelope validation, temporal and provenance semantics, PII dereference controls, backwards compatibility, and whether the tests fail closed on malformed or over-broad contracts.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@cwl-noema-review

Please independently review the exact current head after the primary OpenCode review path, focusing on cross-service authority, source-of-truth ownership, tenant/purpose-scoped PII dereference, temporal/provenance semantics, schema evolution, and provider/consumer compatibility failure modes. Do not treat queued or infrastructure-only evidence as a source-code verdict.

Preserve the nine-file CWL ecosystem contract while incorporating the hourly NVIDIA NIM review-repair control plane from protected main. Resolve the CHANGELOG additively without transferring predecessor checks or approvals.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Exact-current-head review request for 29eed74c49037e422a26b03cbac87e0c43558506 against protected main@c47afc2dc68488292c1db7c9d6f82dcd5360f181.

The branch was reconciled by an ordinary two-parent merge commit. Its effective nine-file ecosystem-contract diff is unchanged, while the protected-main hourly NVIDIA NIM review-repair control plane and additive CHANGELOG history are preserved. No predecessor-head check, review, approval, or synthetic merge evidence transfers.

@opencode-agent review
@cwl-noema-review review
@coderabbitai review

Review read-only. Verify schema/fixture parity, fail-closed trace and time validation, one-authority-per-fact and no-cross-service-SQL boundaries, purpose-authorized PII dereferencing, standards/ADR consistency, and exact-current-head tests. Do not update the branch, self-approve, or bypass protection.

@coderabbitai

coderabbitai Bot commented Aug 16, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Tip

For best results, initiate chat on the files or code changes.

🧩 Analysis chain

🏁 Script executed:

#!/bin/bash
set -euo pipefail

base="c47afc2dc68488292c1db7c9d6f82dcd5360f181"
head="29eed74c49037e422a26b03cbac87e0c43558506"

echo '== exact revision and merge topology =='
printf 'checked_out='; git rev-parse HEAD
printf 'base='; git rev-parse "$base"
printf 'head='; git rev-parse "$head"
printf 'head_parents='; git show -s --format='%P' "$head"
git merge-base --is-ancestor "$base" "$head" && echo 'base_is_ancestor=true'

echo '== changed paths and diff stat =='
git diff --name-status "$base" "$head"
git diff --stat "$base" "$head"

echo '== exact diff =='
git diff --unified=80 "$base" "$head"

echo '== changed artifact contents at requested head =='
git diff --name-only "$base" "$head" | while IFS= read -r path; do
  printf '\n--- %s ---\n' "$path"
  case "$path" in
    *.py) ast-grep outline "$path" --items all || true
          cat -n "$path" ;;
    *) git show "${head}:${path}" ;;
  esac
done

echo '== JSON syntax and schema/example structural checks =='
for path in \
  schemas/cwl-event-envelope-v1.schema.json \
  schemas/cwl-command-envelope-v1.schema.json \
  schemas/examples/cwl-event-envelope-v1.example.json \
  schemas/examples/cwl-command-envelope-v1.example.json
do
  printf '%s: ' "$path"
  git show "${head}:${path}" | jq -e . >/dev/null
  echo valid_json
done

echo '== boundary, standards, privacy, temporal, provenance, and compatibility evidence =='
git grep -n -i -E \
  'authoritative owner|cross-service.*SQL|OpenAPI 3\.2\.0|AsyncAPI 3\.1\.0|CloudEvents 1\.0|Draft 2020-12|RFC 9457|RFC 9562|Trace Context|PROV-O|opaque reference|dereference|purpose|tenant|UUIDv7|traceparent|occurred_at|recorded_at|available_at|provenance|idempoten|correlation|causation|compatib|backward' \
  "$head" -- docs schemas tests CHANGELOG.md 2>/dev/null || true

echo '== fail-closed validator evidence =='
rg -n -C 4 \
  'traceparent|date_time|_assert_date_time|leap|additionalProperties|required|pattern|format|oneOf|not' \
  schemas/cwl-event-envelope-v1.schema.json \
  schemas/cwl-command-envelope-v1.schema.json \
  tests/test_cwl_integration_contract.py

echo '== security, dependencies, workflow permissions, and merge authority changes =='
git diff --unified=60 "$base" "$head" -- \
  .github \
  pyproject.toml pytest.ini setup.cfg tox.ini Makefile \
  requirements.txt requirements-dev.txt poetry.lock \
  package.json package-lock.json yarn.lock pnpm-lock.yaml \
  setup.py README.md CHANGELOG.md 2>/dev/null || true

echo '== suspicious added credential material =='
git diff --unified=0 "$base" "$head" | \
  rg -n '^\+.*(?i:(api[_-]?key|secret|token|password|BEGIN (RSA |OPENSSH |EC )?PRIVATE KEY|ghp_|github_pat_))' || true

Length of output: 192581


@seonghobae Formal exact-head verdict for 29eed74c49037e422a26b03cbac87e0c43558506 against main@c47afc2dc68488292c1db7c9d6f82dcd5360f181:

Static review: one P2 finding.

  1. P2 — The timestamp test validator still rejects valid RFC 3339 leap seconds.
    tests/test_cwl_integration_contract.py Line 48 sends every lexically valid timestamp to datetime.fromisoformat(). Python rejects a seconds value of 60. The event and command schema patterns accept :60, and RFC 3339 permits a leap-second value at an announced leap-second instant. Therefore, the stdlib validator rejects an input that the declared contract accepts.

    Update _assert_date_time() to validate a valid leap second without passing :60 directly to datetime.fromisoformat(). Add a positive regression case such as 2016-12-31T23:59:60Z. Keep invalid leap-second placements rejected.

Verified:

  • The checked-out commit matches the requested head.
  • The reviewed commit is an ordinary two-parent merge. Its parents are ca6ba3ec313ba6551376d942f00d1739eb1e9176 and the protected base.
  • The effective diff contains the stated nine contract files.
  • All schemas and fixtures are valid JSON.
  • The contract assigns one authoritative owner to each business fact.
  • The contract prohibits cross-service application SQL reads and writes.
  • The contract, standards record, and ADR consistently specify OpenAPI 3.2.0, AsyncAPI 3.1.0, CloudEvents 1.0, JSON Schema Draft 2020-12, RFC 9457, RFC 9562, W3C Trace Context, and W3C PROV-O.
  • The event and command schemas reject unknown envelope properties.
  • The traceparent patterns require version 00, reject all-zero trace and parent IDs, and permit only flags 00 and 01.
  • The contract defines purpose-, tenant-, and resource-bound audited PII dereferencing through the authoritative API. Events default to opaque references.
  • The contract defines temporal, provenance, causation, correlation, idempotency, authorization, compatibility, rollback, and provider/consumer acceptance requirements.
  • The diff adds no runtime dependencies, package manifests, workflow changes, credential values, permission changes, or merge authority.

I did not execute repository tests. I did not modify the branch, reviewer state, protections, approvals, or merge state.

You are interacting with an AI system.

@opencode-agent
opencode-agent Bot disabled auto-merge August 18, 2026 12:28
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