feat: enforce cloud banking agent skills - #19
EstandarMustaq wants to merge 3 commits into
Conversation
![chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1144995?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 413d2d2c06
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".
| import { spawnSync } from "node:child_process"; | ||
|
|
||
| export const canonicalAgentFiles = Object.freeze([ | ||
| ".agents/AGENTS.md", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
When Codex is working on src/, scripts/, or other repo files, an AGENTS.md under .agents/ is out of scope because AGENTS instructions apply only to the directory subtree containing the file. This makes the new guardian bless an entry point that only affects edits inside .agents, so the intended repo-wide cloud-banking/review routing is not applied to normal changes; require a root AGENTS.md instead, or add one in addition to this canonical copy.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
| for (const file of required) { | ||
| if (!trackedFiles.has(file)) failures.push(`${file} must be tracked`); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
When a later change rewrites one of the required skill files while keeping the same tracked path, this loop still passes because it only verifies that the path is present in git ls-files; I confirmed node scripts/guardian.mjs succeeds after replacing .agents/skills/mavula-review/SKILL.md with a stub containing only the skill name. That leaves the new guardian unable to enforce the canonical review/security gates it is meant to protect, so it should compare expected content/digests or at least assert the required sections and hard-rule text for each canonical file.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
| export const canonicalAgentAdapters = Object.freeze([ | ||
| ".cursor/rules/mavula-engineering.mdc", | ||
| ".github/copilot-instructions.md", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
For GitHub Copilot contexts that load path-specific repository instructions, GitHub documents .github/instructions/**/*.instructions.md as an additional instruction source (https://docs.github.com/en/copilot/reference/custom-instructions-support), but this adapter list only canonicalizes .github/copilot-instructions.md. I confirmed a tracked .github/instructions/unsafe.instructions.md with applyTo: "src/**" passes node scripts/guardian.mjs, so a later change can add conflicting Copilot guidance for production files while the guardian still reports the repository-local policy is enforced.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 6d9d77e2fc
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".
| if (file.startsWith(".agents/") && !allowedAgents.has(file)) { | ||
| failures.push(`${file} is not part of the canonical agent policy`); | ||
| } | ||
| if (file.startsWith(".cursor/rules/") && file !== canonicalAgentAdapters[0]) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Because this check only rejects extra files under .cursor/rules/, a tracked root .cursorrules file can add conflicting Cursor instructions while node scripts/guardian.mjs still passes; I verified this in a detached worktree with a staged .cursorrules. Cursor still treats that file as an instruction source for now—the upstream Cursor forum quotes the docs saying the root .cursorrules file is legacy and adds that it “should still work for now” (https://forum.cursor.com/t/project-rule-in-cursorrules-not-applied-in-agent-chat-works-in-cursor-rules/154309)—so the claimed canonical Cursor policy is not actually enforced unless .cursorrules is also blocked or canonicalized.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
| if (file.startsWith(".cursor/rules/") && file !== canonicalAgentAdapters[0]) { | ||
| failures.push(`${file} is not part of the canonical Cursor policy`); | ||
| } | ||
| if (file.startsWith(".github/instructions/")) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This only rejects .github/instructions/ as an alternate Copilot instruction location, but VS Code's official custom-instructions docs also load workspace CLAUDE.md/.claude/rules and allow workspace settings such as github.copilot.chat.reviewSelection.instructions and chat.instructionsFilesLocations (https://code.visualstudio.com/docs/agent-customization/custom-instructions). I confirmed a staged CLAUDE.md plus .vscode/settings.json with conflicting review instructions still passes node scripts/guardian.mjs, so a later PR can override the canonical Copilot review policy while CI remains green.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
|
As observações de revisão foram incorporadas. A política agora exige AGENTS.md na raiz, valida digests dos ficheiros canónicos, inclui CLAUDE.md canónico e rejeita .cursorrules, regras .claude, instruções Copilot por path, entrypoints aninhados e overrides de instruções no VS Code. O guardian executa quatro testes de mutação e passou localmente.\n\n@codex review |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 0f8f48be1a
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".
| } | ||
| if (file === ".vscode/settings.json") { | ||
| const settings = readFileSync(join(root, file), "utf8"); | ||
| if (/"(?:chat\.instructionsFilesLocations|github\.copilot\.chat\.[^"]*\.instructions)"\s*:/.test(settings)) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Fresh evidence beyond the earlier VS Code override comment: the current VS Code AI settings reference lists chat.useAgentsMdFile, chat.useClaudeMdFile, and github.copilot.chat.codeGeneration.useInstructionFiles (https://code.visualstudio.com/docs/agents/reference/ai-settings), but this regex only matches keys containing instructionsFilesLocations or ending in .instructions. I verified a tracked .vscode/settings.json setting those three keys to false still passes node scripts/guardian.mjs, so VS Code/Copilot workspaces can turn off the required AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md, and Copilot instruction context while the guardian stays green; reject these disabling keys as overrides too.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 0f8f48be1a
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".
| (["AGENTS.md", "AGENTS.override.md"].includes(basename) && file !== "AGENTS.md") | ||
| || (basename === "CLAUDE.md" && file !== "CLAUDE.md") | ||
| ) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Este bloco só rejeita AGENTS.md/AGENTS.override.md e CLAUDE.md; se alguém versionar GEMINI.md na raiz ou num subdiretório, enforceLocalAgentPolicy({ root }) retorna sem falhas, deixando entrar uma fonte alternativa de instruções de agente fora do conteúdo canónico. Como a política agora pretende centralizar os entrypoints de agentes, inclua GEMINI.md nesta validação para evitar overrides que o guardian não detecta.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
| if (file.startsWith(".github/instructions/")) { | ||
| failures.push(`${file} is not part of the canonical Copilot policy`); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Esta validação bloqueia apenas .github/instructions/, mas o Copilot code review também carrega skills de repositório em .github/skills (documentação). Um PR que adicione, por exemplo, .github/skills/code-review/SKILL.md passa por enforceLocalAgentPolicy({ root }) sem falhas e pode introduzir instruções de revisão fora dos skills canónicos de .agents, anulando a política que este guardian tenta impor.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
|
|
||
| For architecture, implementation, operations, security, scalability, | ||
| composability, and no-code configuration, follow | ||
| `.agents/skills/mavula-cloud-banking/SKILL.md`. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Este caminho (e o caminho de review abaixo) só é mencionado como texto; nos fluxos Copilot que usam repository instructions, arquivos externos precisam ser incluídos com @ para serem lidos como contexto referenciado, então o agente pode receber apenas este resumo e não as regras canónicas/digestadas que a política tenta impor. Use referências @.agents/... ou mova os gates essenciais para este adaptador.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
| ) { | ||
| failures.push(`${file} conflicts with the root agent entry point`); | ||
| } | ||
| if (file === ".vscode/settings.json") { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ao limitar a inspeção a .vscode/settings.json, o guardian deixa passar um *.code-workspace versionado com settings.chat.instructionsFilesLocations ou github.copilot.chat.*.instructions; ao abrir esse workspace, o VS Code aplica essas instruções alternativas mesmo sem tocar no arquivo aqui verificado. Para manter a promessa de rejeitar overrides de instruções no VS Code, faça o mesmo scan nos arquivos de workspace rastreados.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
1 participant
Summary
Scope
The policy covers module ownership, real banking operations, security and regulation, governed no-code configuration, cloud-native scale, and TypeScript, Go, Java, COBOL, Python, PostgreSQL, and Redis engineering rules.
Validation