Files
pragent/pilot/README-webhook.md
T
Marcos 90cea84f6f pilot: dedupe + repo config + inline comments w/ suggestions
- Dedupe: Gitea-as-state. Scan existing reviews for a hidden
  <!-- pragent:sha=... --> marker matching the head sha; skip if present
  (kills duplicate reviews on label-toggle / re-fire). Prior review bodies
  fed back as 'already said' context (light framework §6.1).
- Repo-local focus: optional .pr-review.json at repo root
  ({focus,exclude_paths,languages,instructions}), fetched at head ref.
- Inline comments + apply-able suggestions: model emits JSON findings
  {severity,path,line,problem,fix,suggestion}; diff hunks parsed into valid
  (path,new_line) RIGHT-side anchors; anchored findings become positional
  review comments with a ```suggestion fence (Gitea apply-button);
  unanchored findings fold into the summary body.
- Tests: parse_diff_anchors, parse_findings (tolerant JSON), split_findings,
  inline_comment_body, summary_bullets, parse_repo_config, reviewed_shas,
  prior_review_bodies, sha-marker. 35 pass.
- Bump OLLAMA_MAX_TOKENS default 6000 -> 8000 (suggestions add length).

Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-17 19:59:36 +00:00

196 lines
9.2 KiB
Markdown

# pragent pilot — central webhook service
The CI-step pilot (`pilot/README.md`) needs a workflow file + secret + label per
repo. The **central webhook service** removes the workflow file, the secret, and
the runner dependency: a Gitea webhook posts PR events to an always-on in-cluster
service, which gates on the `AI-REVIEW` label and runs the same review core.
## Architecture
```
PR opened/pushed/labeled "AI-REVIEW" (any repo under a covered owner)
│ Gitea user-level webhook (events: pull_request)
Service pragent-webhook.pragent.svc.cluster.local (ClusterIP, ns pragent)
│ HMAC-verify (X-Gitea-Signature) → gate: action in {opened,
│ reopened, synchronize/synchronized, labeled/label_updated}
│ AND pull_request.labels ∋ AI-REVIEW
ai_review.review_pr() (same core the CI-step uses)
1. fetch existing reviews → dedupe: skip if a review already carries
<!-- pragent:sha=<this sha> --> (no duplicate on label-toggle / re-fire)
2. fetch PR diff → GET .../pulls/{i}.diff
3. fetch .pr-review.json @ head ref (optional repo-local focus/config)
4. prior review bodies → fed as "already said" context (light §6.1)
5. review prompt → POST http://100.74.17.70:8789/v1/messages (glm-5.2:cloud)
model emits JSON: {findings:[{severity,path,line,problem,fix,suggestion}]}
6. parse diff hunks → valid (path, new_line) anchors (RIGHT side)
7. post review → POST .../pulls/{i}/reviews (event: COMMENT) as pragent-bot
- anchored findings → inline line comments, body wraps `suggestion` in a
```suggestion fence (Gitea renders an apply-button)
- unanchored findings → summary-body bullets
- summary body carries the <!-- pragent:sha=... --> marker for dedupe
```
Fail-open. No duplicate per commit (dedupe). Inline comments + apply-able
suggestions where the line anchors cleanly. Repo-local focus via
`.pr-review.json`. Prior reviews fed as context so re-pushes synthesize instead
of repeating (light version of framework §6.1).
## What "onboarding a repo" means now
1. Add `pragent-bot` as collaborator with **Write** (so it can read the diff and
post the review). The bot stays a normal user — it is **not** a site admin.
2. Create the `AI-REVIEW` label on the repo (one-time; `pragent-bot`'s
`write:issue` scope can do it once it's a collaborator).
3. Label a PR `AI-REVIEW`.
No workflow file, no repo secret, no act-runner needed. (The owner must already
be covered by a user-level webhook — see below. If not, do the one-time
per-owner setup first.)
## Repo-local focus: `.pr-review.json` (optional)
Drop a `.pr-review.json` at the repo root (committed on the PR's branch, or on
the default branch) to steer the review for that repo. All fields optional;
absent file = defaults. JSON (stdlib, no YAML dependency).
```json
{
"focus": ["security", "supply-chain", "sql-injection"],
"exclude_paths": ["vendor/**", "**/*.generated.ts"],
"languages": ["typescript", "go"],
"instructions": "We use Result<T,E> for error handling. Flag any bare throw. Flag eval()/exec() on user input as critical."
}
```
- `focus` — weight these review areas higher (does not blind the reviewer to
critical issues outside them).
- `exclude_paths` — tell the model to ignore these paths.
- `languages` — hint the primary languages.
- `instructions` — free-form house conventions / compliance language.
Fetched at review time from the PR head ref
(`GET /repos/{o}/{r}/contents/.pr-review.json?ref=<head sha>`). Bad/missing file
fails open to defaults. The bot's `read:repository` scope reads it.
## One-time per-owner setup: register a user-level webhook
Gitea **system webhooks** (one webhook for the whole instance — the ideal) are
**broken in Gitea 1.26.1**: `POST /admin/hooks` returns `201` but the hook never
persists (`GET /admin/hooks` lists 0, no delivery). So we use **user-level
webhooks** instead — one webhook per repo-owner, which fires for every repo that
user owns. For a small instance with few owners this is nearly as good.
To onboard a new owner (e.g. `masi`):
```bash
# 1. generate a one-time token for that user (admin CLI, inside the gitea pod)
K="microk8s kubectl"
GPOD=$($K -n gitea get pod -l app=gitea --field-selector=status.phase=Running \
-o jsonpath='{.items[?(@.status.containerStatuses[0].ready==true)].metadata.name}')
$K -n gitea exec "$GPOD" -c gitea -- \
gitea admin user generate-access-token --username masi \
--scopes write:user,read:user --token-name pragent-userhook-masi
# 2. register the user-level webhook (events: pull_request)
# WEBHOOK_SECRET = the shared HMAC secret in the pragent-webhook K8s Secret
python3 - "$MASI_TOKEN" <<'PY'
import sys, json, urllib.request
tok = sys.argv[1]
GAPI = "http://100.74.17.70:30000/api/v1"
WS = open("/dev/stdin") and __import__("os").environ["WEBHOOK_SECRET"] # or paste
req = urllib.request.Request(
f"{GAPI}/user/hooks",
data=json.dumps({"type":"gitea",
"config":{"url":"http://pragent-webhook.pragent.svc.cluster.local/webhook",
"content_type":"json","secret":WS},
"events":["pull_request"],"active":True}).encode(),
method="POST", headers={"Authorization":f"token {tok}","Content-Type":"application/json"})
print(urllib.request.urlopen(req).status, urllib.request.urlopen(req).read()[:80])
PY
# 3. revoke the one-time token (Gitea admin UI → Users → masi → Access Tokens).
```
Owners already covered: `gitea_admin` (webhook id=4), `masi` (webhook id=5).
## Gitea SSRF allow-list (required, one-time)
Gitea refuses to POST webhooks to in-cluster addresses by default:
```
webhook can only call allowed HTTP servers (check your webhook.ALLOWED_HOST_LIST setting),
deny 'pragent-webhook.pragent.svc.cluster.local(10.152.183.170:80)'
```
Fix: add a scoped `[webhook]` section to Gitea's `app.ini` via the helm chart's
inline-config secret (`gitea-inline-config`, key = section name `webhook`):
```ini
ALLOWED_HOST_LIST = external,loopback,*.svc.cluster.local,10.0.0.0/8,172.16.0.0/12,192.168.0.0/16,100.64.0.0/10
```
Then restart the gitea pod. Scoped to in-cluster + tailnet ranges only — not a
blanket "allow all private". A future `helm upgrade` may overwrite the inline
secret; bake it into `gitea.config.webhook.ALLOWED_HOST_LIST` in the helm values
for permanence.
## K8s deployment
Manifest: `~/k8s/pragent-webhook.yaml` (Namespace `pragent`, Deployment pinned to
`kubernets`, ClusterIP Service). The two scripts are a ConfigMap
(`pragent-scripts`) and the webhook secret + bot token are a Secret
(`pragent-webhook`). Verified: a regular pod on kubernets reaches both
`100.74.17.70:8789` (headroom/glm) and `gitea-http.gitea.svc.cluster.local:3000`.
Update the scripts after editing `pilot/ai_review.py` or `pilot/webhook_server.py`:
```bash
K="microk8s kubectl"; cd ~/Projects/pragent
$K -n pragent create configmap pragent-scripts \
--from-file=webhook_server.py=pilot/webhook_server.py \
--from-file=ai_review.py=pilot/ai_review.py \
--dry-run=client -o yaml | $K apply -f -
$K -n pragent rollout restart deploy/pragent-webhook
```
Env on the Deployment: `GITEA_API`, `OLLAMA_URL`, `OLLAMA_MODEL`, `OLLAMA_MAX_TOKENS`,
`DIFF_MAX_CHARS` are literals; `WEBHOOK_SECRET` + `PRAGENT_BOT_TOKEN` come from the
Secret.
## Relationship to the CI-step pilot
Both paths coexist. The webhook service is strictly less per-repo setup. For
repos still on the CI-step workflow (`.gitea/workflows/ai-review.yml`), retire
that file once the owner has a user-level webhook — otherwise a labeled PR gets
reviewed twice. `gitea_admin/pragent`'s own self-CI workflow was retired when the
webhook service went live.
## Known limitations (pilot)
- One model (`glm-5.2:cloud`); no tiering, no analyzer fan-out, no shared-prefix
caching. Those are framework features.
- No status checks, no fail-close (review never blocks a PR).
- Dedupe is per-commit: a re-push (new SHA) always re-reviews (by design — the
diff changed). Prior-review context is fed to the model so it doesn't repeat,
but the bot does not delete or resolve its own old reviews.
- Inline comments only anchor to post-change lines present in the diff (context +
added). A finding whose `line` the model places on a removed line or outside
the diff is folded into the summary as a bullet instead of misplaced.
- Gitea 1.26.1: system webhooks broken (see above) → user-level webhooks instead;
hook delivery-history API (`.../hooks/{id}/tasks`) returns 404, so delivery is
observed via the pragent-webhook pod logs (`kubectl -n pragent logs -f deploy/pragent-webhook`).
## Cleanup of one-time setup tokens (manual)
Token revocation via API/CLI is broken in Gitea 1.26.1 (`GET /users/{u}/tokens`
401, no CLI `delete-access-token`). Revoke these one-time setup tokens in the
Gitea admin UI (Site Administration → Users → *user* → Manage access tokens),
name prefix `pragent-`:
- `gitea_admin`: `pragent-syswh-reg-2026`, `pragent-syswh-list-2026`,
`pragent-syswh-test-2026`, `pragent-syswh-retry-2026`,
`pragent-userhook-test-2026`, `pragent-payload-look-2026`,
`pragent-cleanup-2026`, `pragent-cleanup2-2026`, `pragent-cleanup3-2026`.
- `masi`: `pragent-userhook-masi-2026`.
(Keep `pragent-bot`'s `pragent-ci` token — that's the live reviewer credential.)