fix(cli): make --llms-full complete and accurate - #474
Conversation
|
@codex review |
|
Security review completed. No security issues were found in this pull request. Reviewed commit: Only the user who started this review can view the report in Codex. ℹ️ About Codex security reviews in GitHubThis is an experimental Codex feature. Security reviews are triggered when:
Once complete, Codex will leave suggestions, or a comment if no findings are found. |
|
Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Nice work! Reviewed commit: ℹ️ About Codex in GitHubYour team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
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". |
![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: 5789da8956
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".
|
@codex review |
|
Security review completed. No security issues were found in this pull request. Reviewed commit: Only the user who started this review can view the report in Codex. ℹ️ About Codex security reviews in GitHubThis is an experimental Codex feature. Security reviews are triggered when:
Once complete, Codex will leave suggestions, or a comment if no findings are found. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: d2e63a0a1d
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".
| INCUR_VALUE_OPTIONS.has(argument) && | ||
| argv[index + 1] !== undefined |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
When an accepted equals-form global option precedes the command path, such as codex-security --filter-output=scan scans show --llms-full, this exact lookup does not consume it. renderFullMarkdownManifest consequently treats the option as the first command argument and leaves the scope empty, producing a root heading and root operating guide even though Incur selected only scans show; handle equals forms for --filter-output, --token-limit, and --token-offset before deriving the scope.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
| if (options && property.type === "array") { | ||
| details.push("Repeat this flag for multiple values."); | ||
| if (Array.isArray(property.default)) { | ||
| details.push(`Default: ${codeValue(property.default)}.`); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Every repeatable option such as --path, --knowledge-base, and --codex is an array whose string items have a minimum length, but Zod places that constraint under property.items and this branch only describes repetition and the outer default. Because Incur does not render these constraints itself, the full manifest omits that empty repeated values are rejected; include applicable item-level constraints when documenting arrays.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
…/codex/fix-llms-full-manifest
|
@codex review Please review the current head, |
|
Security review completed. No security issues were found in this pull request. Reviewed commit: Only the user who started this review can view the report in Codex. ℹ️ About Codex security reviews in GitHubThis is an experimental Codex feature. Security reviews are triggered when:
Once complete, Codex will leave suggestions, or a comment if no findings are found. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 59ae515c1f
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".
| { commands: [{ name: command }] }, | ||
| [command], | ||
| ); | ||
| expect(scoped).toMatch(/--filter-output.*only to command results/u); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The latest commit reintroduces an assertion on exact generated English by requiring the words “only to command results,” so a harmless copy edit will fail this test even when filtering behavior and documented restrictions remain correct. Assert a stable semantic property or source-of-truth value instead; this is fresh evidence after the earlier wording assertions were removed.
AGENTS.md reference: sdk/typescript/AGENTS.md:L29-L32
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
|
@codex review Please review the current head, |
|
Security review completed. No security issues were found in this pull request. Reviewed commit: Only the user who started this review can view the report in Codex. ℹ️ About Codex security reviews in GitHubThis is an experimental Codex feature. Security reviews are triggered when:
Once complete, Codex will leave suggestions, or a comment if no findings are found. |
|
Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Nice work! Reviewed commit: ℹ️ About Codex in GitHubYour team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
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". |
zcrab-oai
left a comment
zcrab-oai
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Reviewed the generated CLI reference against actual command schemas; verified scoped equals-form options and repeatable-value constraints.
|
@codex review Please review the current head, |
|
Security review completed. No security issues were found in this pull request. Reviewed commit: Only the user who started this review can view the report in Codex. ℹ️ About Codex security reviews in GitHubThis is an experimental Codex feature. Security reviews are triggered when:
Once complete, Codex will leave suggestions, or a comment if no findings are found. |
|
Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Delightful! Reviewed commit: ℹ️ About Codex in GitHubYour team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
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". |
2 participants
Summary
Make
--llms-fulla complete reference for the installed CLI. The reference now uses the live command schemas and documents the options, constraints, and output modes that the CLI actually supports.Changes
Testing
5f8ccba0: 28 passed, zero failures, 1,539 assertions.pnpm run types,pnpm run format, andgit diff --check: passed.check:package, and separate installed-package smoke: passed. The archive check validated 226 entries and 106 bundled plugin files; the installed smoke exercised the nested worker without a global Codex installation.beedc8eepassed 1,307 tests with 11 skips and zero failures. That result is historical; a new full suite was not run for this main integration.5f8ccba0found no confirmed blocking or advisory findings. Pushed-head CI is still required.Risk and rollout
This keeps Incur's live parser schemas and the existing command-result policy. There is no dependency, persisted-state, or bundled-plugin-version change. Current-head cross-platform CI, required human review, and resolution of older source-fixed review threads remain merge conditions.
Public disclosure review
Newly authored material was reviewed for public disclosure. Existing automated review comments contain access-restricted report references; maintainer cleanup remains outstanding.