Job 1e8493fb-d340-4510-a33c-bdebb40de3d2
Details and log output for this agent run.
Agent
greg
greg
Log
Thinking
Let's start by understanding the situation. I'm greg, a senior developer/architect agent. I was triggered by a "pr:review" event on abrander/zoo. The review was submitted by abrander, requesting changes, and there's one inline comment:
1. [zoo.hcl.example:78] abrander (comment ID 4646): "Why is there an agent here? I think the agent who opened the PR should handle it."
So the feedback is about line 78 of `zoo.hcl.example`, where there's an `event "pr:review"` block that names an agent. The reviewer is saying that instead of a static agent handling all `pr:review` events, the agent who opened the PR should handle the review.
Let's look at the code to understand the current implementation:
- `pr:review` is a static event kind (like `pr:new`): the agent named in the `event "pr:review"` block in `zoo.hcl` handles it.
The reviewer wants: the agent who opened the PR should handle the review.
So what I need to do is:
1. Investigate the codebase to understand how events are resolved to agents.
2. Change `pr:review` from a static event kind to a dynamic one that resolves to the agent who opened the PR.
3. Update `zoo.hcl.example` to remove the `event "pr:review"` block (line 78).
4. Update the tests.
5. Push the changes, reply to the review, and resolve the inline comment.
Let's start by exploring the repository first.
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /project && git log --oneline -10 && git status && git branch -a"}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /project && git log --oneline -10 && git status && git branch -a"}
Result
eb16dd3 (HEAD -> issue-36-greg) Add pr:review event so agents react to PR reviews 42fe9d9 (origin/main, origin/HEAD, main) Merge pull request 'Include full issue comment thread in the agent's seed message' (#34) from issue-33-greg into main 9e5dece Include full issue comment thread in the agent's seed message c8784fa Merge pull request 'fix(tools): make grep_search actually use regex (ERE)' (#32) from issue-31-greg into main 2c5b978 fix(tools): make grep_search actually use regex (ERE) ea073a3 Merge pull request 'Add job overview on dashboard' (#26) from issue-24-anna into main 3b38675 feat(dashboard): add job overview on dashboard 1c33680 Merge pull request 'Move max_live_agents into the environment block' (#23) from issue-22-mika into main 7cf22ff Move max_live_agents into the environment block 94b8ca1 Merge pull request 'Add per-agent Forgejo tokens, deprecate Sudo: header approach' (#21) from issue-16-mika into main On branch issue-36-greg nothing to commit, working tree clean * issue-36-greg main remotes/origin/HEAD -> origin/main remotes/origin/main
Tool 🔧 read_file {"path": "zoo.hcl.example", "start_line": 1, "end_line": 120}
Arguments
{"path": "zoo.hcl.example", "start_line": 1, "end_line": 120}
Result
{"path":"zoo.hcl.example","content":"# zoo.hcl - Configuration for the zoo daemon.\r\n#\r\n# Copy this file to zoo.hcl (gitignored) and fill in real values.\r\n\r\nllm \"Qwen 3.6\" {\r\n openai = \"https://code.stdio.dk\"\r\n token = \"TOKEN\"\r\n model = \"Qwen3.6\"\r\n}\r\n\r\nllm \"Qwen 3.8\" {\r\n openai = \"https://code.stdio.dk\"\r\n token = \"TOKEN\"\r\n model = \"Qwen3.8\"\r\n}\r\n\r\nforgejo {\r\n url = \"https://code.stdio.dk\"\r\n token = \"ZOO_SERVICE_TOKEN\"\r\n # Shared secret configured on the Forgejo webhook. Required to accept\r\n # webhook deliveries; polling works without it.\r\n webhook_secret = \"EXAMPLE_WEBHOOK_SECRET\"\r\n}\r\n\r\nenvironment {\r\n docker_image = \"golang:latest\"\r\n max_live_agents = 5\r\n}\r\n\r\nagent \"anna\" {\r\n llm = \"Qwen 3.6\"\r\n token = \"ANNA_FORGEJO_TOKEN\"\r\n}\r\n\r\nagent \"greg\" {\r\n llm = \"Qwen 3.8\"\r\n token = \"GREG_FORGEJO_TOKEN\"\r\n}\r\n\r\n# \"leon\" doubles as the expected Forgejo assignee username for\r\n# issue:assigned events - see the event block below.\r\nagent \"leon\" {\r\n llm = \"Qwen 3.8\"\r\n token = \"LEON_FORGEJO_TOKEN\"\r\n}\r\n\r\nagent \"mika\" {\r\n llm = \"Qwen 3.6\"\r\n token = \"MIKA_FORGEJO_TOKEN\"\r\n}\r\n\r\nevent \"issue:new\" {\r\n agent = \"leon\"\r\n}\r\n\r\nevent \"issue:assigned\" {\r\n // No `agent` here: the agent whose name matches the Forgejo\r\n // assignee's username is triggered.\r\n instructions = \"Please handle this issue.\"\r\n}\r\n\r\nevent \"issue:comment\" {\r\n agent = \"leon\"\r\n instructions = \"Please review what this comment says and respond appropriately.\"\r\n}\r\n\r\nevent \"pr:new\" {\r\n agent = \"greg\"\r\n instructions = \"Please review this pull request and respond appropriately.\"\r\n}\r\n\r\n# A review was submitted on a pull request (approved, changes requested,\r\n# or comment). The agent's working tree is checked out on the PR's head\r\n# branch, so changes it pushes update the PR directly. It should address\r\n# the feedback, reply to the review, and resolve the inline comments it\r\n# has addressed.\r\nevent \"pr:review\" {\r\n agent = \"greg\"\r\n instructions = \"A review was submitted on this pull request. Address the feedback, push your changes to the PR branch, reply to the review, and resolve the inline comments you have addressed.\"\r\n}\r","start_line":1,"end_line":80,"total_lines":80,"truncated":false}
Thinking
The reviewer's comment is about line 78 of `zoo.hcl.example`: `agent = "greg"` inside the `event "pr:review"` block. The reviewer is saying "Why is there an agent here? I think the agent who opened the PR should handle it."
So the design change is: `pr:review` should be a dynamic event kind — the agent who opened the PR (the PR's author) should be the one to handle the review, not a statically configured agent.
Let's investigate the codebase to understand how event kinds work, especially the dynamic ones like `issue:assigned` (the agent whose name matches the Forgejo assignee's username). We need to do the same for `pr:review` — the agent whose name matches the PR author's username.
Let's take a look at the internal/config and internal/scheduler (or wherever event resolution happens) code.
The reviewer wants `pr:review` to be handled by the agent who opened the PR, not a statically configured agent. Let me explore the codebase to understand how event resolution works.
Tool 🔧 list_files {"path": ".", "recursive": true}
Arguments
{"path": ".", "recursive": true}
Result
/project/cmd /project/cmd/zoo /project/cmd/zoo/main.go /project/go.mod /project/go.sum /project/internal /project/internal/agentrun /project/internal/agentrun/clone.go /project/internal/agentrun/context.go /project/internal/agentrun/docker.go /project/internal/agentrun/docker_integration_test.go /project/internal/agentrun/forgejo.go /project/internal/agentrun/loop.go /project/internal/agentrun/roster.go /project/internal/agentrun/roster_test.go /project/internal/agentrun/run.go /project/internal/agentrun/seed_test.go /project/internal/agentrun/system.md /project/internal/config /project/internal/config/config.go /project/internal/config/config_test.go /project/internal/forgejo /project/internal/forgejo/client.go /project/internal/forgejo/client_test.go /project/internal/forgejo/event.go /project/internal/forgejo/poll.go /project/internal/forgejo/poll_test.go /project/internal/forgejo/watcher.go /project/internal/forgejo/webhook.go /project/internal/forgejo/webhook_test.go /project/internal/livelog /project/internal/livelog/hub.go /project/internal/livelog/hub_test.go /project/internal/llm /project/internal/llm/client.go /project/internal/llm/streamer.go /project/internal/llm/streamer_test.go /project/internal/llm/types.go /project/internal/scheduler /project/internal/scheduler/scheduler.go /project/internal/scheduler/scheduler_test.go /project/internal/store /project/internal/store/schema.sql /project/internal/store/store.go /project/internal/store/store_test.go /project/internal/tools /project/internal/tools/bash.go /project/internal/tools/context.go /project/internal/tools/edit-file.go /project/internal/tools/forgejo.go /project/internal/tools/git.go /project/internal/tools/grep_search.go /project/internal/tools/list_files.go /project/internal/tools/move_file.go /project/internal/tools/read_file.go /project/internal/tools/registry.go /project/internal/tools/remove_file.go /project/internal/tools/shell.go /project/internal/tools/tools_test.go /project/internal/tools/write_file.go /project/internal/web /project/internal/web/templates.go /project/internal/web/web.go /project/internal/web/web_test.go /project/zoo.hcl.example
Tool 🔧 grep_search {"query": "pr:review", "context_after": 2, "context_before": 2}
Arguments
{"query": "pr:review", "context_after": 2, "context_before": 2}
Result
/project/internal/config/config.go-16- EventIssueAssigned = "issue:assigned"
/project/internal/config/config.go-17- EventPRNew = "pr:new"
/project/internal/config/config.go:18: EventPRReview = "pr:review"
/project/internal/config/config.go-19-)
/project/internal/config/config.go-20-
--
/project/internal/config/config_test.go-56-}
/project/internal/config/config_test.go-57-
/project/internal/config/config_test.go:58:event "pr:review" {
/project/internal/config/config_test.go-59- agent = "leon"
/project/internal/config/config_test.go-60- instructions = "Address the review feedback and respond."
--
/project/internal/config/config_test.go-91-
/project/internal/config/config_test.go-92- if agent, ok := cfg.EventAgent(EventPRReview); !ok || agent != "leon" {
/project/internal/config/config_test.go:93: t.Fatalf("expected pr:review -> leon, got %q, %v", agent, ok)
/project/internal/config/config_test.go-94- }
/project/internal/config/config_test.go-95- if got := cfg.EventInstructions(EventPRReview); got != "Address the review feedback and respond." {
/project/internal/config/config_test.go:96: t.Fatalf("unexpected pr:review instructions: %q", got)
/project/internal/config/config_test.go-97- }
/project/internal/config/config_test.go-98-}
--
/project/internal/config/config_test.go-104-environment { docker_image = "debian:unstable" max_live_agents = 1 }
/project/internal/config/config_test.go-105-agent "leon" { llm = "qwen" }
/project/internal/config/config_test.go:106:event "pr:review" { instructions = "no agent set" }
/project/internal/config/config_test.go-107-`)
/project/internal/config/config_test.go-108- if err == nil {
/project/internal/config/config_test.go:109: t.Fatal("expected error for pr:review without an agent")
/project/internal/config/config_test.go-110- }
/project/internal/config/config_test.go-111-}
--
/project/internal/tools/forgejo.go-88- tool := llm.NewTool(
/project/internal/tools/forgejo.go-89- "submit_review",
/project/internal/tools/forgejo.go:90: "Submit a review on the pull request that triggered this run: approve it, request changes, or leave review feedback. A submitted review fires a pr:review event that triggers a run, so use it to react to a PR (e.g. after addressing earlier feedback) or to review someone else's PR.")
/project/internal/tools/forgejo.go-91-
/project/internal/tools/forgejo.go-92- tool.AddEnumProperty("state", "The review verdict", []string{"approved", "changes_requested", "comment"}, true)
--
/project/internal/forgejo/poll.go-158-}
/project/internal/forgejo/poll.go-159-
/project/internal/forgejo/poll.go:160:// pollReviews dispatches a pr:review event for each review submitted on
/project/internal/forgejo/poll.go-161-// the PR since the last poll. The reviews listing has no server-side
/project/internal/forgejo/poll.go-162-// "since" filter, so every review on an updated PR is fetched and
--
/project/internal/forgejo/webhook_test.go-217- }
/project/internal/forgejo/webhook_test.go-218- if ev.Kind != EventPRReview {
/project/internal/forgejo/webhook_test.go:219: t.Fatalf("expected pr:review, got %q", ev.Kind)
/project/internal/forgejo/webhook_test.go-220- }
/project/internal/forgejo/webhook_test.go-221- if ev.Owner != "acme" || ev.Repo != "widgets" || ev.Index != 9 {
--
/project/internal/forgejo/webhook.go-216-
/project/internal/forgejo/webhook.go-217-// pullRequestReviewEvent turns a pull_request_review delivery into a
/project/internal/forgejo/webhook.go:218:// pr:review event. Only "submitted" is interesting: it's the moment a
/project/internal/forgejo/webhook.go-219-// review lands with a verdict. "edited" and "dismissed" are follow-ups
/project/internal/forgejo/webhook.go-220-// to a review that already triggered a run, and "pending" reviews have
--
/project/internal/forgejo/client.go-257-
/project/internal/forgejo/client.go-258-// ReviewDetail is the review context zoo briefs an agent with when a
/project/internal/forgejo/client.go:259:// pr:review event fires: the review's verdict and body, plus its inline
/project/internal/forgejo/client.go-260-// comments.
/project/internal/forgejo/client.go-261-type ReviewDetail struct {
--
/project/internal/forgejo/poll_test.go-66- case ev := <-w.Events():
/project/internal/forgejo/poll_test.go-67- if ev.Kind != EventPRReview {
/project/internal/forgejo/poll_test.go:68: t.Fatalf("expected pr:review, got %q", ev.Kind)
/project/internal/forgejo/poll_test.go-69- }
/project/internal/forgejo/poll_test.go-70- if ev.Owner != "acme" || ev.Repo != "widgets" || ev.Index != 9 {
--
/project/internal/forgejo/event.go-11- EventIssueAssigned = "issue:assigned"
/project/internal/forgejo/event.go-12- EventPRNew = "pr:new"
/project/internal/forgejo/event.go:13: EventPRReview = "pr:review"
/project/internal/forgejo/event.go-14-)
/project/internal/forgejo/event.go-15-
--
/project/internal/agentrun/run.go-127- projectDir := filepath.Join(workDir, "project")
/project/internal/agentrun/run.go-128-
/project/internal/agentrun/run.go:129: // A pr:review run works on the PR's own head branch, so the agent's
/project/internal/agentrun/run.go-130- // commits push straight to the PR. Every other event kind branches
/project/internal/agentrun/run.go-131- // off the default branch as usual.
--
/project/internal/agentrun/run.go-147-
/project/internal/agentrun/run.go-148- if headRef == "" {
/project/internal/agentrun/run.go:149: return fmt.Errorf("pr:review event has no pull request head branch to check out")
/project/internal/agentrun/run.go-150- }
/project/internal/agentrun/run.go-151-
--
/project/internal/agentrun/run.go-354- }
/project/internal/agentrun/run.go-355-
/project/internal/agentrun/run.go:356: // A pr:review run works on the PR's own head branch, not a fresh
/project/internal/agentrun/run.go-357- // branch off the default branch.
/project/internal/agentrun/run.go-358- branchLine := fmt.Sprintf("Your working branch is %q, checked out from the default branch %q.\n\n", branch, defaultBranch)
--
/project/internal/scheduler/scheduler_test.go-281-}
/project/internal/scheduler/scheduler_test.go-282-
/project/internal/scheduler/scheduler_test.go:283:// A review the pr:review agent submits on the same PR must not trigger
/project/internal/scheduler/scheduler_test.go-284-// itself: the event's author (the reviewer) is the resolved agent.
/project/internal/scheduler/scheduler_test.go-285-func TestSchedulerDropsPRReviewAuthoredByTargetAgent(t *testing.T) {
--
/project/zoo.hcl.example-75-# the feedback, reply to the review, and resolve the inline comments it
/project/zoo.hcl.example-76-# has addressed.
/project/zoo.hcl.example:77:event "pr:review" {
/project/zoo.hcl.example-78- agent = "greg"
Thinking
Let's understand how event resolution works. I'll check the scheduler, config, and event.go to see how `issue:assigned` (dynamic) and `pr:new` (static) work.
Tool 🔧 read_file {"path": "internal/scheduler/scheduler.go", "start_line": 1, "end_line": 250}
Arguments
{"path": "internal/scheduler/scheduler.go", "start_line": 1, "end_line": 250}
Result
{"path":"internal/scheduler/scheduler.go","content":"// Package scheduler resolves incoming Forgejo events to configured\r\n// agents and runs them, bounded by max_live_agents.\r\npackage scheduler\r\n\r\nimport (\r\n\t\"context\"\r\n\t\"errors\"\r\n\t\"fmt\"\r\n\t\"log/slog\"\r\n\t\"sync\"\r\n\r\n\t\"github.com/google/uuid\"\r\n\r\n\t\"github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/config\"\r\n\t\"github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/forgejo\"\r\n\t\"github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/livelog\"\r\n\t\"github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/store\"\r\n)\r\n\r\n// forgejoActions is the narrow slice of Client the scheduler needs for\r\n// its own failure-reporting side effects (defined here, not in\r\n// internal/forgejo, so tests can inject a fake).\r\ntype forgejoActions interface {\r\n\tCreateIssueComment(owner, repo string, index int64, body string) error\r\n\tAddLabel(owner, repo string, index int64, name string) error\r\n}\r\n\r\n// FailureLabel is applied to the triggering issue/PR, alongside a\r\n// comment, whenever an agent run fails or times out.\r\nconst FailureLabel = \"zoo:failed\"\r\n\r\n// Runner runs a single agent invocation to completion. Implemented by\r\n// internal/agentrun.Run; a narrow interface here so the scheduler is\r\n// testable without Docker.\r\ntype Runner interface {\r\n\tRun(ctx context.Context, jobID string, agent config.AgentConfig, llm config.LLM, dockerImage string, ev forgejo.Event) error\r\n}\r\n\r\ntype Scheduler struct {\r\n\tcfg *config.Config\r\n\tstore *store.Store\r\n\tforgejo forgejoActions\r\n\trunner Runner\r\n\thub *livelog.Hub\r\n\tlogger *slog.Logger\r\n\r\n\tsem chan struct{}\r\n\twg sync.WaitGroup\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc New(cfg *config.Config, st *store.Store, fg forgejoActions, runner Runner, hub *livelog.Hub, logger *slog.Logger) *Scheduler {\r\n\treturn \u0026Scheduler{\r\n\t\tcfg: cfg,\r\n\t\tstore: st,\r\n\t\tforgejo: fg,\r\n\t\trunner: runner,\r\n\t\thub: hub,\r\n\t\tlogger: logger,\r\n\t\tsem: make(chan struct{}, cfg.Environment.MaxLive),\r\n\t}\r\n}\r\n\r\n// resolveAgent returns the name of the agent that should handle ev, if\r\n// any. issue:assigned resolves dynamically: the agent whose config label\r\n// matches the Forgejo assignee's username. Every other event kind uses\r\n// the static event-\u003eagent mapping from config.\r\nfunc resolveAgent(cfg *config.Config, ev forgejo.Event) (string, bool) {\r\n\tif ev.Kind == config.EventIssueAssigned {\r\n\t\tif _, ok := cfg.AgentByName(ev.Assignee); ok {\r\n\t\t\treturn ev.Assignee, true\r\n\t\t}\r\n\r\n\t\treturn \"\", false\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\treturn cfg.EventAgent(ev.Kind)\r\n}\r\n\r\n// Run consumes events until ctx is canceled or the channel closes,\r\n// dispatching each to its resolved agent and blocking on the\r\n// max_live_agents semaphore before starting a run.\r\nfunc (s *Scheduler) Run(ctx context.Context, events \u003c-chan forgejo.Event) {\r\n\tfor {\r\n\t\tselect {\r\n\t\tcase \u003c-ctx.Done():\r\n\t\t\treturn\r\n\r\n\t\tcase ev, ok := \u003c-events:\r\n\t\t\tif !ok {\r\n\t\t\t\treturn\r\n\t\t\t}\r\n\r\n\t\t\ts.handle(ctx, ev)\r\n\t\t}\r\n\t}\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc (s *Scheduler) handle(ctx context.Context, ev forgejo.Event) {\r\n\tagentName, ok := resolveAgent(s.cfg, ev)\r\n\tif !ok {\r\n\t\ts.logger.Debug(\"no agent resolved for event, dropping\", \"kind\", ev.Kind, \"owner\", ev.Owner, \"repo\", ev.Repo, \"index\", ev.Index)\r\n\t\treturn\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\t// An agent's own actions (e.g. a comment posted via the `comment`\r\n\t// tool, authenticated with its own per-agent token) can themselves\r\n\t// show up as new events. Don't let an agent trigger itself off its\r\n\t// own activity — that's a self-reinforcing loop, not new work.\r\n\tif ev.Author != \"\" \u0026\u0026 ev.Author == agentName {\r\n\t\ts.logger.Debug(\"dropping event authored by the agent it would trigger\", \"kind\", ev.Kind, \"agent\", agentName, \"owner\", ev.Owner, \"repo\", ev.Repo, \"index\", ev.Index)\r\n\t\treturn\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tagent, ok := s.cfg.AgentByName(agentName)\r\n\tif !ok {\r\n\t\ts.logger.Error(\"resolved agent not declared in config\", \"agent\", agentName)\r\n\t\treturn\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tllm, ok := s.cfg.LLMByName(agent.LLM)\r\n\tif !ok {\r\n\t\ts.logger.Error(\"agent references undeclared llm\", \"agent\", agentName, \"llm\", agent.LLM)\r\n\t\treturn\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tjobID := uuid.NewString()\r\n\r\n\tif err := s.store.CreateJob(ctx, store.Job{\r\n\t\tID: jobID,\r\n\t\tEventKind: ev.Kind,\r\n\t\tAgent: agentName,\r\n\t\tOwner: ev.Owner,\r\n\t\tRepo: ev.Repo,\r\n\t\tIssueIndex: ev.Index,\r\n\t\tTitle: ev.Title,\r\n\t}); err != nil {\r\n\t\ts.logger.Error(\"failed to record job\", \"job\", jobID, \"error\", err)\r\n\t\treturn\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tselect {\r\n\tcase s.sem \u003c- struct{}{}:\r\n\r\n\tcase \u003c-ctx.Done():\r\n\t\treturn\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\ts.wg.Add(1)\r\n\r\n\tgo func() {\r\n\t\tdefer s.wg.Done()\r\n\t\tdefer func() { \u003c-s.sem }()\r\n\r\n\t\ts.run(ctx, jobID, agent, llm, ev)\r\n\t}()\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc (s *Scheduler) run(ctx context.Context, jobID string, agent config.AgentConfig, llm config.LLM, ev forgejo.Event) {\r\n\tlogger := s.logger.With(\"job\", jobID, \"agent\", agent.Name, \"event\", ev.Kind, \"owner\", ev.Owner, \"repo\", ev.Repo, \"index\", ev.Index)\r\n\r\n\t// Job status writes use a context detached from ctx, not ctx itself:\r\n\t// ctx is canceled on daemon shutdown to unwind the in-flight run, and\r\n\t// an already-canceled ctx would make these UPDATEs fail instantly,\r\n\t// leaving the job stuck at \"running\" forever even though the process\r\n\t// has exited.\r\n\tif err := s.store.MarkJobStarted(context.Background(), jobID); err != nil {\r\n\t\tlogger.Error(\"failed to mark job started\", \"error\", err)\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tlogger.Info(\"agent run starting\")\r\n\r\n\terr := s.runner.Run(ctx, jobID, agent, llm, s.cfg.Environment.DockerImage, ev)\r\n\r\n\tstatus := store.JobSucceeded\r\n\terrMsg := \"\"\r\n\r\n\tif err != nil {\r\n\t\terrMsg = err.Error()\r\n\t\t// The daemon-wide ctx passed in here isn't what times a run out\r\n\t\t// (agentrun.Runner.Run applies its own per-run deadline\r\n\t\t// internally); a timed-out run surfaces as a wrapped\r\n\t\t// context.DeadlineExceeded in the returned error instead.\r\n\t\tif errors.Is(err, context.DeadlineExceeded) {\r\n\t\t\tstatus = store.JobTimedOut\r\n\t\t} else {\r\n\t\t\tstatus = store.JobFailed\r\n\t\t}\r\n\r\n\t\tlogger.Error(\"agent run failed\", \"status\", status, \"error\", err)\r\n\t\ts.reportFailure(ev, status, err)\r\n\t} else {\r\n\t\tlogger.Info(\"agent run succeeded\")\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tif err := s.store.MarkJobFinished(context.Background(), jobID, status, errMsg); err != nil {\r\n\t\tlogger.Error(\"failed to mark job finished\", \"error\", err)\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\t// Closing the hub here, only after the terminal status is durably\r\n\t// written, is what lets a dashboard tab's auto-reload (triggered by\r\n\t// this Close) see the finished status immediately. Closing it inside\r\n\t// Runner.Run instead — before this status write — raced a fast\r\n\t// reload against MarkJobFinished: the reloaded page could still see\r\n\t// \"running\", open a fresh SSE subscription against a hub entry that\r\n\t// no longer exists, and be stuck showing a stale status forever.\r\n\ts.hub.Close(jobID)\r\n}\r\n\r\n// reportFailure implements the locked-in failure policy: comment on the\r\n// triggering issue/PR with an error summary, and apply FailureLabel.\r\nfunc (s *Scheduler) reportFailure(ev forgejo.Event, status store.JobStatus, runErr error) {\r\n\tbody := fmt.Sprintf(\"zoo agent run %s: %s\", status, runErr.Error())\r\n\r\n\tif err := s.forgejo.CreateIssueComment(ev.Owner, ev.Repo, ev.Index, body); err != nil {\r\n\t\ts.logger.Error(\"failed to post failure comment\", \"owner\", ev.Owner, \"repo\", ev.Repo, \"index\", ev.Index, \"error\", err)\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tif err := s.forgejo.AddLabel(ev.Owner, ev.Repo, ev.Index, FailureLabel); err != nil {\r\n\t\ts.logger.Error(\"failed to add failure label\", \"owner\", ev.Owner, \"repo\", ev.Repo, \"index\", ev.Index, \"error\", err)\r\n\t}\r\n}\r\n\r\n// Shutdown stops accepting new work is the caller's responsibility (stop\r\n// feeding Run's channel); Shutdown just waits for in-flight runs, up to\r\n// ctx's deadline.\r\nfunc (s *Scheduler) Shutdown(ctx context.Context) error {\r\n\tdone := make(chan struct{})\r\n\r\n\tgo func() {\r\n\t\ts.wg.Wait()\r\n\t\tclose(done)\r\n\t}()\r\n\r\n\tselect {\r\n\tcase \u003c-done:\r\n\t\treturn nil\r\n\r\n\tcase \u003c-ctx.Done():\r\n\t\treturn ctx.Err()\r\n\t}\r\n}\r","start_line":1,"end_line":241,"total_lines":241,"truncated":false}
Tool 🔧 read_file {"path": "internal/forgejo/event.go", "start_line": 1, "end_line": 120}
Arguments
{"path": "internal/forgejo/event.go", "start_line": 1, "end_line": 120}
Result
{"path":"internal/forgejo/event.go","content":"package forgejo\r\n\r\nimport \"encoding/json\"\r\n\r\n// Event kinds, matching the values used as event block labels in\r\n// config.Config (config avoids importing this package, so the kind\r\n// strings are duplicated by value, not by identity).\r\nconst (\r\n\tEventIssueNew = \"issue:new\"\r\n\tEventIssueComment = \"issue:comment\"\r\n\tEventIssueAssigned = \"issue:assigned\"\r\n\tEventPRNew = \"pr:new\"\r\n\tEventPRReview = \"pr:review\"\r\n)\r\n\r\n// Event is the normalized shape produced by both the webhook receiver and\r\n// the polling fallback, and is what the scheduler dispatches on.\r\ntype Event struct {\r\n\tKind string\r\n\r\n\t// ID uniquely identifies this event for dedup, regardless of whether\r\n\t// it arrived via webhook or polling.\r\n\tID string\r\n\r\n\tOwner, Repo string\r\n\tIndex int64 // issue or PR number\r\n\r\n\tTitle, Body string\r\n\tAuthor string\r\n\r\n\t// Assignee is set for EventIssueAssigned: the Forgejo username the\r\n\t// issue was assigned to.\r\n\tAssignee string\r\n\r\n\t// Comment is set for EventIssueComment.\r\n\tComment string\r\n\r\n\t// Review fields, set for EventPRReview: the submitted review's id,\r\n\t// verdict, and body. Inline review comments are not part of the\r\n\t// webhook payload, so they're fetched separately when briefing the\r\n\t// agent (see Client.ReviewDetail).\r\n\tReviewID int64\r\n\tReviewState string\r\n\tReviewBody string\r\n\r\n\t// HeadRef is set for PR events when the source payload carries the\r\n\t// PR's head branch: the branch the PR's changes live on. A run\r\n\t// reacting to the PR checks it out so its pushes update the PR\r\n\t// directly.\r\n\tHeadRef string\r\n\r\n\t// Raw is the full source payload (webhook body, or a synthesized\r\n\t// equivalent when polling), written to /event in the agent container.\r\n\tRaw json.RawMessage\r\n}\r","start_line":1,"end_line":55,"total_lines":55,"truncated":false}
Thinking
Now I understand the structure. The `resolveAgent` function in the scheduler handles `issue:assigned` dynamically (the agent whose name matches the assignee), and everything else is handled statically via `cfg.EventAgent(ev.Kind)`.
The reviewer's request: `pr:review` should be resolved dynamically to the agent who opened the PR. That is, the agent whose name matches the PR author's username.
Wait — but the `Author` field on the event is the author of the event (i.e., the person who submitted the review), not the author of the PR. Let me check how the webhook and polling decode the event, and see what fields are available.
In the case of the `pull_request_review` webhook, the payload has `user` (the reviewer) and `pull_request` (which has `user` = the PR author). Let me look at webhook.go and poll.go to check how the event is constructed.
Now let me look at the webhook and poll decoders to see what fields are available on the event.
Tool 🔧 read_file {"path": "internal/forgejo/webhook.go", "start_line": 1, "end_line": 320}
Arguments
{"path": "internal/forgejo/webhook.go", "start_line": 1, "end_line": 320}
Result
{"path":"internal/forgejo/webhook.go","content":"package forgejo\r\n\r\nimport (\r\n\t\"encoding/json\"\r\n\t\"fmt\"\r\n\t\"io\"\r\n\t\"log/slog\"\r\n\t\"net/http\"\r\n\t\"time\"\r\n\r\n\tsdk \"codeberg.org/mvdkleijn/forgejo-sdk/forgejo/v2\"\r\n)\r\n\r\ntype issuePayload struct {\r\n\tAction string `json:\"action\"`\r\n\tIssue *sdk.Issue `json:\"issue\"`\r\n\tRepository *sdk.Repository `json:\"repository\"`\r\n}\r\n\r\ntype issueCommentPayload struct {\r\n\tAction string `json:\"action\"`\r\n\tIssue *sdk.Issue `json:\"issue\"`\r\n\tComment *sdk.Comment `json:\"comment\"`\r\n\tRepository *sdk.Repository `json:\"repository\"`\r\n}\r\n\r\ntype pullRequestPayload struct {\r\n\tAction string `json:\"action\"`\r\n\tPullRequest *sdk.PullRequest `json:\"pull_request\"`\r\n\tRepository *sdk.Repository `json:\"repository\"`\r\n}\r\n\r\ntype pullRequestReviewPayload struct {\r\n\tAction string `json:\"action\"`\r\n\tReview *sdk.PullReview `json:\"review\"`\r\n\tPullRequest *sdk.PullRequest `json:\"pull_request\"`\r\n\tRepository *sdk.Repository `json:\"repository\"`\r\n}\r\n\r\n// WebhookHandler returns the http.Handler to mount at (e.g.)\r\n// /webhooks/forgejo. If secret is non-empty, deliveries are verified via\r\n// the SDK's X-Forgejo-Signature middleware; callers should always set a\r\n// secret for anything reachable off localhost.\r\nfunc WebhookHandler(secret string, logger *slog.Logger, emit func(Event)) http.Handler {\r\n\thandler := http.HandlerFunc(func(w http.ResponseWriter, r *http.Request) {\r\n\t\tbody, err := io.ReadAll(r.Body)\r\n\t\tif err != nil {\r\n\t\t\thttp.Error(w, err.Error(), http.StatusBadRequest)\r\n\t\t\treturn\r\n\t\t}\r\n\r\n\t\tkind := r.Header.Get(\"X-Forgejo-Event\")\r\n\t\tif kind == \"\" {\r\n\t\t\tkind = r.Header.Get(\"X-Gitea-Event\")\r\n\t\t}\r\n\r\n\t\tev, ok, err := decodeWebhookEvent(kind, body)\r\n\t\tif err != nil {\r\n\t\t\tlogger.Warn(\"failed to decode webhook payload\", \"event\", kind, \"error\", err)\r\n\t\t\thttp.Error(w, err.Error(), http.StatusBadRequest)\r\n\t\t\treturn\r\n\t\t}\r\n\r\n\t\tif ok {\r\n\t\t\temit(ev)\r\n\t\t}\r\n\r\n\t\tw.WriteHeader(http.StatusOK)\r\n\t})\r\n\r\n\tif secret == \"\" {\r\n\t\tlogger.Warn(\"forgejo webhook_secret is not set; incoming webhook deliveries are not authenticated\")\r\n\r\n\t\treturn handler\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\treturn sdk.VerifyWebhookSignatureMiddleware(secret)(handler)\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc decodeWebhookEvent(kind string, body []byte) (Event, bool, error) {\r\n\tswitch kind {\r\n\tcase \"issues\":\r\n\t\tvar p issuePayload\r\n\r\n\t\tif err := json.Unmarshal(body, \u0026p); err != nil {\r\n\t\t\treturn Event{}, false, err\r\n\t\t}\r\n\r\n\t\treturn issueEvent(p, body)\r\n\r\n\tcase \"issue_comment\":\r\n\t\tvar p issueCommentPayload\r\n\r\n\t\tif err := json.Unmarshal(body, \u0026p); err != nil {\r\n\t\t\treturn Event{}, false, err\r\n\t\t}\r\n\r\n\t\treturn issueCommentEvent(p, body)\r\n\r\n\tcase \"pull_request\":\r\n\t\tvar p pullRequestPayload\r\n\r\n\t\tif err := json.Unmarshal(body, \u0026p); err != nil {\r\n\t\t\treturn Event{}, false, err\r\n\t\t}\r\n\r\n\t\treturn pullRequestEvent(p, body)\r\n\r\n\tcase \"pull_request_review\":\r\n\t\tvar p pullRequestReviewPayload\r\n\r\n\t\tif err := json.Unmarshal(body, \u0026p); err != nil {\r\n\t\t\treturn Event{}, false, err\r\n\t\t}\r\n\r\n\t\treturn pullRequestReviewEvent(p, body)\r\n\r\n\tdefault:\r\n\t\treturn Event{}, false, nil\r\n\t}\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc issueEvent(p issuePayload, raw []byte) (Event, bool, error) {\r\n\tif p.Issue == nil || p.Repository == nil {\r\n\t\treturn Event{}, false, nil\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\towner := repoOwner(p.Repository)\r\n\r\n\tswitch p.Action {\r\n\tcase \"opened\":\r\n\t\treturn Event{\r\n\t\t\tKind: EventIssueNew,\r\n\t\t\tID: issueNewID(p.Issue.ID),\r\n\t\t\tOwner: owner,\r\n\t\t\tRepo: p.Repository.Name,\r\n\t\t\tIndex: p.Issue.Index,\r\n\t\t\tTitle: p.Issue.Title,\r\n\t\t\tBody: p.Issue.Body,\r\n\t\t\tAuthor: posterName(p.Issue.Poster),\r\n\t\t\tRaw: raw,\r\n\t\t}, true, nil\r\n\r\n\tcase \"assigned\":\r\n\t\tif len(p.Issue.Assignees) == 0 {\r\n\t\t\treturn Event{}, false, nil\r\n\t\t}\r\n\r\n\t\t// Webhook payloads only carry the single latest assignment as a\r\n\t\t// distinct field on some Gitea/Forgejo versions; using the last\r\n\t\t// entry in the current assignee list is the closest stable\r\n\t\t// approximation available from the Issue object alone.\r\n\t\tassignee := p.Issue.Assignees[len(p.Issue.Assignees)-1]\r\n\r\n\t\treturn Event{\r\n\t\t\tKind: EventIssueAssigned,\r\n\t\t\tID: issueAssignedID(p.Issue.ID, assignee.UserName, p.Issue.Updated),\r\n\t\t\tOwner: owner,\r\n\t\t\tRepo: p.Repository.Name,\r\n\t\t\tIndex: p.Issue.Index,\r\n\t\t\tTitle: p.Issue.Title,\r\n\t\t\tBody: p.Issue.Body,\r\n\t\t\tAuthor: posterName(p.Issue.Poster),\r\n\t\t\tAssignee: assignee.UserName,\r\n\t\t\tRaw: raw,\r\n\t\t}, true, nil\r\n\r\n\tdefault:\r\n\t\treturn Event{}, false, nil\r\n\t}\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc issueCommentEvent(p issueCommentPayload, raw []byte) (Event, bool, error) {\r\n\tif p.Action != \"created\" || p.Issue == nil || p.Comment == nil || p.Repository == nil {\r\n\t\treturn Event{}, false, nil\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\t// Comments on pull requests arrive on this same event in\r\n\t// Gitea/Forgejo (PRs are issues under the hood); pr:comment is out\r\n\t// of scope for v1.\r\n\tif p.Issue.PullRequest != nil {\r\n\t\treturn Event{}, false, nil\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\treturn Event{\r\n\t\tKind: EventIssueComment,\r\n\t\tID: issueCommentID(p.Comment.ID),\r\n\t\tOwner: repoOwner(p.Repository),\r\n\t\tRepo: p.Repository.Name,\r\n\t\tIndex: p.Issue.Index,\r\n\t\tTitle: p.Issue.Title,\r\n\t\tBody: p.Issue.Body,\r\n\t\tAuthor: posterName(p.Comment.Poster),\r\n\t\tComment: p.Comment.Body,\r\n\t\tRaw: raw,\r\n\t}, true, nil\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc pullRequestEvent(p pullRequestPayload, raw []byte) (Event, bool, error) {\r\n\tif p.Action != \"opened\" || p.PullRequest == nil || p.Repository == nil {\r\n\t\treturn Event{}, false, nil\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\treturn Event{\r\n\t\tKind: EventPRNew,\r\n\t\tID: prNewID(p.PullRequest.ID),\r\n\t\tOwner: repoOwner(p.Repository),\r\n\t\tRepo: p.Repository.Name,\r\n\t\tIndex: p.PullRequest.Index,\r\n\t\tTitle: p.PullRequest.Title,\r\n\t\tBody: p.PullRequest.Body,\r\n\t\tAuthor: posterName(p.PullRequest.Poster),\r\n\t\tRaw: raw,\r\n\t}, true, nil\r\n}\r\n\r\n// pullRequestReviewEvent turns a pull_request_review delivery into a\r\n// pr:review event. Only \"submitted\" is interesting: it's the moment a\r\n// review lands with a verdict. \"edited\" and \"dismissed\" are follow-ups\r\n// to a review that already triggered a run, and \"pending\" reviews have\r\n// no verdict to react to yet.\r\nfunc pullRequestReviewEvent(p pullRequestReviewPayload, raw []byte) (Event, bool, error) {\r\n\tif p.Action != \"submitted\" || p.Review == nil || p.PullRequest == nil || p.Repository == nil {\r\n\t\treturn Event{}, false, nil\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\theadRef := \"\"\r\n\tif p.PullRequest.Head != nil {\r\n\t\theadRef = p.PullRequest.Head.Ref\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\treturn Event{\r\n\t\tKind: EventPRReview,\r\n\t\tID: prReviewID(p.Review.ID),\r\n\t\tOwner: repoOwner(p.Repository),\r\n\t\tRepo: p.Repository.Name,\r\n\t\tIndex: p.PullRequest.Index,\r\n\t\tTitle: p.PullRequest.Title,\r\n\t\tBody: p.PullRequest.Body,\r\n\t\tAuthor: posterName(p.Review.Reviewer),\r\n\t\tReviewID: p.Review.ID,\r\n\t\tReviewState: string(p.Review.State),\r\n\t\tReviewBody: p.Review.Body,\r\n\t\tHeadRef: headRef,\r\n\t\tRaw: raw,\r\n\t}, true, nil\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc repoOwner(r *sdk.Repository) string {\r\n\tif r.Owner == nil {\r\n\t\treturn \"\"\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\treturn r.Owner.UserName\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc posterName(u *sdk.User) string {\r\n\tif u == nil {\r\n\t\treturn \"\"\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\treturn u.UserName\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc issueNewID(issueID int64) string {\r\n\treturn fmt.Sprintf(\"issue-new-%d\", issueID)\r\n}\r\n\r\n// issueAssignedID keys one *occurrence* of an assignment, not the\r\n// (issue, assignee) pair: Forgejo bumps the issue's updated timestamp on\r\n// every assignment, so assigning the same issue to the same agent again\r\n// yields a new id and triggers a new run, while the webhook delivery and\r\n// the poller's later sighting of that same assignment still collapse\r\n// onto one id and run once.\r\nfunc issueAssignedID(issueID int64, assignee string, assignedAt time.Time) string {\r\n\treturn fmt.Sprintf(\"issue-assigned-%d-%s-%d\", issueID, assignee, assignedAt.Unix())\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc issueCommentID(commentID int64) string {\r\n\treturn fmt.Sprintf(\"issue-comment-%d\", commentID)\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc prNewID(prID int64) string {\r\n\treturn fmt.Sprintf(\"pr-new-%d\", prID)\r\n}\r\n\r\n// prReviewID keys the review itself: a review is submitted once, so its\r\n// id is a stable dedup key across the webhook delivery and the poller's\r\n// later sighting of the same review.\r\nfunc prReviewID(reviewID int64) string {\r\n\treturn fmt.Sprintf(\"pr-review-%d\", reviewID)\r\n}\r","start_line":1,"end_line":292,"total_lines":292,"truncated":false}
Tool 🔧 read_file {"path": "internal/forgejo/poll.go", "start_line": 1, "end_line": 260}
Arguments
{"path": "internal/forgejo/poll.go", "start_line": 1, "end_line": 260}
Result
{"path":"internal/forgejo/poll.go","content":"package forgejo\r\n\r\nimport (\r\n\t\"context\"\r\n\t\"encoding/json\"\r\n\t\"fmt\"\r\n\t\"time\"\r\n\r\n\tsdk \"codeberg.org/mvdkleijn/forgejo-sdk/forgejo/v2\"\r\n)\r\n\r\nconst (\r\n\twatermarkIssues = \"poll:issues\"\r\n\twatermarkPulls = \"poll:pulls\"\r\n)\r\n\r\n// pollOnce lists issues and pull requests updated since the stored\r\n// watermark, across every repo the configured token can see, and\r\n// dispatches synthesized Events for anything new. It's the fallback path\r\n// for when Forgejo webhooks aren't set up or reachable.\r\nfunc (w *Watcher) pollOnce(ctx context.Context) {\r\n\tif err := w.pollIssues(ctx); err != nil {\r\n\t\tw.logger.Warn(\"poll issues failed\", \"error\", err)\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tif err := w.pollPulls(ctx); err != nil {\r\n\t\tw.logger.Warn(\"poll pull requests failed\", \"error\", err)\r\n\t}\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc (w *Watcher) pollIssues(ctx context.Context) error {\r\n\tsince, err := w.watermark(ctx, watermarkIssues)\r\n\tif err != nil {\r\n\t\treturn err\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tissues, _, err := w.client.sdk.ListIssues(sdk.ListIssueOption{\r\n\t\tType: sdk.IssueTypeIssue,\r\n\t\tState: sdk.StateAll,\r\n\t\tSince: since,\r\n\t})\r\n\tif err != nil {\r\n\t\treturn fmt.Errorf(\"list issues: %w\", err)\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tnext := since\r\n\r\n\tfor _, issue := range issues {\r\n\t\tif issue.Repository == nil {\r\n\t\t\tcontinue\r\n\t\t}\r\n\r\n\t\tif issue.Updated.After(next) {\r\n\t\t\tnext = issue.Updated\r\n\t\t}\r\n\r\n\t\towner, repo := issue.Repository.Owner, issue.Repository.Name\r\n\r\n\t\tif issue.Comments == 0 \u0026\u0026 issue.Created.After(since) {\r\n\t\t\tw.dispatch(issueToNewEvent(issue, owner, repo))\r\n\t\t} else if issue.Updated.After(since) {\r\n\t\t\tif err := w.pollNewComments(ctx, owner, repo, issue, since); err != nil {\r\n\t\t\t\tw.logger.Warn(\"poll issue comments failed\", \"owner\", owner, \"repo\", repo, \"issue\", issue.Index, \"error\", err)\r\n\t\t\t}\r\n\t\t}\r\n\r\n\t\tw.pollAssignments(ctx, owner, repo, issue)\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\treturn w.store.SetWatermark(ctx, watermarkIssues, next.Format(time.RFC3339))\r\n}\r\n\r\n// pollAssignments dispatches an assigned event for each assignee that\r\n// wasn't on the issue the last time we looked. Listing only ever shows\r\n// current state, so without that comparison every unrelated update to an\r\n// assigned issue (a comment, an edit) would look like a fresh\r\n// assignment; and because the event id now varies per assignment\r\n// occurrence, dedup no longer masks that.\r\n//\r\n// The tradeoff is that an unassign and a re-assign to the same user\r\n// landing inside a single poll interval look like no change at all, and\r\n// only the webhook path catches them.\r\nfunc (w *Watcher) pollAssignments(ctx context.Context, owner, repo string, issue *sdk.Issue) {\r\n\tcurrent := make([]string, 0, len(issue.Assignees))\r\n\r\n\tfor _, assignee := range issue.Assignees {\r\n\t\tif assignee == nil {\r\n\t\t\tcontinue\r\n\t\t}\r\n\r\n\t\tcurrent = append(current, assignee.UserName)\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tadded, err := w.store.SyncAssignees(ctx, issue.ID, current)\r\n\tif err != nil {\r\n\t\tw.logger.Warn(\"sync assignees failed\", \"owner\", owner, \"repo\", repo, \"issue\", issue.Index, \"error\", err)\r\n\t\treturn\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tfor _, assignee := range added {\r\n\t\tw.dispatch(issueToAssignedEvent(issue, owner, repo, assignee))\r\n\t}\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc (w *Watcher) pollNewComments(ctx context.Context, owner, repo string, issue *sdk.Issue, since time.Time) error {\r\n\tcomments, _, err := w.client.sdk.ListIssueComments(owner, repo, issue.Index, sdk.ListIssueCommentOptions{Since: since})\r\n\tif err != nil {\r\n\t\treturn err\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tfor _, comment := range comments {\r\n\t\tif !comment.Created.After(since) {\r\n\t\t\tcontinue\r\n\t\t}\r\n\r\n\t\tw.dispatch(issueToCommentEvent(issue, owner, repo, comment))\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\treturn nil\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc (w *Watcher) pollPulls(ctx context.Context) error {\r\n\tsince, err := w.watermark(ctx, watermarkPulls)\r\n\tif err != nil {\r\n\t\treturn err\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tissues, _, err := w.client.sdk.ListIssues(sdk.ListIssueOption{\r\n\t\tType: sdk.IssueTypePull,\r\n\t\tState: sdk.StateAll,\r\n\t\tSince: since,\r\n\t})\r\n\tif err != nil {\r\n\t\treturn fmt.Errorf(\"list pull requests: %w\", err)\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tnext := since\r\n\r\n\tfor _, issue := range issues {\r\n\t\tif issue.Repository == nil {\r\n\t\t\tcontinue\r\n\t\t}\r\n\r\n\t\tif issue.Updated.After(next) {\r\n\t\t\tnext = issue.Updated\r\n\t\t}\r\n\r\n\t\towner, repo := issue.Repository.Owner, issue.Repository.Name\r\n\r\n\t\tif issue.Created.After(since) {\r\n\t\t\tw.dispatch(issueToPRNewEvent(issue, owner, repo))\r\n\t\t}\r\n\r\n\t\tw.pollReviews(ctx, owner, repo, issue, since)\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\treturn w.store.SetWatermark(ctx, watermarkPulls, next.Format(time.RFC3339))\r\n}\r\n\r\n// pollReviews dispatches a pr:review event for each review submitted on\r\n// the PR since the last poll. The reviews listing has no server-side\r\n// \"since\" filter, so every review on an updated PR is fetched and\r\n// filtered client-side by submitted time. Submitting a review bumps the\r\n// PR's updated timestamp, so the PR is listed in the same poll that sees\r\n// the review and the watermark can't run past it; dedup by review id\r\n// keeps a review from being dispatched twice.\r\nfunc (w *Watcher) pollReviews(ctx context.Context, owner, repo string, pr *sdk.Issue, since time.Time) {\r\n\treviews, _, err := w.client.sdk.ListPullReviews(owner, repo, pr.Index, sdk.ListPullReviewsOptions{})\r\n\tif err != nil {\r\n\t\tw.logger.Warn(\"poll reviews failed\", \"owner\", owner, \"repo\", repo, \"pr\", pr.Index, \"error\", err)\r\n\t\treturn\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tfor _, review := range reviews {\r\n\t\tif review.Reviewer == nil || review.Submitted.IsZero() {\r\n\t\t\tcontinue\r\n\t\t}\r\n\r\n\t\tif !review.Submitted.After(since) {\r\n\t\t\tcontinue\r\n\t\t}\r\n\r\n\t\tw.dispatch(reviewToEvent(pr, review, owner, repo))\r\n\t}\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc (w *Watcher) watermark(ctx context.Context, key string) (time.Time, error) {\r\n\tv, err := w.store.GetWatermark(ctx, key)\r\n\tif err != nil {\r\n\t\treturn time.Time{}, err\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tif v == \"\" {\r\n\t\treturn time.Time{}, nil\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tt, err := time.Parse(time.RFC3339, v)\r\n\tif err != nil {\r\n\t\treturn time.Time{}, fmt.Errorf(\"parse watermark %q: %w\", key, err)\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\treturn t, nil\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc issueToNewEvent(issue *sdk.Issue, owner, repo string) Event {\r\n\traw, _ := json.Marshal(issue)\r\n\r\n\treturn Event{\r\n\t\tKind: EventIssueNew,\r\n\t\tID: issueNewID(issue.ID),\r\n\t\tOwner: owner,\r\n\t\tRepo: repo,\r\n\t\tIndex: issue.Index,\r\n\t\tTitle: issue.Title,\r\n\t\tBody: issue.Body,\r\n\t\tAuthor: posterName(issue.Poster),\r\n\t\tRaw: raw,\r\n\t}\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc issueToAssignedEvent(issue *sdk.Issue, owner, repo, assignee string) Event {\r\n\traw, _ := json.Marshal(issue)\r\n\r\n\treturn Event{\r\n\t\tKind: EventIssueAssigned,\r\n\t\tID: issueAssignedID(issue.ID, assignee, issue.Updated),\r\n\t\tOwner: owner,\r\n\t\tRepo: repo,\r\n\t\tIndex: issue.Index,\r\n\t\tTitle: issue.Title,\r\n\t\tBody: issue.Body,\r\n\t\tAuthor: posterName(issue.Poster),\r\n\t\tAssignee: assignee,\r\n\t\tRaw: raw,\r\n\t}\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc issueToCommentEvent(issue *sdk.Issue, owner, repo string, comment *sdk.Comment) Event {\r\n\traw, _ := json.Marshal(comment)\r\n\r\n\treturn Event{\r\n\t\tKind: EventIssueComment,\r\n\t\tID: issueCommentID(comment.ID),\r\n\t\tOwner: owner,\r\n\t\tRepo: repo,\r\n\t\tIndex: issue.Index,\r\n\t\tTitle: issue.Title,\r\n\t\tBody: issue.Body,\r\n\t\tAuthor: posterName(comment.Poster),\r\n\t\tComment: comment.Body,\r\n\t\tRaw: raw,\r\n\t}\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc issueToPRNewEvent(issue *sdk.Issue, owner, repo string) Event {\r\n\traw, _ := json.Marshal(issue)\r\n\r\n\treturn Event{\r\n\t\tKind: EventPRNew,\r\n\t\tID: prNewID(issue.ID),\r","start_line":1,"end_line":260,"total_lines":288,"truncated":true}
Thinking
Let's take a look at the rest of poll.go (the `reviewToEvent` function), and the config package to understand how event blocks are validated.
Tool 🔧 read_file {"path": "internal/forgejo/poll.go", "start_line": 255, "end_line": 288}
Arguments
{"path": "internal/forgejo/poll.go", "start_line": 255, "end_line": 288}
Result
{"path":"internal/forgejo/poll.go","content":"func issueToPRNewEvent(issue *sdk.Issue, owner, repo string) Event {\r\n\traw, _ := json.Marshal(issue)\r\n\r\n\treturn Event{\r\n\t\tKind: EventPRNew,\r\n\t\tID: prNewID(issue.ID),\r\n\t\tOwner: owner,\r\n\t\tRepo: repo,\r\n\t\tIndex: issue.Index,\r\n\t\tTitle: issue.Title,\r\n\t\tBody: issue.Body,\r\n\t\tAuthor: posterName(issue.Poster),\r\n\t\tRaw: raw,\r\n\t}\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc reviewToEvent(pr *sdk.Issue, review *sdk.PullReview, owner, repo string) Event {\r\n\traw, _ := json.Marshal(review)\r\n\r\n\treturn Event{\r\n\t\tKind: EventPRReview,\r\n\t\tID: prReviewID(review.ID),\r\n\t\tOwner: owner,\r\n\t\tRepo: repo,\r\n\t\tIndex: pr.Index,\r\n\t\tTitle: pr.Title,\r\n\t\tBody: pr.Body,\r\n\t\tAuthor: posterName(review.Reviewer),\r\n\t\tReviewID: review.ID,\r\n\t\tReviewState: string(review.State),\r\n\t\tReviewBody: review.Body,\r\n\t\tRaw: raw,\r\n\t}\r\n}\r","start_line":255,"end_line":288,"total_lines":288,"truncated":false}
Tool 🔧 read_file {"path": "internal/config/config.go", "start_line": 1, "end_line": 260}
Arguments
{"path": "internal/config/config.go", "start_line": 1, "end_line": 260}
Result
{"path":"internal/config/config.go","content":"// Package config loads and validates zoo's HCL configuration file.\r\npackage config\r\n\r\nimport (\r\n\t\"fmt\"\r\n\r\n\t\"github.com/hashicorp/hcl/v2/hclsimple\"\r\n)\r\n\r\n// Known event kinds. issue:assigned is resolved dynamically (agent name\r\n// must match the Forgejo assignee's username) so it never carries an\r\n// `agent` attribute; the rest map statically to one configured agent.\r\nconst (\r\n\tEventIssueNew = \"issue:new\"\r\n\tEventIssueComment = \"issue:comment\"\r\n\tEventIssueAssigned = \"issue:assigned\"\r\n\tEventPRNew = \"pr:new\"\r\n\tEventPRReview = \"pr:review\"\r\n)\r\n\r\nvar staticEventKinds = map[string]bool{\r\n\tEventIssueNew: true,\r\n\tEventIssueComment: true,\r\n\tEventPRNew: true,\r\n\tEventPRReview: true,\r\n}\r\n\r\ntype Config struct {\r\n\tLLMs []LLM `hcl:\"llm,block\"`\r\n\tForgejo Forgejo `hcl:\"forgejo,block\"`\r\n\tEnvironment Environment `hcl:\"environment,block\"`\r\n\tAgents []Agent `hcl:\"agent,block\"`\r\n\tEvents []Event `hcl:\"event,block\"`\r\n\tWeb *Web `hcl:\"web,block\"`\r\n}\r\n\r\n// Web configures the dashboard's optional bearer-token gate. Leave the\r\n// block out of zoo.hcl entirely to run without one (fine on localhost;\r\n// put a real gate or a proxy in front for anything else).\r\ntype Web struct {\r\n\tToken string `hcl:\"token,optional\"`\r\n}\r\n\r\ntype LLM struct {\r\n\tName string `hcl:\"name,label\"`\r\n\tOpenAI string `hcl:\"openai\"`\r\n\tToken string `hcl:\"token\"`\r\n\tModel string `hcl:\"model\"`\r\n}\r\n\r\ntype Forgejo struct {\r\n\tURL string `hcl:\"url\"`\r\n\tToken string `hcl:\"token\"`\r\n\tWebhookSecret string `hcl:\"webhook_secret,optional\"`\r\n}\r\n\r\ntype Environment struct {\r\n\tDockerImage string `hcl:\"docker_image\"`\r\n\tMaxLive int `hcl:\"max_live_agents\"`\r\n}\r\n\r\ntype Agent struct {\r\n\tName string `hcl:\"name,label\"`\r\n\tLLM string `hcl:\"llm\"`\r\n\tToken string `hcl:\"token,optional\"`\r\n}\r\n\r\ntype Event struct {\r\n\tKind string `hcl:\"name,label\"`\r\n\tAgent string `hcl:\"agent,optional\"`\r\n\tInstructions string `hcl:\"instructions,optional\"`\r\n}\r\n\r\n// Load reads and validates the config file at path.\r\nfunc Load(path string) (*Config, error) {\r\n\tvar cfg Config\r\n\r\n\tif err := hclsimple.DecodeFile(path, nil, \u0026cfg); err != nil {\r\n\t\treturn nil, fmt.Errorf(\"parse config: %w\", err)\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tif err := cfg.Validate(); err != nil {\r\n\t\treturn nil, fmt.Errorf(\"invalid config: %w\", err)\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\treturn \u0026cfg, nil\r\n}\r\n\r\n// Validate checks that the config is internally consistent: every\r\n// reference between blocks resolves, and required values are set.\r\nfunc (c *Config) Validate() error {\r\n\tllmNames := make(map[string]bool, len(c.LLMs))\r\n\tfor _, l := range c.LLMs {\r\n\t\tif l.OpenAI == \"\" || l.Token == \"\" || l.Model == \"\" {\r\n\t\t\treturn fmt.Errorf(\"llm %q: openai, token, and model are required\", l.Name)\r\n\t\t}\r\n\t\tllmNames[l.Name] = true\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tif c.Forgejo.URL == \"\" || c.Forgejo.Token == \"\" {\r\n\t\treturn fmt.Errorf(\"forgejo: url and token are required\")\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tif c.Environment.MaxLive \u003c 1 {\r\n\t\treturn fmt.Errorf(\"environment: max_live_agents must be \u003e= 1, got %d\", c.Environment.MaxLive)\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tif c.Environment.DockerImage == \"\" {\r\n\t\treturn fmt.Errorf(\"environment: docker_image is required\")\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tagentNames := make(map[string]bool, len(c.Agents))\r\n\tfor _, a := range c.Agents {\r\n\t\tif !llmNames[a.LLM] {\r\n\t\t\treturn fmt.Errorf(\"agent %q: references undeclared llm %q\", a.Name, a.LLM)\r\n\t\t}\r\n\t\tagentNames[a.Name] = true\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tseenEventKinds := make(map[string]bool, len(c.Events))\r\n\tfor _, e := range c.Events {\r\n\t\tif seenEventKinds[e.Kind] {\r\n\t\t\treturn fmt.Errorf(\"event %q: declared more than once\", e.Kind)\r\n\t\t}\r\n\t\tseenEventKinds[e.Kind] = true\r\n\r\n\t\tswitch {\r\n\t\tcase e.Kind == EventIssueAssigned:\r\n\t\t\tif e.Agent != \"\" {\r\n\t\t\t\treturn fmt.Errorf(\"event %q: must not set agent; the agent whose name matches the Forgejo assignee's username is triggered dynamically\", e.Kind)\r\n\t\t\t}\r\n\r\n\t\tcase staticEventKinds[e.Kind]:\r\n\t\t\tif e.Agent == \"\" {\r\n\t\t\t\treturn fmt.Errorf(\"event %q: agent is required\", e.Kind)\r\n\t\t\t}\r\n\t\t\tif !agentNames[e.Agent] {\r\n\t\t\t\treturn fmt.Errorf(\"event %q: references undeclared agent %q\", e.Kind, e.Agent)\r\n\t\t\t}\r\n\r\n\t\tdefault:\r\n\t\t\treturn fmt.Errorf(\"event %q: unknown event kind\", e.Kind)\r\n\t\t}\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\treturn nil\r\n}\r\n\r\n// AgentConfig holds an agent's full configuration including its\r\n// Forgejo token (if configured).\r\ntype AgentConfig struct {\r\n\tName string\r\n\tLLM string\r\n\tToken string\r\n}\r\n\r\n// AgentByName returns the agent config with the given name, if declared.\r\nfunc (c *Config) AgentByName(name string) (AgentConfig, bool) {\r\n\tfor _, a := range c.Agents {\r\n\t\tif a.Name == name {\r\n\t\t\treturn AgentConfig{\r\n\t\t\t\tName: a.Name,\r\n\t\t\t\tLLM: a.LLM,\r\n\t\t\t\tToken: a.Token,\r\n\t\t\t}, true\r\n\t\t}\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\treturn AgentConfig{}, false\r\n}\r\n\r\n// LLMByName returns the llm config with the given name, if declared.\r\nfunc (c *Config) LLMByName(name string) (LLM, bool) {\r\n\tfor _, l := range c.LLMs {\r\n\t\tif l.Name == name {\r\n\t\t\treturn l, true\r\n\t\t}\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\treturn LLM{}, false\r\n}\r\n\r\n// EventAgent returns the statically configured agent name for the given\r\n// event kind, if one is declared and set.\r\nfunc (c *Config) EventAgent(kind string) (string, bool) {\r\n\tfor _, e := range c.Events {\r\n\t\tif e.Kind == kind {\r\n\t\t\treturn e.Agent, e.Agent != \"\"\r\n\t\t}\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\treturn \"\", false\r\n}\r\n\r\n// EventInstructions returns the configured freeform instructions for the\r\n// given event kind, e.g. \"Please review this pull request and respond\r\n// appropriately.\" Returns \"\" if the event isn't declared or has none.\r\nfunc (c *Config) EventInstructions(kind string) string {\r\n\tfor _, e := range c.Events {\r\n\t\tif e.Kind == kind {\r\n\t\t\treturn e.Instructions\r\n\t\t}\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\treturn \"\"\r\n}\r","start_line":1,"end_line":206,"total_lines":206,"truncated":false}
Thinking
Now I understand the design. The reviewer's request: `pr:review` should be resolved dynamically — the agent who opened the PR should handle the review. This is similar to `issue:assigned`, which resolves to the agent whose name matches the assignee's username.
So the changes are:
1. **`internal/forgejo/event.go`**: Add a `PRAuthor` field (or reuse an existing field?) to `Event` for `EventPRReview` — the username of the PR's author. Actually, wait — the event's `Author` field is the review submitter (reviewer). We need the PR author. Let's add a `PRAuthor string` field that gets set for PR events (at least for pr:review).
Actually, for `pr:new`, `Author` is the PR author. For `pr:review`, `Author` is the reviewer. To keep the semantics clean, I'll add a `PRAuthor` field that gets set for both `pr:new` and `pr:review` events.
2. **`internal/forgejo/webhook.go`**: In `pullRequestReviewEvent`, set `PRAuthor: posterName(p.PullRequest.Poster)`.
3. **`internal/forgejo/poll.go`**: In `reviewToEvent`, set `PRAuthor: posterName(pr.Poster)`. Note: `pr` here is `*sdk.Issue` (Forgejo represents PRs as issues). The `Poster` field is the PR creator. Let me confirm: in `issueToPRNewEvent`, `Author: posterName(issue.Poster)` — yes, `issue.Poster` is the PR author.
Also, for consistency, I could set `PRAuthor` in `issueToPRNewEvent` too. Hmm, but is it necessary? For pr:new, `Author` is already the PR author. For consistency, I could set `PRAuthor` on both PR events. Let me think about the minimal, surgical change: only `pr:review` needs it. But it's cleaner to set it on both PR events. Actually, let me keep it surgical: only set it where it's needed — `pr:review`. Hmm, but then the field's docs would say "set for PR events when...". Let me think about what's cleanest.
I'll add `PRAuthor` and set it for both `pr:new` and `pr:review` events (webhook + poll). That's consistent and harmless. Actually wait — for pr:new, `Author` is already the poster. Setting PRAuthor too is redundant but consistent. Let me set it on both for uniformity. Hmm, actually, let me reconsider: surgical change principle. The task is to make pr:review resolve to the PR author. Minimal change: set PRAuthor only on pr:review events. But then the field's docs would say "set for pr:review events". That's fine and minimal.
Hmm, but there's a subtle point: for `pr:new`, the event's `Author` is the PR author, and the self-trigger guard drops events created by the resolved agent. For pr:review, the event's `Author` is the reviewer. The self-trigger guard: "the scheduler's existing self-trigger guard drops events created by the agent that would resolve to it — so reviews submitted by the pr:review agent itself never trigger itself."
With the new dynamic resolution, the resolved agent = PR author (if it's an agent). The self-trigger guard checks `ev.Author == agentName`. For a review submitted by the PR author themselves (e.g., an agent reviewing its own PR), the event's author (reviewer) = PR author = resolved agent → dropped. Good, that's still correct.
But wait, there's a new subtlety: if an agent opens a PR and then a human reviews it, the resolved agent is the PR author (the agent). The event's author is the human reviewer. Guard: ev.Author (human) != agentName (agent) → not dropped. Good, the agent runs.
If the PR author is a human and an agent reviews it: resolved agent = human's username, which is probably not in the agent config → `cfg.AgentByName` fails → event is dropped (no agent resolves). Good.
4. **`internal/config/config.go`**:
- Remove `EventPRReview` from `staticEventKinds`.
- Add `EventPRReview` to the dynamic case: `agent` must not be set (same as issue:assigned).
- Update comments.
5. **`internal/scheduler/scheduler.go`**: In `resolveAgent`, handle `EventPRReview` dynamically: if `ev.PRAuthor` is a known agent, return it.
6. **`zoo.hcl.example`**: Remove the `agent = "greg"` line from the `event "pr:review"` block; update the comment to explain that the PR author agent is triggered dynamically (similar to the issue:assigned block).
7. **Tests**:
- `internal/config/config_test.go`: Update — `pr:review` with an agent should now be an error; without an agent it should be fine.
- `internal/scheduler/scheduler_test.go`: Update the `TestSchedulerDropsPRReviewAuthoredByTargetAgent` test — the resolution logic has changed. Let me read the scheduler tests.
- `internal/forgejo/webhook_test.go` and `poll_test.go`: Add assertions for `PRAuthor`.
- `internal/agentrun/seed_test.go` / `run.go`: The seed message might mention something about the agent. Let me check seedMessage and the system prompt for wording about "the agent named in the event block".
Let me look at the remaining relevant files: run.go, seed (context.go?), seed_test.go, system.md, scheduler_test.go, config_test.go, webhook_test.go, poll_test.go, tools/forgejo.go.
Now let me look at the agentrun side (run.go, seed message, system prompt) and the tests.
Tool 🔧 read_file {"path": "internal/agentrun/run.go", "start_line": 1, "end_line": 260}
Arguments
{"path": "internal/agentrun/run.go", "start_line": 1, "end_line": 260}
Result
{"path":"internal/agentrun/run.go","content":"// Package agentrun creates the throwaway per-job environment an agent\r\n// runs in: a git clone + branch bind-mounted into a Docker container,\r\n// the triggering event written to /event, and the tool-calling loop\r\n// (internal/llm + internal/tools) driven against it.\r\npackage agentrun\r\n\r\nimport (\r\n\t\"context\"\r\n\t_ \"embed\"\r\n\t\"encoding/json\"\r\n\t\"fmt\"\r\n\t\"log/slog\"\r\n\t\"os\"\r\n\t\"path/filepath\"\r\n\t\"strings\"\r\n\t\"sync\"\r\n\t\"time\"\r\n\r\n\t\"github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/config\"\r\n\t\"github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/forgejo\"\r\n\t\"github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/livelog\"\r\n\t\"github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/llm\"\r\n\t\"github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/store\"\r\n)\r\n\r\n//go:embed system.md\r\nvar defaultSystemPrompt string\r\n\r\n// DefaultTimeout bounds a single agent run's wall-clock time if the\r\n// caller doesn't override it.\r\nconst DefaultTimeout = 120 * time.Minute\r\n\r\ntype Runner struct {\r\n\tdocker *dockerRuntime\r\n\tforgejo *forgejo.Client\r\n\tstore *store.Store\r\n\thub *livelog.Hub\r\n\tcfg *config.Config\r\n\tlogger *slog.Logger\r\n\ttimeout time.Duration\r\n\tkeepOnFailure bool\r\n\r\n\tagentClientsMu sync.Mutex\r\n\tagentClients map[string]*forgejo.Client\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc NewRunner(cfg *config.Config, fg *forgejo.Client, st *store.Store, hub *livelog.Hub, logger *slog.Logger, timeout time.Duration, keepOnFailure bool) (*Runner, error) {\r\n\tdocker, err := newDockerRuntime()\r\n\tif err != nil {\r\n\t\treturn nil, err\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tif timeout \u003c= 0 {\r\n\t\ttimeout = DefaultTimeout\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\treturn \u0026Runner{\r\n\t\tdocker: docker,\r\n\t\tforgejo: fg,\r\n\t\tstore: st,\r\n\t\thub: hub,\r\n\t\tcfg: cfg,\r\n\t\tlogger: logger,\r\n\t\ttimeout: timeout,\r\n\t\tkeepOnFailure: keepOnFailure,\r\n\t\tagentClients: make(map[string]*forgejo.Client),\r\n\t}, nil\r\n}\r\n\r\n// forgejoAs returns a Forgejo client that authenticates as the given\r\n// agent (using the agent's own token from config). This lets each agent\r\n// act as themselves on Forgejo without needing a global token with sudo\r\n// privileges. Clients are built once per agent and cached, since\r\n// constructing one costs an extra API round trip.\r\n//\r\n// If the agent has no token configured, falls back to the shared zoo\r\n// identity so existing deployments without per-agent tokens still work.\r\nfunc (r *Runner) forgejoAs(agentName, token string) *forgejo.Client {\r\n\tr.agentClientsMu.Lock()\r\n\tdefer r.agentClientsMu.Unlock()\r\n\r\n\tif c, ok := r.agentClients[agentName]; ok {\r\n\t\treturn c\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tvar c *forgejo.Client\r\n\tif token != \"\" {\r\n\t\tc = r.forgejo.As(token)\r\n\t} else {\r\n\t\t// Fallback: use shared identity. Optionally log a warning\r\n\t\t// if we ever want to enforce per-agent tokens.\r\n\t\tc = r.forgejo\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tr.agentClients[agentName] = c\r\n\r\n\treturn c\r\n}\r\n\r\n// Run implements scheduler.Runner.\r\nfunc (r *Runner) Run(ctx context.Context, jobID string, agent config.AgentConfig, llmCfg config.LLM, dockerImage string, ev forgejo.Event) error {\r\n\tctx, cancel := context.WithTimeout(ctx, r.timeout)\r\n\tdefer cancel()\r\n\r\n\tlogger := r.logger.With(\"job\", jobID, \"agent\", agent.Name)\r\n\r\n\trepoInfo, err := r.forgejo.RepositoryInfo(ev.Owner, ev.Repo)\r\n\tif err != nil {\r\n\t\treturn fmt.Errorf(\"look up repository: %w\", err)\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tworkDir, err := os.MkdirTemp(\"\", \"zoo-run-*\")\r\n\tif err != nil {\r\n\t\treturn fmt.Errorf(\"create work dir: %w\", err)\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tsucceeded := false\r\n\r\n\tdefer func() {\r\n\t\tif succeeded || !r.keepOnFailure {\r\n\t\t\tos.RemoveAll(workDir)\r\n\t\t} else {\r\n\t\t\tlogger.Warn(\"keeping work dir after failure\", \"dir\", workDir)\r\n\t\t}\r\n\t}()\r\n\r\n\tprojectDir := filepath.Join(workDir, \"project\")\r\n\r\n\t// A pr:review run works on the PR's own head branch, so the agent's\r\n\t// commits push straight to the PR. Every other event kind branches\r\n\t// off the default branch as usual.\r\n\tvar review *forgejo.ReviewDetail\r\n\tbranch := fmt.Sprintf(\"issue-%d-%s\", ev.Index, agent.Name)\r\n\r\n\tif ev.Kind == forgejo.EventPRReview {\r\n\t\t// Always fetch the current head ref, not just when the event\r\n\t\t// lacks one (the polling path doesn't carry it): the webhook's\r\n\t\t// copy could be stale if the PR's head branch was renamed since\r\n\t\t// the review, and the push target depends on it.\r\n\t\theadRef := ev.HeadRef\r\n\r\n\t\tif prInfo, err := r.forgejo.PullRequestInfo(ev.Owner, ev.Repo, ev.Index); err != nil {\r\n\t\t\tlogger.Warn(\"fetch pull request head failed; falling back to the event's head ref\", \"error\", err)\r\n\t\t} else if prInfo.HeadRef != \"\" {\r\n\t\t\theadRef = prInfo.HeadRef\r\n\t\t}\r\n\r\n\t\tif headRef == \"\" {\r\n\t\t\treturn fmt.Errorf(\"pr:review event has no pull request head branch to check out\")\r\n\t\t}\r\n\r\n\t\tif err := clonePRHead(ctx, repoInfo.CloneURL, r.forgejo.Token(), repoInfo.DefaultBranch, headRef, ev.Index, projectDir); err != nil {\r\n\t\t\treturn fmt.Errorf(\"prepare git working tree: %w\", err)\r\n\t\t}\r\n\r\n\t\tbranch = headRef\r\n\r\n\t\t// Fetch the full review (verdict, body, inline comments) so the\r\n\t\t// agent sees all the feedback, not just the triggering event. A\r\n\t\t// failure degrades to no review detail rather than failing the\r\n\t\t// run: the agent can still do its job, just without the inline\r\n\t\t// comments.\r\n\t\treview, err = r.forgejo.ReviewDetail(ev.Owner, ev.Repo, ev.Index, ev.ReviewID)\r\n\t\tif err != nil {\r\n\t\t\tlogger.Warn(\"fetch review detail failed; agent will not see inline review comments\", \"error\", err)\r\n\t\t\treview = nil\r\n\t\t}\r\n\t} else {\r\n\t\tif err := cloneAndBranch(ctx, repoInfo.CloneURL, r.forgejo.Token(), repoInfo.DefaultBranch, branch, projectDir); err != nil {\r\n\t\t\treturn fmt.Errorf(\"prepare git working tree: %w\", err)\r\n\t\t}\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\troster := buildRoster(r.forgejo, r.cfg.Agents, logger)\r\n\tgitName, gitEmail := gitIdentity(agent.Name, roster)\r\n\r\n\t// Local (not --global) scope, so this identity lives in\r\n\t// projectDir/.git/config: the one place both this host-side clone\r\n\t// and the container it's bind-mounted into (as /project) actually\r\n\t// share.\r\n\tif out, err := runGit(ctx, projectDir, \"config\", \"user.name\", gitName); err != nil {\r\n\t\treturn fmt.Errorf(\"configure git user.name: %w: %s\", err, out)\r\n\t}\r\n\tif out, err := runGit(ctx, projectDir, \"config\", \"user.email\", gitEmail); err != nil {\r\n\t\treturn fmt.Errorf(\"configure git user.email: %w: %s\", err, out)\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\teventPath := filepath.Join(workDir, \"event.json\")\r\n\tif err := os.WriteFile(eventPath, ev.Raw, 0o644); err != nil {\r\n\t\treturn fmt.Errorf(\"write event file: %w\", err)\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tcontainerID, err := r.docker.createContainer(ctx, dockerImage, []string{\r\n\t\tprojectDir + \":/project\",\r\n\t\teventPath + \":/event:ro\",\r\n\t}, fmt.Sprintf(\"zoo-issue-%d-%s\", ev.Index, agent.Name))\r\n\tif err != nil {\r\n\t\treturn fmt.Errorf(\"start container: %w\", err)\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tdefer func() {\r\n\t\tcleanupCtx, cleanupCancel := context.WithTimeout(context.Background(), 30*time.Second)\r\n\t\tdefer cleanupCancel()\r\n\t\tif err := r.docker.remove(cleanupCtx, containerID); err != nil {\r\n\t\t\tlogger.Warn(\"failed to remove container\", \"container\", containerID, \"error\", err)\r\n\t\t}\r\n\t}()\r\n\r\n\t// /project is bind-mounted from the host, so it's owned by the host\r\n\t// UID that ran the clone, not whatever UID runs inside the\r\n\t// container (usually root) — git's ownership check rejects that by\r\n\t// default (\"detected dubious ownership\") unless told otherwise.\r\n\t// --system (not --global) so this holds regardless of which user\r\n\t// subsequent `docker exec` calls run as. Commit identity is\r\n\t// configured host-side, above, with --local scope so it's visible\r\n\t// from both sides of the bind mount without needing --global here.\r\n\tout, exitCode, err := r.docker.exec(ctx, containerID, \"git config --system --add safe.directory '*'\")\r\n\tif err != nil {\r\n\t\treturn fmt.Errorf(\"configure git safe.directory in container: %w: %s\", err, out)\r\n\t}\r\n\tif exitCode != 0 {\r\n\t\treturn fmt.Errorf(\"configure git safe.directory in container: exit %d: %s\", exitCode, out)\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tlogAppend := func(stream, line string) {\r\n\t\tif err := r.store.AppendLog(context.Background(), jobID, stream, line); err != nil {\r\n\t\t\tlogger.Warn(\"failed to append log\", \"error\", err)\r\n\t\t}\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\trunCtx := \u0026runContext{\r\n\t\tdocker: r.docker,\r\n\t\tcontainerID: containerID,\r\n\t\tprojectDir: projectDir,\r\n\t\ttoken: r.forgejo.Token(),\r\n\t\tforgejo: \u0026runForgejoActions{\r\n\t\t\tclient: r.forgejoAs(agent.Name, agent.Token),\r\n\t\t\towner: ev.Owner,\r\n\t\t\trepo: ev.Repo,\r\n\t\t\tindex: ev.Index,\r\n\t\t\tlogger: logger,\r\n\t\t},\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tllmClient := llm.NewClient(llmCfg)\r\n\r\n\tsystemPrompt := defaultSystemPrompt + identitySection(agent.Name, roster)\r\n\r\n\tinstructions := r.cfg.EventInstructions(ev.Kind)\r\n\r\n\t// Fetch the full comment thread so the agent sees everything that's\r\n\t// been said on the issue/PR, not just the triggering event (which\r\n\t// only carries the latest comment, if any). A failure degrades to\r\n\t// no comments rather than failing the run: the agent can still do\r\n\t// its job, just without prior context.\r\n\tcomments, err := r.forgejo.ListIssueComments(ev.Owner, ev.Repo, ev.Index)\r\n\tif err != nil {\r\n\t\tlogger.Warn(\"fetch issue comments failed; agent will not see prior comments\", \"error\", err)\r\n\t\tcomments = nil\r\n\t}\r","start_line":1,"end_line":260,"total_lines":435,"truncated":true}
Tool 🔧 read_file {"path": "internal/scheduler/scheduler_test.go", "start_line": 1, "end_line": 120}
Arguments
{"path": "internal/scheduler/scheduler_test.go", "start_line": 1, "end_line": 120}
Result
{"path":"internal/scheduler/scheduler_test.go","content":"package scheduler\r\n\r\nimport (\r\n\t\"context\"\r\n\t\"fmt\"\r\n\t\"log/slog\"\r\n\t\"path/filepath\"\r\n\t\"sync\"\r\n\t\"testing\"\r\n\t\"time\"\r\n\r\n\t\"github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/config\"\r\n\t\"github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/forgejo\"\r\n\t\"github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/livelog\"\r\n\t\"github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/store\"\r\n)\r\n\r\nfunc testConfig() *config.Config {\r\n\treturn \u0026config.Config{\r\n\t\tLLMs: []config.LLM{{Name: \"qwen\", OpenAI: \"https://example.com\", Token: \"tok\", Model: \"qwen3\"}},\r\n\t\tForgejo: config.Forgejo{URL: \"https://example.com\", Token: \"tok\"},\r\n\t\tEnvironment: config.Environment{DockerImage: \"debian:unstable\", MaxLive: 1},\r\n\t\tAgents: []config.Agent{\r\n\t\t\t{Name: \"leon\", LLM: \"qwen\"},\r\n\t\t\t{Name: \"greg\", LLM: \"qwen\"},\r\n\t\t},\r\n\t\tEvents: []config.Event{\r\n\t\t\t{Kind: config.EventIssueNew, Agent: \"leon\"},\r\n\t\t\t{Kind: config.EventIssueComment, Agent: \"leon\"},\r\n\t\t\t{Kind: config.EventIssueAssigned},\r\n\t\t\t{Kind: config.EventPRNew, Agent: \"greg\"},\r\n\t\t\t{Kind: config.EventPRReview, Agent: \"greg\"},\r\n\t\t},\r\n\t}\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc TestResolveAgentStatic(t *testing.T) {\r\n\tcfg := testConfig()\r\n\r\n\tname, ok := resolveAgent(cfg, forgejo.Event{Kind: config.EventIssueNew})\r\n\tif !ok || name != \"leon\" {\r\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected leon, got %q, %v\", name, ok)\r\n\t}\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc TestResolveAgentPRReviewStatic(t *testing.T) {\r\n\tcfg := testConfig()\r\n\r\n\tname, ok := resolveAgent(cfg, forgejo.Event{Kind: config.EventPRReview, ReviewID: 42})\r\n\tif !ok || name != \"greg\" {\r\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected greg, got %q, %v\", name, ok)\r\n\t}\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc TestResolveAgentAssignedMatch(t *testing.T) {\r\n\tcfg := testConfig()\r\n\r\n\tname, ok := resolveAgent(cfg, forgejo.Event{Kind: config.EventIssueAssigned, Assignee: \"greg\"})\r\n\tif !ok || name != \"greg\" {\r\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected greg, got %q, %v\", name, ok)\r\n\t}\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc TestResolveAgentAssignedNoMatch(t *testing.T) {\r\n\tcfg := testConfig()\r\n\r\n\t_, ok := resolveAgent(cfg, forgejo.Event{Kind: config.EventIssueAssigned, Assignee: \"not-an-agent\"})\r\n\tif ok {\r\n\t\tt.Fatal(\"expected no agent to resolve for a non-agent assignee\")\r\n\t}\r\n}\r\n\r\ntype fakeForgejo struct {\r\n\tmu sync.Mutex\r\n\tcomments []string\r\n\tlabels []string\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc (f *fakeForgejo) CreateIssueComment(owner, repo string, index int64, body string) error {\r\n\tf.mu.Lock()\r\n\tdefer f.mu.Unlock()\r\n\tf.comments = append(f.comments, body)\r\n\treturn nil\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc (f *fakeForgejo) AddLabel(owner, repo string, index int64, name string) error {\r\n\tf.mu.Lock()\r\n\tdefer f.mu.Unlock()\r\n\tf.labels = append(f.labels, name)\r\n\treturn nil\r\n}\r\n\r\ntype fakeRunner struct {\r\n\tmu sync.Mutex\r\n\trunning int\r\n\tmaxSeen int\r\n\tfail bool\r\n\ttimeoutErr bool\r\n\tblockUntil chan struct{}\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc (f *fakeRunner) Run(ctx context.Context, jobID string, agent config.AgentConfig, llm config.LLM, dockerImage string, ev forgejo.Event) error {\r\n\tf.mu.Lock()\r\n\tf.running++\r\n\tif f.running \u003e f.maxSeen {\r\n\t\tf.maxSeen = f.running\r\n\t}\r\n\tf.mu.Unlock()\r\n\r\n\tif f.blockUntil != nil {\r\n\t\t\u003c-f.blockUntil\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tf.mu.Lock()\r\n\tf.running--\r\n\tf.mu.Unlock()\r\n\r\n\tif f.timeoutErr {\r\n\t\treturn fmt.Errorf(\"agent loop: %w\", context.DeadlineExceeded)\r\n\t}\r","start_line":1,"end_line":120,"total_lines":415,"truncated":true}
Thinking
Let's check the rest of scheduler_test.go, especially `TestSchedulerDropsPRReviewAuthoredByTargetAgent`.
Tool 🔧 read_file {"end_line": 415, "path": "internal/scheduler/scheduler_test.go", "start_line": 120}
Arguments
{"end_line": 415, "path": "internal/scheduler/scheduler_test.go", "start_line": 120}
Result
{"path":"internal/scheduler/scheduler_test.go","content":"\t}\r\n\tif f.fail {\r\n\t\treturn fmt.Errorf(\"boom\")\r\n\t}\r\n\treturn nil\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc newStore(t *testing.T) *store.Store {\r\n\tt.Helper()\r\n\ts, err := store.Open(filepath.Join(t.TempDir(), \"zoo.db\"))\r\n\tif err != nil {\r\n\t\tt.Fatal(err)\r\n\t}\r\n\tt.Cleanup(func() { s.Close() })\r\n\treturn s\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc TestSchedulerDispatchAndSucceed(t *testing.T) {\r\n\tcfg := testConfig()\r\n\tst := newStore(t)\r\n\tfg := \u0026fakeForgejo{}\r\n\trunner := \u0026fakeRunner{}\r\n\tlogger := slog.New(slog.DiscardHandler)\r\n\r\n\tsched := New(cfg, st, fg, runner, livelog.NewHub(), logger)\r\n\r\n\tevents := make(chan forgejo.Event, 1)\r\n\tevents \u003c- forgejo.Event{Kind: config.EventIssueNew, Owner: \"acme\", Repo: \"widgets\", Index: 5}\r\n\tclose(events)\r\n\r\n\tctx, cancel := context.WithTimeout(context.Background(), 2*time.Second)\r\n\tdefer cancel()\r\n\r\n\tsched.Run(ctx, events)\r\n\tsched.Shutdown(ctx)\r\n\r\n\tjobs, err := st.ListJobs(ctx, 10)\r\n\tif err != nil {\r\n\t\tt.Fatal(err)\r\n\t}\r\n\tif len(jobs) != 1 || jobs[0].Status != store.JobSucceeded {\r\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"unexpected jobs: %+v\", jobs)\r\n\t}\r\n\tif len(fg.comments) != 0 || len(fg.labels) != 0 {\r\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected no failure reporting on success, got comments=%v labels=%v\", fg.comments, fg.labels)\r\n\t}\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc TestSchedulerReportsFailure(t *testing.T) {\r\n\tcfg := testConfig()\r\n\tst := newStore(t)\r\n\tfg := \u0026fakeForgejo{}\r\n\trunner := \u0026fakeRunner{fail: true}\r\n\tlogger := slog.New(slog.DiscardHandler)\r\n\r\n\tsched := New(cfg, st, fg, runner, livelog.NewHub(), logger)\r\n\r\n\tevents := make(chan forgejo.Event, 1)\r\n\tevents \u003c- forgejo.Event{Kind: config.EventPRNew, Owner: \"acme\", Repo: \"widgets\", Index: 9}\r\n\tclose(events)\r\n\r\n\tctx, cancel := context.WithTimeout(context.Background(), 2*time.Second)\r\n\tdefer cancel()\r\n\r\n\tsched.Run(ctx, events)\r\n\tsched.Shutdown(ctx)\r\n\r\n\tjobs, err := st.ListJobs(ctx, 10)\r\n\tif err != nil {\r\n\t\tt.Fatal(err)\r\n\t}\r\n\tif len(jobs) != 1 || jobs[0].Status != store.JobFailed {\r\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"unexpected jobs: %+v\", jobs)\r\n\t}\r\n\tif len(fg.comments) != 1 || len(fg.labels) != 1 || fg.labels[0] != FailureLabel {\r\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected failure comment+label, got comments=%v labels=%v\", fg.comments, fg.labels)\r\n\t}\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc TestSchedulerClassifiesTimeout(t *testing.T) {\r\n\tcfg := testConfig()\r\n\tst := newStore(t)\r\n\tfg := \u0026fakeForgejo{}\r\n\trunner := \u0026fakeRunner{timeoutErr: true}\r\n\tlogger := slog.New(slog.DiscardHandler)\r\n\r\n\tsched := New(cfg, st, fg, runner, livelog.NewHub(), logger)\r\n\r\n\tevents := make(chan forgejo.Event, 1)\r\n\tevents \u003c- forgejo.Event{Kind: config.EventIssueNew, Owner: \"acme\", Repo: \"widgets\", Index: 3}\r\n\tclose(events)\r\n\r\n\tctx, cancel := context.WithTimeout(context.Background(), 2*time.Second)\r\n\tdefer cancel()\r\n\r\n\tsched.Run(ctx, events)\r\n\tsched.Shutdown(ctx)\r\n\r\n\tjobs, err := st.ListJobs(ctx, 10)\r\n\tif err != nil {\r\n\t\tt.Fatal(err)\r\n\t}\r\n\tif len(jobs) != 1 || jobs[0].Status != store.JobTimedOut {\r\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected timed_out status, got %+v\", jobs)\r\n\t}\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc TestSchedulerDropsUnresolvedEvent(t *testing.T) {\r\n\tcfg := testConfig()\r\n\tst := newStore(t)\r\n\tfg := \u0026fakeForgejo{}\r\n\trunner := \u0026fakeRunner{}\r\n\tlogger := slog.New(slog.DiscardHandler)\r\n\r\n\tsched := New(cfg, st, fg, runner, livelog.NewHub(), logger)\r\n\r\n\tevents := make(chan forgejo.Event, 1)\r\n\tevents \u003c- forgejo.Event{Kind: config.EventIssueAssigned, Assignee: \"nobody\", Owner: \"acme\", Repo: \"widgets\", Index: 1}\r\n\tclose(events)\r\n\r\n\tctx, cancel := context.WithTimeout(context.Background(), 2*time.Second)\r\n\tdefer cancel()\r\n\r\n\tsched.Run(ctx, events)\r\n\tsched.Shutdown(ctx)\r\n\r\n\tjobs, err := st.ListJobs(ctx, 10)\r\n\tif err != nil {\r\n\t\tt.Fatal(err)\r\n\t}\r\n\tif len(jobs) != 0 {\r\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected no job for unresolved event, got %+v\", jobs)\r\n\t}\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc TestSchedulerDropsEventAuthoredByTargetAgent(t *testing.T) {\r\n\tcfg := testConfig()\r\n\tst := newStore(t)\r\n\tfg := \u0026fakeForgejo{}\r\n\trunner := \u0026fakeRunner{}\r\n\tlogger := slog.New(slog.DiscardHandler)\r\n\r\n\tsched := New(cfg, st, fg, runner, livelog.NewHub(), logger)\r\n\r\n\tevents := make(chan forgejo.Event, 1)\r\n\tevents \u003c- forgejo.Event{Kind: config.EventIssueComment, Author: \"leon\", Owner: \"acme\", Repo: \"widgets\", Index: 1}\r\n\tclose(events)\r\n\r\n\tctx, cancel := context.WithTimeout(context.Background(), 2*time.Second)\r\n\tdefer cancel()\r\n\r\n\tsched.Run(ctx, events)\r\n\tsched.Shutdown(ctx)\r\n\r\n\tjobs, err := st.ListJobs(ctx, 10)\r\n\tif err != nil {\r\n\t\tt.Fatal(err)\r\n\t}\r\n\tif len(jobs) != 0 {\r\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected leon's own comment not to trigger leon, got %+v\", jobs)\r\n\t}\r\n}\r\n\r\n// A review the pr:review agent submits on the same PR must not trigger\r\n// itself: the event's author (the reviewer) is the resolved agent.\r\nfunc TestSchedulerDropsPRReviewAuthoredByTargetAgent(t *testing.T) {\r\n\tcfg := testConfig()\r\n\tst := newStore(t)\r\n\tfg := \u0026fakeForgejo{}\r\n\trunner := \u0026fakeRunner{}\r\n\tlogger := slog.New(slog.DiscardHandler)\r\n\r\n\tsched := New(cfg, st, fg, runner, livelog.NewHub(), logger)\r\n\r\n\tevents := make(chan forgejo.Event, 1)\r\n\tevents \u003c- forgejo.Event{Kind: config.EventPRReview, Author: \"greg\", Owner: \"acme\", Repo: \"widgets\", Index: 9, ReviewID: 42}\r\n\tclose(events)\r\n\r\n\tctx, cancel := context.WithTimeout(context.Background(), 2*time.Second)\r\n\tdefer cancel()\r\n\r\n\tsched.Run(ctx, events)\r\n\tsched.Shutdown(ctx)\r\n\r\n\tjobs, err := st.ListJobs(ctx, 10)\r\n\tif err != nil {\r\n\t\tt.Fatal(err)\r\n\t}\r\n\tif len(jobs) != 0 {\r\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected greg's own review not to trigger greg, got %+v\", jobs)\r\n\t}\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc TestSchedulerDispatchesPRReviewFromSomeoneElse(t *testing.T) {\r\n\tcfg := testConfig()\r\n\tst := newStore(t)\r\n\tfg := \u0026fakeForgejo{}\r\n\trunner := \u0026fakeRunner{}\r\n\tlogger := slog.New(slog.DiscardHandler)\r\n\r\n\tsched := New(cfg, st, fg, runner, livelog.NewHub(), logger)\r\n\r\n\tevents := make(chan forgejo.Event, 1)\r\n\tevents \u003c- forgejo.Event{Kind: config.EventPRReview, Author: \"leon\", Owner: \"acme\", Repo: \"widgets\", Index: 9, ReviewID: 42}\r\n\tclose(events)\r\n\r\n\tctx, cancel := context.WithTimeout(context.Background(), 2*time.Second)\r\n\tdefer cancel()\r\n\r\n\tsched.Run(ctx, events)\r\n\tsched.Shutdown(ctx)\r\n\r\n\tjobs, err := st.ListJobs(ctx, 10)\r\n\tif err != nil {\r\n\t\tt.Fatal(err)\r\n\t}\r\n\tif len(jobs) != 1 || jobs[0].Agent != \"greg\" {\r\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected a review from a different author to dispatch to greg, got %+v\", jobs)\r\n\t}\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc TestSchedulerDispatchesCommentFromSomeoneElse(t *testing.T) {\r\n\tcfg := testConfig()\r\n\tst := newStore(t)\r\n\tfg := \u0026fakeForgejo{}\r\n\trunner := \u0026fakeRunner{}\r\n\tlogger := slog.New(slog.DiscardHandler)\r\n\r\n\tsched := New(cfg, st, fg, runner, livelog.NewHub(), logger)\r\n\r\n\tevents := make(chan forgejo.Event, 1)\r\n\tevents \u003c- forgejo.Event{Kind: config.EventIssueComment, Author: \"greg\", Owner: \"acme\", Repo: \"widgets\", Index: 1}\r\n\tclose(events)\r\n\r\n\tctx, cancel := context.WithTimeout(context.Background(), 2*time.Second)\r\n\tdefer cancel()\r\n\r\n\tsched.Run(ctx, events)\r\n\tsched.Shutdown(ctx)\r\n\r\n\tjobs, err := st.ListJobs(ctx, 10)\r\n\tif err != nil {\r\n\t\tt.Fatal(err)\r\n\t}\r\n\tif len(jobs) != 1 || jobs[0].Agent != \"leon\" {\r\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected a comment from a different author to still dispatch to leon, got %+v\", jobs)\r\n\t}\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc TestSchedulerBackpressure(t *testing.T) {\r\n\tcfg := testConfig()\r\n\tcfg.Environment.MaxLive = 1\r\n\tst := newStore(t)\r\n\tfg := \u0026fakeForgejo{}\r\n\tblock := make(chan struct{})\r\n\trunner := \u0026fakeRunner{blockUntil: block}\r\n\tlogger := slog.New(slog.DiscardHandler)\r\n\r\n\tsched := New(cfg, st, fg, runner, livelog.NewHub(), logger)\r\n\r\n\tevents := make(chan forgejo.Event, 2)\r\n\tevents \u003c- forgejo.Event{Kind: config.EventIssueNew, Owner: \"acme\", Repo: \"widgets\", Index: 1}\r\n\tevents \u003c- forgejo.Event{Kind: config.EventIssueNew, Owner: \"acme\", Repo: \"widgets\", Index: 2}\r\n\tclose(events)\r\n\r\n\tctx, cancel := context.WithTimeout(context.Background(), 5*time.Second)\r\n\tdefer cancel()\r\n\r\n\tdone := make(chan struct{})\r\n\tgo func() {\r\n\t\tsched.Run(ctx, events)\r\n\t\tclose(done)\r\n\t}()\r\n\r\n\t// Give the scheduler a moment to pick up both events; with\r\n\t// max_live_agents=1 only one Run should be in flight at a time.\r\n\ttime.Sleep(200 * time.Millisecond)\r\n\trunner.mu.Lock()\r\n\tmaxSeen := runner.maxSeen\r\n\trunner.mu.Unlock()\r\n\tif maxSeen \u003e 1 {\r\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected at most 1 concurrent run, saw %d\", maxSeen)\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tclose(block)\r\n\t\u003c-done\r\n\tsched.Shutdown(ctx)\r\n\r\n\tjobs, err := st.ListJobs(ctx, 10)\r\n\tif err != nil {\r\n\t\tt.Fatal(err)\r\n\t}\r\n\tif len(jobs) != 2 {\r\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected 2 jobs, got %d\", len(jobs))\r\n\t}\r\n}\r","start_line":120,"end_line":415,"total_lines":415,"truncated":false}
Thinking
Next, let's take a look at the config tests, the seed message, and the system prompt.
Tool 🔧 read_file {"end_line": 130, "path": "internal/config/config_test.go", "start_line": 1}
Arguments
{"end_line": 130, "path": "internal/config/config_test.go", "start_line": 1}
Result
{"path":"internal/config/config_test.go","content":"package config\r\n\r\nimport (\r\n\t\"os\"\r\n\t\"path/filepath\"\r\n\t\"testing\"\r\n)\r\n\r\nfunc load(t *testing.T, hcl string) (*Config, error) {\r\n\tt.Helper()\r\n\r\n\tpath := filepath.Join(t.TempDir(), \"zoo.hcl\")\r\n\tif err := os.WriteFile(path, []byte(hcl), 0o600); err != nil {\r\n\t\tt.Fatal(err)\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\treturn Load(path)\r\n}\r\n\r\nconst validConfig = `\r\nllm \"qwen\" {\r\n openai = \"https://example.com\"\r\n token = \"tok\"\r\n model = \"qwen3\"\r\n}\r\n\r\nforgejo {\r\n url = \"https://example.com\"\r\n token = \"tok\"\r\n}\r\n\r\nenvironment {\r\n docker_image = \"debian:unstable\"\r\n max_live_agents = 2\r\n}\r\n\r\nagent \"leon\" {\r\n llm = \"qwen\"\r\n}\r\n\r\nevent \"issue:new\" {\r\n agent = \"leon\"\r\n}\r\n\r\nevent \"issue:assigned\" {\r\n instructions = \"Please handle this issue.\"\r\n}\r\n\r\nevent \"issue:comment\" {\r\n agent = \"leon\"\r\n instructions = \"Please review the comment and respond appropriately.\"\r\n}\r\n\r\nevent \"pr:new\" {\r\n agent = \"leon\"\r\n}\r\n\r\nevent \"pr:review\" {\r\n agent = \"leon\"\r\n instructions = \"Address the review feedback and respond.\"\r\n}\r\n`\r\n\r\nfunc TestLoadValid(t *testing.T) {\r\n\tcfg, err := load(t, validConfig)\r\n\tif err != nil {\r\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"unexpected error: %v\", err)\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tif len(cfg.LLMs) != 1 || cfg.LLMs[0].Name != \"qwen\" {\r\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"unexpected llms: %+v\", cfg.LLMs)\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tif agent, ok := cfg.EventAgent(EventIssueNew); !ok || agent != \"leon\" {\r\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected issue:new -\u003e leon, got %q, %v\", agent, ok)\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tif _, ok := cfg.EventAgent(EventIssueAssigned); ok {\r\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"issue:assigned should have no static agent\")\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tif got := cfg.EventInstructions(EventIssueAssigned); got != \"Please handle this issue.\" {\r\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"unexpected issue:assigned instructions: %q\", got)\r\n\t}\r\n\tif got := cfg.EventInstructions(EventIssueComment); got != \"Please review the comment and respond appropriately.\" {\r\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"unexpected issue:comment instructions: %q\", got)\r\n\t}\r\n\tif got := cfg.EventInstructions(EventPRNew); got != \"\" {\r\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected no instructions for pr:new, got %q\", got)\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tif agent, ok := cfg.EventAgent(EventPRReview); !ok || agent != \"leon\" {\r\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected pr:review -\u003e leon, got %q, %v\", agent, ok)\r\n\t}\r\n\tif got := cfg.EventInstructions(EventPRReview); got != \"Address the review feedback and respond.\" {\r\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"unexpected pr:review instructions: %q\", got)\r\n\t}\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc TestValidatePRReviewRequiresAgent(t *testing.T) {\r\n\t_, err := load(t, `\r\nllm \"qwen\" { openai = \"https://example.com\" token = \"tok\" model = \"qwen3\" }\r\nforgejo { url = \"https://example.com\" token = \"tok\" }\r\nenvironment { docker_image = \"debian:unstable\" max_live_agents = 1 }\r\nagent \"leon\" { llm = \"qwen\" }\r\nevent \"pr:review\" { instructions = \"no agent set\" }\r\n`)\r\n\tif err == nil {\r\n\t\tt.Fatal(\"expected error for pr:review without an agent\")\r\n\t}\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc TestValidateUndeclaredLLM(t *testing.T) {\r\n\t_, err := load(t, `\r\nforgejo { url = \"https://example.com\" token = \"tok\" }\r\nenvironment { docker_image = \"debian:unstable\" max_live_agents = 1 }\r\nagent \"leon\" { llm = \"missing\" }\r\n`)\r\n\tif err == nil {\r\n\t\tt.Fatal(\"expected error for undeclared llm reference\")\r\n\t}\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc TestValidateUndeclaredEventAgent(t *testing.T) {\r\n\t_, err := load(t, `\r\nllm \"qwen\" { openai = \"https://example.com\" token = \"tok\" model = \"qwen3\" }\r\nforgejo { url = \"https://example.com\" token = \"tok\" }\r\nenvironment { docker_image = \"debian:unstable\" max_live_agents = 1 }\r\nagent \"leon\" { llm = \"qwen\" }\r\nevent \"issue:new\" { agent = \"missing\" }\r","start_line":1,"end_line":130,"total_lines":183,"truncated":true}
Tool 🔧 read_file {"end_line": 435, "path": "internal/agentrun/run.go", "start_line": 260}
Arguments
{"end_line": 435, "path": "internal/agentrun/run.go", "start_line": 260}
Result
{"path":"internal/agentrun/run.go","content":"\t}\r\n\r\n\tmessages := []llm.Message{\r\n\t\t{Role: \"system\", Content: systemPrompt},\r\n\t\t{Role: \"user\", Content: seedMessage(ev, branch, repoInfo.DefaultBranch, instructions, comments, review)},\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\thooks := r.streamHooks(jobID, logAppend)\r\n\r\n\t_, err = runLoop(ctx, llmClient, runCtx, messages, hooks)\r\n\tif err != nil {\r\n\t\treturn fmt.Errorf(\"agent loop: %w\", err)\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tsucceeded = true\r\n\r\n\treturn nil\r\n}\r\n\r\n// streamHooks builds the Hooks a single Run passes to runLoop: every\r\n// delta is published live to the hub for connected dashboard viewers,\r\n// and once a reasoning/content block or tool call is complete, it's\r\n// persisted to the store as one row and the hub's replay buffer for\r\n// jobID is checkpointed — so a viewer connecting from this point on\r\n// sees it via the persisted history instead of a live replay, and is\r\n// never shown it twice.\r\nfunc (r *Runner) streamHooks(jobID string, logAppend func(stream, line string)) Hooks {\r\n\tvar reasoningBuf, contentBuf strings.Builder\r\n\r\n\treasoningOpen, contentOpen := false, false\r\n\r\n\treturn Hooks{\r\n\t\tOnReasoningDelta: func(delta string) {\r\n\t\t\tif !reasoningOpen {\r\n\t\t\t\treasoningOpen = true\r\n\t\t\t\treasoningBuf.Reset()\r\n\t\t\t\tr.hub.Publish(jobID, livelog.Event{Type: livelog.ReasoningStart})\r\n\t\t\t}\r\n\r\n\t\t\treasoningBuf.WriteString(delta)\r\n\t\t\tr.hub.Publish(jobID, livelog.Event{Type: livelog.ReasoningDelta, Text: delta})\r\n\t\t},\r\n\t\tOnContentDelta: func(delta string) {\r\n\t\t\tif !contentOpen {\r\n\t\t\t\tcontentOpen = true\r\n\t\t\t\tcontentBuf.Reset()\r\n\t\t\t\tr.hub.Publish(jobID, livelog.Event{Type: livelog.ContentStart})\r\n\t\t\t}\r\n\r\n\t\t\tcontentBuf.WriteString(delta)\r\n\t\t\tr.hub.Publish(jobID, livelog.Event{Type: livelog.ContentDelta, Text: delta})\r\n\t\t},\r\n\t\tOnTurnEnd: func() {\r\n\t\t\tif reasoningOpen {\r\n\t\t\t\tr.hub.Publish(jobID, livelog.Event{Type: livelog.ReasoningEnd})\r\n\t\t\t\tlogAppend(\"reasoning\", reasoningBuf.String())\r\n\t\t\t\tr.hub.Checkpoint(jobID)\r\n\t\t\t\treasoningOpen = false\r\n\t\t\t}\r\n\r\n\t\t\tif contentOpen {\r\n\t\t\t\tr.hub.Publish(jobID, livelog.Event{Type: livelog.ContentEnd})\r\n\t\t\t\tlogAppend(\"content\", contentBuf.String())\r\n\t\t\t\tr.hub.Checkpoint(jobID)\r\n\t\t\t\tcontentOpen = false\r\n\t\t\t}\r\n\t\t},\r\n\t\tOnTool: func(name, arguments, result string, toolErr bool) {\r\n\t\t\tr.hub.Publish(jobID, livelog.Event{\r\n\t\t\t\tType: livelog.Tool,\r\n\t\t\t\tName: name,\r\n\t\t\t\tArguments: arguments,\r\n\t\t\t\tResult: result,\r\n\t\t\t\tError: toolErr,\r\n\t\t\t})\r\n\r\n\t\t\tline, err := json.Marshal(store.ToolLogEntry{Name: name, Arguments: arguments, Result: result, Error: toolErr})\r\n\t\t\tif err != nil {\r\n\t\t\t\tr.logger.Warn(\"failed to marshal tool log entry\", \"job\", jobID, \"error\", err)\r\n\t\t\t} else {\r\n\t\t\t\tlogAppend(\"tool\", string(line))\r\n\t\t\t}\r\n\r\n\t\t\tr.hub.Checkpoint(jobID)\r\n\t\t},\r\n\t}\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc seedMessage(ev forgejo.Event, branch, defaultBranch, instructions string, comments []forgejo.IssueComment, review *forgejo.ReviewDetail) string {\r\n\traw, _ := json.MarshalIndent(json.RawMessage(ev.Raw), \"\", \" \")\r\n\r\n\tvar instructionsSection string\r\n\tif instructions != \"\" {\r\n\t\tinstructionsSection = fmt.Sprintf(\"Instructions for this event, from zoo.hcl:\\n%s\\n\\n\", instructions)\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\t// A pr:review run works on the PR's own head branch, not a fresh\r\n\t// branch off the default branch.\r\n\tbranchLine := fmt.Sprintf(\"Your working branch is %q, checked out from the default branch %q.\\n\\n\", branch, defaultBranch)\r\n\tif ev.Kind == forgejo.EventPRReview {\r\n\t\tbranchLine = fmt.Sprintf(\"Your working branch is %q, the pull request's head branch — commits you push here update the pull request directly.\\n\\n\", branch)\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tvar reviewSection string\r\n\tif review != nil {\r\n\t\treviewSection = renderReviewSection(review)\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tvar commentsSection string\r\n\tif len(comments) \u003e 0 {\r\n\t\tvar b strings.Builder\r\n\t\tfmt.Fprintf(\u0026b, \"Comments (%d):\\n\\n\", len(comments))\r\n\r\n\t\tfor i, c := range comments {\r\n\t\t\tfmt.Fprintf(\u0026b, \"%d. %s (%s):\\n%s\\n\\n\", i+1, c.Author, c.Created.Format(time.RFC3339), c.Body)\r\n\t\t}\r\n\r\n\t\tcommentsSection = b.String()\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\treturn fmt.Sprintf(\r\n\t\t\"You were triggered by a %q event on %s/%s.\\n\\n\"+\r\n\t\t\t\"%s%s\"+\r\n\t\t\t\"%sTitle: %s\\n\\nBody:\\n%s\\n\\n%sFull event payload:\\n```json\\n%s\\n```\",\r\n\t\tev.Kind, ev.Owner, ev.Repo, instructionsSection, branchLine, reviewSection, ev.Title, ev.Body, commentsSection, raw)\r\n}\r\n\r\n// renderReviewSection renders the submitted review as a briefing\r\n// section: the verdict, the review body, and each inline comment with\r\n// its location and id (the id is what the agent passes to\r\n// resolve_review_comment once it has addressed the feedback).\r\nfunc renderReviewSection(review *forgejo.ReviewDetail) string {\r\n\tvar b strings.Builder\r\n\r\n\tfmt.Fprintf(\u0026b, \"Review submitted by %s:\\n\", review.Reviewer)\r\n\tfmt.Fprintf(\u0026b, \" Verdict: %s\\n\", humanReviewState(review.State))\r\n\r\n\tif review.Body != \"\" {\r\n\t\tb.WriteString(\" Review body:\\n\")\r\n\t\tfor _, line := range strings.Split(review.Body, \"\\n\") {\r\n\t\t\tfmt.Fprintf(\u0026b, \" %s\\n\", line)\r\n\t\t}\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tif len(review.Comments) \u003e 0 {\r\n\t\tfmt.Fprintf(\u0026b, \" Inline comments (%d):\\n\", len(review.Comments))\r\n\r\n\t\tfor i, c := range review.Comments {\r\n\t\t\twhere := c.Path\r\n\t\t\tif c.Line \u003e 0 {\r\n\t\t\t\twhere = fmt.Sprintf(\"%s:%d\", c.Path, c.Line)\r\n\t\t\t}\r\n\r\n\t\t\tfmt.Fprintf(\u0026b, \" %d. [%s] %s (comment id %d):\\n\", i+1, where, c.Author, c.ID)\r\n\t\t\tfor _, line := range strings.Split(c.Body, \"\\n\") {\r\n\t\t\t\tfmt.Fprintf(\u0026b, \" %s\\n\", line)\r\n\t\t\t}\r\n\t\t}\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\treturn b.String() + \"\\n\"\r\n}\r\n\r\n// humanReviewState maps a Forgejo review state to a readable verdict.\r\nfunc humanReviewState(state string) string {\r\n\tswitch state {\r\n\tcase \"APPROVED\":\r\n\t\treturn \"approved\"\r\n\tcase \"REQUEST_CHANGES\":\r\n\t\treturn \"changes requested\"\r\n\tcase \"COMMENT\":\r\n\t\treturn \"comment\"\r\n\tdefault:\r\n\t\treturn state\r\n\t}\r\n}\r","start_line":260,"end_line":435,"total_lines":435,"truncated":false}
Thinking
Next, let's check the remaining parts:
1. The rest of config_test.go (lines 130-183)
2. The pr:review section in webhook_test.go
3. The pr:review section in poll_test.go
4. seed_test.go
5. system.md
6. tools/forgejo.go (the description of submit_review mentions pr:review)
After that, I'll make the following changes:
1. `internal/forgejo/event.go`: Add a `PRAuthor` field to Event.
2. `internal/forgejo/webhook.go`: Set `PRAuthor` in `pullRequestReviewEvent` (and possibly in `pullRequestEvent` for consistency).
3. `internal/forgejo/poll.go`: Set `PRAuthor` in `reviewToEvent` (and possibly in `issueToPRNewEvent`).
4. `internal/config/config.go`: Move `EventPRReview` from `staticEventKinds` to the dynamic group (must not set agent).
5. `internal/scheduler/scheduler.go`: `resolveAgent` handles `EventPRReview` dynamically via `ev.PRAuthor`.
6. `zoo.hcl.example`: Remove `agent = "greg"` from the pr:review block and update the comment.
7. Tests:
- config_test.go: Update validConfig (pr:review without agent), update TestLoadValid, replace TestValidatePRReviewRequiresAgent with TestValidatePRReviewRejectsAgent.
- scheduler_test.go: Update testConfig (remove Agent from the pr:review event), update TestResolveAgentPRReviewStatic → make it dynamic (PRAuthor match / no match), update TestSchedulerDropsPRReviewAuthoredByTargetAgent (event with PRAuthor greg + Author greg → drop), update TestSchedulerDispatchesPRReviewFromSomeoneElse (PRAuthor greg, Author leon → dispatch to greg).
- webhook_test.go: Assert PRAuthor on pr:review events.
- poll_test.go: Assert PRAuthor on pr:review events.
- seed_test.go: Check whether there's anything about the static agent.
Let's read the remaining files.
Tool 🔧 read_file {"end_line": 183, "path": "internal/config/config_test.go", "start_line": 130}
Arguments
{"end_line": 183, "path": "internal/config/config_test.go", "start_line": 130}
Result
{"path":"internal/config/config_test.go","content":"event \"issue:new\" { agent = \"missing\" }\r\n`)\r\n\tif err == nil {\r\n\t\tt.Fatal(\"expected error for undeclared agent reference\")\r\n\t}\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc TestValidateIssueAssignedRejectsAgent(t *testing.T) {\r\n\t_, err := load(t, `\r\nllm \"qwen\" { openai = \"https://example.com\" token = \"tok\" model = \"qwen3\" }\r\nforgejo { url = \"https://example.com\" token = \"tok\" }\r\nenvironment { docker_image = \"debian:unstable\" max_live_agents = 1 }\r\nagent \"leon\" { llm = \"qwen\" }\r\nevent \"issue:assigned\" { agent = \"leon\" }\r\n`)\r\n\tif err == nil {\r\n\t\tt.Fatal(\"expected error: issue:assigned must not set agent\")\r\n\t}\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc TestValidateMaxLiveAgents(t *testing.T) {\r\n\t_, err := load(t, `\r\nllm \"qwen\" { openai = \"https://example.com\" token = \"tok\" model = \"qwen3\" }\r\nforgejo { url = \"https://example.com\" token = \"tok\" }\r\nenvironment { docker_image = \"debian:unstable\" max_live_agents = 0 }\r\n`)\r\n\tif err == nil {\r\n\t\tt.Fatal(\"expected error for max_live_agents \u003c 1\")\r\n\t}\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc TestValidateMissingDockerImage(t *testing.T) {\r\n\t_, err := load(t, `\r\nllm \"qwen\" { openai = \"https://example.com\" token = \"tok\" model = \"qwen3\" }\r\nforgejo { url = \"https://example.com\" token = \"tok\" }\r\nenvironment { docker_image = \"\" max_live_agents = 1 }\r\n`)\r\n\tif err == nil {\r\n\t\tt.Fatal(\"expected error for missing docker_image\")\r\n\t}\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc TestValidateUnknownEventKind(t *testing.T) {\r\n\t_, err := load(t, `\r\nllm \"qwen\" { openai = \"https://example.com\" token = \"tok\" model = \"qwen3\" }\r\nforgejo { url = \"https://example.com\" token = \"tok\" }\r\nenvironment { docker_image = \"debian:unstable\" max_live_agents = 1 }\r\nagent \"leon\" { llm = \"qwen\" }\r\nevent \"pr:sync\" { agent = \"leon\" }\r\n`)\r\n\tif err == nil {\r\n\t\tt.Fatal(\"expected error for unknown event kind\")\r\n\t}\r\n}\r","start_line":130,"end_line":183,"total_lines":183,"truncated":false}
Tool 🔧 read_file {"end_line": 292, "path": "internal/forgejo/webhook_test.go", "start_line": 150}
Arguments
{"end_line": 292, "path": "internal/forgejo/webhook_test.go", "start_line": 150}
Result
{"path":"internal/forgejo/webhook_test.go","content":"\t\tt.Fatal(err)\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tsecond, _, err := decodeWebhookEvent(\"issues\", []byte(issueReassignedPayload))\r\n\tif err != nil {\r\n\t\tt.Fatal(err)\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tif second.Assignee != \"leon\" {\r\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"unexpected assignee: %q\", second.Assignee)\r\n\t}\r\n\tif first.ID == second.ID {\r\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"re-assignment reused the dedup id %q, so it would be dropped\", first.ID)\r\n\t}\r\n}\r\n\r\n// The webhook delivery and the poller's later sighting of that one\r\n// assignment must still collapse onto a single id, so it runs once.\r\nfunc TestAssignedIDMatchesAcrossWebhookAndPoll(t *testing.T) {\r\n\tev, _, err := decodeWebhookEvent(\"issues\", []byte(issueAssignedPayload))\r\n\tif err != nil {\r\n\t\tt.Fatal(err)\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tupdated, err := time.Parse(time.RFC3339, \"2026-08-20T10:00:00Z\")\r\n\tif err != nil {\r\n\t\tt.Fatal(err)\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tif polled := issueAssignedID(101, \"leon\", updated); polled != ev.ID {\r\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"poll id %q does not match webhook id %q\", polled, ev.ID)\r\n\t}\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc TestDecodeIssueCommentCreated(t *testing.T) {\r\n\tev, ok, err := decodeWebhookEvent(\"issue_comment\", []byte(issueCommentCreatedPayload))\r\n\tif err != nil {\r\n\t\tt.Fatal(err)\r\n\t}\r\n\tif !ok {\r\n\t\tt.Fatal(\"expected an event\")\r\n\t}\r\n\tif ev.Kind != EventIssueComment || ev.Comment != \"any update?\" || ev.Author != \"bob\" {\r\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"unexpected event: %+v\", ev)\r\n\t}\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc TestDecodePullRequestOpened(t *testing.T) {\r\n\tev, ok, err := decodeWebhookEvent(\"pull_request\", []byte(pullRequestOpenedPayload))\r\n\tif err != nil {\r\n\t\tt.Fatal(err)\r\n\t}\r\n\tif !ok {\r\n\t\tt.Fatal(\"expected an event\")\r\n\t}\r\n\tif ev.Kind != EventPRNew || ev.Index != 9 || ev.Author != \"greg\" {\r\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"unexpected event: %+v\", ev)\r\n\t}\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc TestDecodePullRequestReviewSubmitted(t *testing.T) {\r\n\tev, ok, err := decodeWebhookEvent(\"pull_request_review\", []byte(pullRequestReviewSubmittedPayload))\r\n\tif err != nil {\r\n\t\tt.Fatal(err)\r\n\t}\r\n\tif !ok {\r\n\t\tt.Fatal(\"expected an event\")\r\n\t}\r\n\tif ev.Kind != EventPRReview {\r\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected pr:review, got %q\", ev.Kind)\r\n\t}\r\n\tif ev.Owner != \"acme\" || ev.Repo != \"widgets\" || ev.Index != 9 {\r\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"unexpected owner/repo/index: %+v\", ev)\r\n\t}\r\n\t// The author is the reviewer, not the PR author.\r\n\tif ev.Author != \"leon\" {\r\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected reviewer as author, got %q\", ev.Author)\r\n\t}\r\n\tif ev.ReviewID != 42 || ev.ReviewState != \"REQUEST_CHANGES\" || ev.ReviewBody != \"Please address the inline comments.\" {\r\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"unexpected review fields: %+v\", ev)\r\n\t}\r\n\tif ev.HeadRef != \"issue-9-greg\" {\r\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected head ref issue-9-greg, got %q\", ev.HeadRef)\r\n\t}\r\n\tif ev.ID != \"pr-review-42\" {\r\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"unexpected dedup id: %q\", ev.ID)\r\n\t}\r\n}\r\n\r\n// Only a submitted review triggers a run: an edit or dismissal of a\r\n// review that already triggered one is a follow-up, not new feedback.\r\nfunc TestDecodePullRequestReviewIgnoresNonSubmitted(t *testing.T) {\r\n\tfor _, action := range []string{\"edited\", \"dismissed\", \"pending\"} {\r\n\t\tpayload := strings.Replace(pullRequestReviewSubmittedPayload, `\"action\": \"submitted\"`, `\"action\": \"`+action+`\"`, 1)\r\n\r\n\t\tif _, ok, err := decodeWebhookEvent(\"pull_request_review\", []byte(payload)); err != nil {\r\n\t\t\tt.Fatalf(\"action %s: unexpected error: %v\", action, err)\r\n\t\t} else if ok {\r\n\t\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected action %s to be ignored\", action)\r\n\t\t}\r\n\t}\r\n}\r\n\r\n// The webhook delivery and the poller's later sighting of the same\r\n// review must collapse onto a single dedup id, so it runs once.\r\nfunc TestReviewIDMatchesAcrossWebhookAndPoll(t *testing.T) {\r\n\tev, _, err := decodeWebhookEvent(\"pull_request_review\", []byte(pullRequestReviewSubmittedPayload))\r\n\tif err != nil {\r\n\t\tt.Fatal(err)\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tif polled := prReviewID(42); polled != ev.ID {\r\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"poll id %q does not match webhook id %q\", polled, ev.ID)\r\n\t}\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc TestDecodeIgnoresUnknownAction(t *testing.T) {\r\n\t_, ok, err := decodeWebhookEvent(\"issues\", []byte(`{\"action\": \"closed\", \"issue\": {\"id\": 1}, \"repository\": {\"name\": \"x\", \"owner\": {\"login\": \"y\"}}}`))\r\n\tif err != nil {\r\n\t\tt.Fatal(err)\r\n\t}\r\n\tif ok {\r\n\t\tt.Fatal(\"expected closed action to be ignored\")\r\n\t}\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc TestDecodeIgnoresUnknownEventKind(t *testing.T) {\r\n\t_, ok, err := decodeWebhookEvent(\"release\", []byte(`{}`))\r\n\tif err != nil {\r\n\t\tt.Fatal(err)\r\n\t}\r\n\tif ok {\r\n\t\tt.Fatal(\"expected unknown event kind to be ignored\")\r\n\t}\r\n}\r","start_line":150,"end_line":284,"total_lines":284,"truncated":false}
Thinking
Let's check the webhook test payload (pullRequestReviewSubmittedPayload) to see what the PR poster is, and also take a look at poll_test.go.
Tool 🔧 read_file {"end_line": 150, "path": "internal/forgejo/webhook_test.go", "start_line": 1}
Arguments
{"end_line": 150, "path": "internal/forgejo/webhook_test.go", "start_line": 1}
Result
{"path":"internal/forgejo/webhook_test.go","content":"package forgejo\r\n\r\nimport (\r\n\t\"strings\"\r\n\t\"testing\"\r\n\t\"time\"\r\n)\r\n\r\nconst issueOpenedPayload = `{\r\n \"action\": \"opened\",\r\n \"issue\": {\r\n \"id\": 101,\r\n \"number\": 5,\r\n \"title\": \"Something is broken\",\r\n \"body\": \"Steps to reproduce...\",\r\n \"user\": {\"login\": \"alice\"},\r\n \"assignees\": []\r\n },\r\n \"repository\": {\r\n \"name\": \"widgets\",\r\n \"owner\": {\"login\": \"acme\"}\r\n }\r\n}`\r\n\r\nconst issueAssignedPayload = `{\r\n \"action\": \"assigned\",\r\n \"issue\": {\r\n \"id\": 101,\r\n \"number\": 5,\r\n \"title\": \"Something is broken\",\r\n \"updated_at\": \"2026-08-20T10:00:00Z\",\r\n \"user\": {\"login\": \"alice\"},\r\n \"assignees\": [{\"login\": \"leon\"}]\r\n },\r\n \"repository\": {\r\n \"name\": \"widgets\",\r\n \"owner\": {\"login\": \"acme\"}\r\n }\r\n}`\r\n\r\n// The same issue assigned to the same agent a second time, later.\r\nconst issueReassignedPayload = `{\r\n \"action\": \"assigned\",\r\n \"issue\": {\r\n \"id\": 101,\r\n \"number\": 5,\r\n \"title\": \"Something is broken\",\r\n \"updated_at\": \"2026-08-20T11:30:00Z\",\r\n \"user\": {\"login\": \"alice\"},\r\n \"assignees\": [{\"login\": \"leon\"}]\r\n },\r\n \"repository\": {\r\n \"name\": \"widgets\",\r\n \"owner\": {\"login\": \"acme\"}\r\n }\r\n}`\r\n\r\nconst issueCommentCreatedPayload = `{\r\n \"action\": \"created\",\r\n \"issue\": {\r\n \"id\": 101,\r\n \"number\": 5,\r\n \"title\": \"Something is broken\",\r\n \"user\": {\"login\": \"alice\"}\r\n },\r\n \"comment\": {\r\n \"id\": 55,\r\n \"body\": \"any update?\",\r\n \"user\": {\"login\": \"bob\"}\r\n },\r\n \"repository\": {\r\n \"name\": \"widgets\",\r\n \"owner\": {\"login\": \"acme\"}\r\n }\r\n}`\r\n\r\nconst pullRequestOpenedPayload = `{\r\n \"action\": \"opened\",\r\n \"pull_request\": {\r\n \"id\": 202,\r\n \"number\": 9,\r\n \"title\": \"Fix the thing\",\r\n \"body\": \"This fixes it\",\r\n \"user\": {\"login\": \"greg\"}\r\n },\r\n \"repository\": {\r\n \"name\": \"widgets\",\r\n \"owner\": {\"login\": \"acme\"}\r\n }\r\n}`\r\n\r\nconst pullRequestReviewSubmittedPayload = `{\r\n \"action\": \"submitted\",\r\n \"review\": {\r\n \"id\": 42,\r\n \"user\": {\"login\": \"leon\"},\r\n \"state\": \"REQUEST_CHANGES\",\r\n \"body\": \"Please address the inline comments.\",\r\n \"submitted_at\": \"2026-08-24T10:00:00Z\"\r\n },\r\n \"pull_request\": {\r\n \"id\": 202,\r\n \"number\": 9,\r\n \"title\": \"Fix the thing\",\r\n \"body\": \"This fixes it\",\r\n \"user\": {\"login\": \"greg\"},\r\n \"head\": {\"ref\": \"issue-9-greg\"}\r\n },\r\n \"repository\": {\r\n \"name\": \"widgets\",\r\n \"owner\": {\"login\": \"acme\"}\r\n }\r\n}`\r\n\r\nfunc TestDecodeIssueOpened(t *testing.T) {\r\n\tev, ok, err := decodeWebhookEvent(\"issues\", []byte(issueOpenedPayload))\r\n\tif err != nil {\r\n\t\tt.Fatal(err)\r\n\t}\r\n\tif !ok {\r\n\t\tt.Fatal(\"expected an event\")\r\n\t}\r\n\tif ev.Kind != EventIssueNew || ev.Owner != \"acme\" || ev.Repo != \"widgets\" || ev.Index != 5 || ev.Author != \"alice\" {\r\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"unexpected event: %+v\", ev)\r\n\t}\r\n\tif ev.ID != \"issue-new-101\" {\r\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"unexpected dedup id: %q\", ev.ID)\r\n\t}\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc TestDecodeIssueAssigned(t *testing.T) {\r\n\tev, ok, err := decodeWebhookEvent(\"issues\", []byte(issueAssignedPayload))\r\n\tif err != nil {\r\n\t\tt.Fatal(err)\r\n\t}\r\n\tif !ok {\r\n\t\tt.Fatal(\"expected an event\")\r\n\t}\r\n\tif ev.Kind != EventIssueAssigned || ev.Assignee != \"leon\" {\r\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"unexpected event: %+v\", ev)\r\n\t}\r\n}\r\n\r\n// Assigning an issue to an agent that already held it once has to\r\n// produce a distinct dedup id, or the watcher swallows it as already\r\n// seen and the agent never picks the issue up again.\r\nfunc TestDecodeIssueReassignedToSameAgentIsNotDeduped(t *testing.T) {\r\n\tfirst, _, err := decodeWebhookEvent(\"issues\", []byte(issueAssignedPayload))\r\n\tif err != nil {\r\n\t\tt.Fatal(err)\r","start_line":1,"end_line":150,"total_lines":284,"truncated":true}
Tool 🔧 read_file {"path": "internal/forgejo/poll_test.go", "start_line": 1, "end_line": 200}
Arguments
{"path": "internal/forgejo/poll_test.go", "start_line": 1, "end_line": 200}
Result
{"path":"internal/forgejo/poll_test.go","content":"package forgejo\r\n\r\nimport (\r\n\t\"context\"\r\n\t\"encoding/json\"\r\n\t\"log/slog\"\r\n\t\"net/http\"\r\n\t\"path/filepath\"\r\n\t\"testing\"\r\n\t\"time\"\r\n\r\n\tsdk \"codeberg.org/mvdkleijn/forgejo-sdk/forgejo/v2\"\r\n\r\n\t\"github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/config\"\r\n\t\"github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/store\"\r\n)\r\n\r\nfunc newTestStore(t *testing.T) *store.Store {\r\n\tt.Helper()\r\n\r\n\tst, err := store.Open(filepath.Join(t.TempDir(), \"zoo.db\"))\r\n\tif err != nil {\r\n\t\tt.Fatal(err)\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tt.Cleanup(func() { st.Close() })\r\n\r\n\treturn st\r\n}\r\n\r\n// newTestWatcher returns a Watcher whose client talks to the test\r\n// server and whose events can be read from Events().\r\nfunc newTestWatcher(t *testing.T, serverURL string) *Watcher {\r\n\tt.Helper()\r\n\r\n\tclient, err := NewClient(config.Forgejo{URL: serverURL, Token: \"test\"})\r\n\tif err != nil {\r\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"new client: %v\", err)\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\treturn NewWatcher(client, newTestStore(t), \"\", slog.New(slog.DiscardHandler))\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc TestPollReviewsDispatchesNewReview(t *testing.T) {\r\n\tserver, mux := newTestServer(t)\r\n\r\n\tmux.HandleFunc(\"/api/v1/repos/acme/widgets/pulls/9/reviews\", func(w http.ResponseWriter, r *http.Request) {\r\n\t\tw.Header().Set(\"Content-Type\", \"application/json\")\r\n\t\t_ = json.NewEncoder(w).Encode([]map[string]any{\r\n\t\t\t{\r\n\t\t\t\t\"id\": 42,\r\n\t\t\t\t\"user\": map[string]string{\"login\": \"leon\"},\r\n\t\t\t\t\"state\": \"REQUEST_CHANGES\",\r\n\t\t\t\t\"body\": \"Please address the inline comments.\",\r\n\t\t\t\t\"submitted_at\": \"2026-08-24T10:00:00Z\",\r\n\t\t\t},\r\n\t\t})\r\n\t})\r\n\r\n\tw := newTestWatcher(t, server.URL)\r\n\tsince := time.Date(2026, 8, 24, 9, 0, 0, 0, time.UTC)\r\n\r\n\tw.pollReviews(context.Background(), \"acme\", \"widgets\", \u0026sdk.Issue{Index: 9, Title: \"Fix the thing\", Body: \"This fixes it\"}, since)\r\n\r\n\tselect {\r\n\tcase ev := \u003c-w.Events():\r\n\t\tif ev.Kind != EventPRReview {\r\n\t\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected pr:review, got %q\", ev.Kind)\r\n\t\t}\r\n\t\tif ev.Owner != \"acme\" || ev.Repo != \"widgets\" || ev.Index != 9 {\r\n\t\t\tt.Fatalf(\"unexpected owner/repo/index: %+v\", ev)\r\n\t\t}\r\n\t\tif ev.Author != \"leon\" {\r\n\t\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected reviewer as author, got %q\", ev.Author)\r\n\t\t}\r\n\t\tif ev.ReviewID != 42 || ev.ReviewState != \"REQUEST_CHANGES\" || ev.ReviewBody != \"Please address the inline comments.\" {\r\n\t\t\tt.Fatalf(\"unexpected review fields: %+v\", ev)\r\n\t\t}\r\n\t\tif ev.ID != \"pr-review-42\" {\r\n\t\t\tt.Fatalf(\"unexpected dedup id: %q\", ev.ID)\r\n\t\t}\r\n\tdefault:\r\n\t\tt.Fatal(\"expected a dispatched review event, got none\")\r\n\t}\r\n}\r\n\r\n// A review submitted before the watermark, and a pending (unsubmitted)\r\n// review, must not be dispatched.\r\nfunc TestPollReviewsSkipsOldAndPending(t *testing.T) {\r\n\tserver, mux := newTestServer(t)\r\n\r\n\tmux.HandleFunc(\"/api/v1/repos/acme/widgets/pulls/9/reviews\", func(w http.ResponseWriter, r *http.Request) {\r\n\t\tw.Header().Set(\"Content-Type\", \"application/json\")\r\n\t\t_ = json.NewEncoder(w).Encode([]map[string]any{\r\n\t\t\t{\r\n\t\t\t\t// Submitted before `since` — already seen.\r\n\t\t\t\t\"id\": 41,\r\n\t\t\t\t\"user\": map[string]string{\"login\": \"leon\"},\r\n\t\t\t\t\"state\": \"APPROVED\",\r\n\t\t\t\t\"body\": \"lgtm\",\r\n\t\t\t\t\"submitted_at\": \"2026-08-24T08:00:00Z\",\r\n\t\t\t},\r\n\t\t\t{\r\n\t\t\t\t// Pending — no submitted_at, no verdict yet.\r\n\t\t\t\t\"id\": 43,\r\n\t\t\t\t\"user\": map[string]string{\"login\": \"greg\"},\r\n\t\t\t\t\"state\": \"PENDING\",\r\n\t\t\t\t\"body\": \"\",\r\n\t\t\t},\r\n\t\t})\r\n\t})\r\n\r\n\tw := newTestWatcher(t, server.URL)\r\n\tsince := time.Date(2026, 8, 24, 9, 0, 0, 0, time.UTC)\r\n\r\n\tw.pollReviews(context.Background(), \"acme\", \"widgets\", \u0026sdk.Issue{Index: 9}, since)\r\n\r\n\tselect {\r\n\tcase ev := \u003c-w.Events():\r\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected no event, got %+v\", ev)\r\n\tdefault:\r\n\t}\r\n}\r\n\r\n// A review the poller dispatches must carry the same dedup id the\r\n// webhook path would, so a review seen by both runs once.\r\nfunc TestPollReviewIDMatchesWebhook(t *testing.T) {\r\n\tserver, mux := newTestServer(t)\r\n\r\n\tmux.HandleFunc(\"/api/v1/repos/acme/widgets/pulls/9/reviews\", func(w http.ResponseWriter, r *http.Request) {\r\n\t\tw.Header().Set(\"Content-Type\", \"application/json\")\r\n\t\t_ = json.NewEncoder(w).Encode([]map[string]any{\r\n\t\t\t{\r\n\t\t\t\t\"id\": 42,\r\n\t\t\t\t\"user\": map[string]string{\"login\": \"leon\"},\r\n\t\t\t\t\"state\": \"COMMENT\",\r\n\t\t\t\t\"body\": \"a thought\",\r\n\t\t\t\t\"submitted_at\": \"2026-08-24T10:00:00Z\",\r\n\t\t\t},\r\n\t\t})\r\n\t})\r\n\r\n\tw := newTestWatcher(t, server.URL)\r\n\tsince := time.Date(2026, 8, 24, 9, 0, 0, 0, time.UTC)\r\n\r\n\tw.pollReviews(context.Background(), \"acme\", \"widgets\", \u0026sdk.Issue{Index: 9}, since)\r\n\r\n\tselect {\r\n\tcase ev := \u003c-w.Events():\r\n\t\tif ev.ID != prReviewID(42) {\r\n\t\t\tt.Fatalf(\"poll id %q does not match webhook id %q\", ev.ID, prReviewID(42))\r\n\t\t}\r\n\tdefault:\r\n\t\tt.Fatal(\"expected a dispatched review event, got none\")\r\n\t}\r\n}\r","start_line":1,"end_line":156,"total_lines":156,"truncated":false}
Thinking
Next, let's check seed_test.go and system.md, and also the PR author field of the `sdk.Issue` struct (Poster). In poll.go, `issueToPRNewEvent` uses `posterName(issue.Poster)`, so `sdk.Issue` has a `Poster` field. In `reviewToEvent(pr *sdk.Issue, ...)`, we can use `posterName(pr.Poster)` for the PR author.
Let's check seed_test.go and system.md.
Tool 🔧 read_file {"path": "internal/agentrun/seed_test.go", "start_line": 1, "end_line": 200}
Arguments
{"path": "internal/agentrun/seed_test.go", "start_line": 1, "end_line": 200}
Result
{"path":"internal/agentrun/seed_test.go","content":"package agentrun\r\n\r\nimport (\r\n\t\"strings\"\r\n\t\"testing\"\r\n\t\"time\"\r\n\r\n\t\"github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/forgejo\"\r\n)\r\n\r\nfunc TestSeedMessageIncludesInstructions(t *testing.T) {\r\n\tev := forgejo.Event{Kind: \"issue:comment\", Owner: \"acme\", Repo: \"widgets\", Index: 5, Title: \"t\", Body: \"b\", Raw: []byte(`{}`)}\r\n\r\n\tmsg := seedMessage(ev, \"issue-5-leon\", \"main\", \"Please review the comment and respond appropriately.\", nil, nil)\r\n\r\n\tif !strings.Contains(msg, \"Instructions for this event, from zoo.hcl:\\nPlease review the comment and respond appropriately.\") {\r\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected instructions section, got: %s\", msg)\r\n\t}\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc TestSeedMessageOmitsEmptyInstructions(t *testing.T) {\r\n\tev := forgejo.Event{Kind: \"pr:new\", Owner: \"acme\", Repo: \"widgets\", Index: 9, Raw: []byte(`{}`)}\r\n\r\n\tmsg := seedMessage(ev, \"issue-9-greg\", \"main\", \"\", nil, nil)\r\n\r\n\tif strings.Contains(msg, \"Instructions for this event\") {\r\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected no instructions section, got: %s\", msg)\r\n\t}\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc TestSeedMessageIncludesAllComments(t *testing.T) {\r\n\tev := forgejo.Event{Kind: \"issue:assigned\", Owner: \"acme\", Repo: \"widgets\", Index: 5, Title: \"t\", Body: \"b\", Raw: []byte(`{}`)}\r\n\r\n\tcomments := []forgejo.IssueComment{\r\n\t\t{Author: \"alice\", Body: \"Please also handle the edge case.\", Created: time.Date(2026, 8, 24, 9, 0, 0, 0, time.UTC)},\r\n\t\t{Author: \"bob\", Body: \"And add a test for it.\", Created: time.Date(2026, 8, 24, 9, 5, 0, 0, time.UTC)},\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tmsg := seedMessage(ev, \"issue-5-greg\", \"main\", \"\", comments, nil)\r\n\r\n\tfor _, want := range []string{\r\n\t\t\"Comments (2):\",\r\n\t\t\"1. alice (2026-08-24T09:00:00Z):\\nPlease also handle the edge case.\",\r\n\t\t\"2. bob (2026-08-24T09:05:00Z):\\nAnd add a test for it.\",\r\n\t} {\r\n\t\tif !strings.Contains(msg, want) {\r\n\t\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected %q in seed message, got:\\n%s\", want, msg)\r\n\t\t}\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\t// Comments come before the raw payload, so the agent reads them\r\n\t// as part of the briefing, not buried in JSON.\r\n\tif !strings.Contains(msg, \"Comments (2):\") ||\r\n\t\tstrings.Index(msg, \"Comments (2):\") \u003e strings.Index(msg, \"Full event payload:\") {\r\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected comments section before the raw payload, got:\\n%s\", msg)\r\n\t}\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc TestSeedMessageOmitsEmptyComments(t *testing.T) {\r\n\tev := forgejo.Event{Kind: \"issue:new\", Owner: \"acme\", Repo: \"widgets\", Index: 5, Title: \"t\", Body: \"b\", Raw: []byte(`{}`)}\r\n\r\n\tmsg := seedMessage(ev, \"issue-5-greg\", \"main\", \"\", nil, nil)\r\n\r\n\tif strings.Contains(msg, \"Comments\") {\r\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected no comments section, got: %s\", msg)\r\n\t}\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc TestSeedMessageIncludesReview(t *testing.T) {\r\n\tev := forgejo.Event{\r\n\t\tKind: forgejo.EventPRReview,\r\n\t\tOwner: \"acme\",\r\n\t\tRepo: \"widgets\",\r\n\t\tIndex: 9,\r\n\t\tTitle: \"Fix the thing\",\r\n\t\tBody: \"This fixes it\",\r\n\t\tReviewID: 42,\r\n\t\tReviewState: \"REQUEST_CHANGES\",\r\n\t\tReviewBody: \"Please address the inline comments.\",\r\n\t\tRaw: []byte(`{}`),\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\treview := \u0026forgejo.ReviewDetail{\r\n\t\tID: 42,\r\n\t\tState: \"REQUEST_CHANGES\",\r\n\t\tBody: \"Please address the inline comments.\",\r\n\t\tReviewer: \"leon\",\r\n\t\tComments: []forgejo.ReviewCommentDetail{\r\n\t\t\t{ID: 7, Path: \"src/foo.go\", Line: 42, Body: \"This is wrong.\", Author: \"leon\"},\r\n\t\t\t{ID: 8, Path: \"src/bar.go\", Line: 0, Body: \"And this.\", Author: \"leon\"},\r\n\t\t},\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tmsg := seedMessage(ev, \"feature-branch\", \"main\", \"\", nil, review)\r\n\r\n\tfor _, want := range []string{\r\n\t\t\"the pull request's head branch\",\r\n\t\t\"Review submitted by leon:\",\r\n\t\t\"Verdict: changes requested\",\r\n\t\t\"Review body:\",\r\n\t\t\"Please address the inline comments.\",\r\n\t\t\"Inline comments (2):\",\r\n\t\t\"[src/foo.go:42] leon (comment id 7):\",\r\n\t\t\"This is wrong.\",\r\n\t\t\"[src/bar.go] leon (comment id 8):\",\r\n\t\t\"And this.\",\r\n\t} {\r\n\t\tif !strings.Contains(msg, want) {\r\n\t\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected %q in seed message, got:\\n%s\", want, msg)\r\n\t\t}\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\t// The review section comes before the raw payload, so the agent\r\n\t// reads it as part of the briefing, not buried in JSON.\r\n\tif strings.Index(msg, \"Review submitted by\") \u003e strings.Index(msg, \"Full event payload:\") {\r\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected review section before the raw payload, got:\\n%s\", msg)\r\n\t}\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc TestSeedMessageOmitsNilReview(t *testing.T) {\r\n\tev := forgejo.Event{Kind: forgejo.EventPRReview, Owner: \"acme\", Repo: \"widgets\", Index: 9, Raw: []byte(`{}`)}\r\n\r\n\tmsg := seedMessage(ev, \"feature-branch\", \"main\", \"\", nil, nil)\r\n\r\n\tif strings.Contains(msg, \"Review submitted by\") {\r\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected no review section, got: %s\", msg)\r\n\t}\r\n}\r","start_line":1,"end_line":128,"total_lines":128,"truncated":false}
Tool 🔧 read_file {"path": "internal/agentrun/system.md", "start_line": 1, "end_line": 120}
Arguments
{"path": "internal/agentrun/system.md", "start_line": 1, "end_line": 120}
Result
{"path":"internal/agentrun/system.md","content":"You are an autonomous coding agent working inside `zoo`, a system that\r\ntriggers you from Forgejo (a Gitea-family forge) issue/PR events.\r\n\r\n**Your environment**\r\n\r\n- Your working tree is at `/project`, checked out on the working branch\r\n named in your briefing below. For most events that's a fresh branch\r\n off the repository's default branch; for a PR review event it's the\r\n pull request's own head branch, so commits you push update the PR\r\n directly. Only `/project` persists; nothing outside it survives\r\n between tool calls.\r\n- The event that triggered you (issue or pull request JSON) is available\r\n at `/event` inside the container, and is also included below.\r\n- You have a real git remote configured with push access. When you're\r\n done, `git add`/`git commit`/`git push` your branch — that's how your\r\n work gets saved. Nothing is persisted automatically.\r\n\r\n**Tools**\r\n\r\n- `bash`, `git`, `read_file`, `write_file`, `list_files`, `grep_search`,\r\n `move_file`, `remove_file` operate on the project container.\r\n- `comment`, `open_pull_request`, `request_review`, `submit_review`,\r\n `resolve_review_comment`, `add_label`, `remove_label`, `close_issue`,\r\n `reopen_issue`, `assign_issue` act directly on the Forgejo issue/PR\r\n that triggered this run — use `comment` to report back to the person\r\n who filed it, `open_pull_request` once you've pushed a branch with\r\n your changes, `submit_review` to leave a review verdict, and\r\n `resolve_review_comment` to mark addressed inline review comments as\r\n resolved.\r\n\r\nBelow, in \"Your identity\" and \"Other agents\", you'll find your own role\r\n(from your Forgejo profile) and a roster of the other agents zoo runs,\r\neach with their own role. If a task in front of you clearly belongs to\r\nsomeone else's role, use `assign_issue` to hand it off rather than\r\ndoing it yourself.\r\n\r\n**Git**\r\n\r\nYou may use normal git commands to manage your working tree. For remote\r\n(pull, fetch, push, etc.) git operations, you can use the `git` tool.\r\n\r\n**Guidelines**\r\n\r\n- Make surgical changes: modify only what's necessary for the task in\r\n the triggering event.\r\n- Before finishing, verify your changes (re-read the file, run tests or\r\n a build if the project has them).\r\n- Always leave a `comment` summarizing what you did (or why you couldn't\r\n finish), and use `open_pull_request` when you have a change ready for\r\n review. Don't leave the issue without a response.\r","start_line":1,"end_line":50,"total_lines":50,"truncated":false}
Thinking
Now I have a grasp of the whole picture. Let me plan the changes:
**Design**: `pr:review` becomes a dynamically resolved event kind, just like `issue:assigned`. The agent whose name matches the username of the PR's author (the person who opened the PR) handles the review.
Changes:
1. **`internal/forgejo/event.go`**: Add a `PRAuthor` field to `Event`:
```go
// PRAuthor is set for PR events: the Forgejo username of the user who
// opened the pull request. For pr:review it's what the scheduler
// resolves the event to (the PR author's agent handles the review).
PRAuthor string
```
2. **`internal/forgejo/webhook.go`**:
- `pullRequestEvent`: add `PRAuthor: posterName(p.PullRequest.Poster)` — for consistency.
- `pullRequestReviewEvent`: add `PRAuthor: posterName(p.PullRequest.Poster)`.
3. **`internal/forgejo/poll.go`**:
- `issueToPRNewEvent`: add `PRAuthor: posterName(issue.Poster)` — for consistency.
- `reviewToEvent`: add `PRAuthor: posterName(pr.Poster)`.
4. **`internal/config/config.go`**:
- Remove `EventPRReview` from `staticEventKinds`.
- Update the comment about the known event kinds.
- In `Validate`, add `EventPRReview` to the dynamic case (must not set agent):
```go
case e.Kind == EventIssueAssigned || e.Kind == EventPRReview:
if e.Agent != "" {
return fmt.Errorf("event %q: must not set agent; the agent whose name matches the %s's username is triggered dynamically", e.Kind, ...)
}
```
Hmm, the error message for issue:assigned is "the agent whose name matches the Forgejo assignee's username is triggered dynamically". For pr:review it should be "the agent whose name matches the pull request author's username is triggered dynamically". Let me restructure:
```go
switch {
case e.Kind == EventIssueAssigned:
if e.Agent != "" {
return fmt.Errorf("event %q: must not set agent; the agent whose name matches the Forgejo assignee's username is triggered dynamically", e.Kind)
}
case e.Kind == EventPRReview:
if e.Agent != "" {
return fmt.Errorf("event %q: must not set agent; the agent whose name matches the pull request author's username is triggered dynamically", e.Kind)
}
case staticEventKinds[e.Kind]:
...
}
```
5. **`internal/scheduler/scheduler.go`**: `resolveAgent`:
```go
func resolveAgent(cfg *config.Config, ev forgejo.Event) (string, bool) {
switch ev.Kind {
case config.EventIssueAssigned:
if _, ok := cfg.AgentByName(ev.Assignee); ok {
return ev.Assignee, true
}
return "", false
case config.EventPRReview:
// The agent that opened the PR handles the review of it.
if _, ok := cfg.AgentByName(ev.PRAuthor); ok {
return ev.PRAuthor, true
}
return "", false
}
return cfg.EventAgent(ev.Kind)
}
```
And update the doc comment: "issue:assigned resolves dynamically: the agent whose config label matches the Forgejo assignee's username. pr:review resolves dynamically: the agent whose config label matches the pull request author's username. All other event kinds use the static event->agent mapping from config."
6. **`zoo.hcl.example`**: Replace the pr:review block:
```hcl
# A review was submitted on a pull request (approved, changes requested,
# or comment). The agent that opened the PR is triggered to handle it,
# like issue:assigned: its working tree is checked out on the PR's head
# branch, so changes it pushes update the PR directly. It should address
# the feedback, reply to the review, and resolve the inline comments it
# has addressed.
event "pr:review" {
// No `agent` here: the agent whose name matches the pull request
// author's username is triggered.
instructions = "A review was submitted on this pull request. Address the feedback, push your changes to the PR branch, reply to the review, and resolve the inline comments you have addressed."
}
```
7. **Tests**:
a. `internal/config/config_test.go`:
- `validConfig`: change the `event "pr:review"` block to not have an agent:
```
event "pr:review" {
instructions = "Address the review feedback and respond."
}
```
- `TestLoadValid`: replace `if agent, ok := cfg.EventAgent(EventPRReview); !ok || agent != "leon"` with `if _, ok := cfg.EventAgent(EventPRReview); ok { t.Fatalf("pr:review should have no static agent") }`.
- `TestValidatePRReviewRequiresAgent` → rename to `TestValidatePRReviewRejectsAgent` and expect an error when an agent is set:
```
event "pr:review" { agent = "leon" }
```
"expected error: pr:review must not set agent"
b. `internal/scheduler/scheduler_test.go`:
- `testConfig()`: change `{Kind: config.EventPRReview, Agent: "greg"}` to `{Kind: config.EventPRReview}`.
- `TestResolveAgentPRReviewStatic` → rename to `TestResolveAgentPRReviewByAuthor`:
```go
name, ok := resolveAgent(cfg, forgejo.Event{Kind: config.EventPRReview, PRAuthor: "greg", ReviewID: 42})
if !ok || name != "greg" {...}
```
Plus a no-match case: `PRAuthor: "not-an-agent"` → no resolution.
- `TestSchedulerDropsPRReviewAuthoredByTargetAgent`: event `{Kind: config.EventPRReview, Author: "greg", PRAuthor: "greg", ...}` — the PR author is greg, and greg submitted the review on their own PR → resolved agent is greg, event author is greg → dropped. Update the comment.
- `TestSchedulerDispatchesPRReviewFromSomeoneElse`: event `{Kind: config.EventPRReview, Author: "leon", PRAuthor: "greg", ...}` → dispatches to greg (the PR author).
Also, it might be worth adding a test where the PR author is not an agent → no job (dropped). That's a good addition: `TestSchedulerDropsPRReviewFromNonAgentAuthor` or fold it into the resolve test. Let me add a resolve-level test (no match), and maybe also a scheduler-level test. The existing `TestSchedulerDropsUnresolvedEvent` covers the drop path for issue:assigned. I could add a similar one for pr:review with a non-agent PR author. Let me add it — it's cheap and meaningful.
c. `internal/forgejo/webhook_test.go`:
- `TestDecodePullRequestReviewSubmitted`: add assertion `if ev.PRAuthor != "greg"`. The payload's pull_request user is greg.
- `TestDecodePullRequestOpened`: add `ev.PRAuthor != "greg"` assertion (since I'm setting it there too).
d. `internal/forgejo/poll_test.go`:
- `TestPollReviewsDispatchesNewReview`: the `sdk.Issue` passed in has no Poster. Need to add `Poster: &sdk.User{UserName: "greg"}` — let me check the field name on the sdk.Issue struct. In poll.go, `posterName(issue.Poster)` is used, and `posterName` takes a `*sdk.User` and returns `u.UserName`. So `sdk.Issue.Poster` is `*sdk.User`. In the test, `&sdk.Issue{Index: 9, Title: ..., Body: ..., Poster: &sdk.User{UserName: "greg"}}`. Then assert `ev.PRAuthor == "greg"`.
e. `internal/agentrun/seed_test.go`: no change needed (no mention of static agent).
8. **`internal/tools/forgejo.go`**: the description of `submit_review` says "A submitted review fires a pr:review event that triggers a run". That's still true. No change needed.
9. **`internal/agentrun/run.go`**: any mention? The seed message says "Your working branch is %q, the pull request's head branch...". No mention of the static agent. No change needed.
Wait — one more consideration. The PR description says "pr:review is a static event kind (like pr:new): the agent named in the event "pr:review" block in zoo.hcl handles it." After the change, it becomes dynamic. The PR description is part of the PR body on Forgejo — I can't easily edit it (I don't have a tool to update the PR body). I'll just mention it in the reply comment.
Also, the self-trigger guard: `if ev.Author != "" && ev.Author == agentName`. For a pr:review event, ev.Author is the reviewer. If the PR author (agent) reviews their own PR, the resolved agent = PR author = reviewer → dropped. Good.
But wait — there's a subtle issue with the self-trigger guard and dynamic resolution. Consider: agent greg opens a PR. Human abrander reviews it. Resolved agent = greg. ev.Author = abrander ≠ greg → run proceeds. Good.
Consider: greg's run calls `submit_review` on its own PR. That fires a pr:review event with Author=greg, PRAuthor=greg → resolved agent greg → dropped by the guard. Good, no self-loop.
Consider: agent leon reviews greg's PR. Event Author=leon, PRAuthor=greg → resolved agent = greg (PR author). Guard: leon ≠ greg → run proceeds, greg handles it.
Now, what about the `submit_review` tool description: "use it to react to a PR (e.g. after addressing earlier feedback) or to review someone else's PR." Still fine.
Another consideration: the `event "pr:review"` block in zoo.hcl.example — should the block still exist? Yes, for the `instructions`. The block is still needed to configure instructions (and to declare the event kind as known). The `agent` attribute must not be set.
Wait, actually — is the event block even required for pr:review to work? Looking at the scheduler: `resolveAgent` for pr:review doesn't consult cfg at all (just checks AgentByName). `EventInstructions` returns "" if not declared. So the block is optional, but I'll keep it in the example for instructions. That matches how issue:assigned works (the block is optional but present in the example).
Hmm, but wait: should `resolveAgent` require the event kind to be declared in config? For issue:assigned, no — it resolves even if there's no event block. Let me check... `resolveAgent` for issue:assigned doesn't check whether the event is declared. So pr:review will follow the same pattern. Consistent.
Now, another question: should the `PRAuthor` field be set on `pr:new` events too? For consistency, yes — it's a PR event, and the field is "the Forgejo username of the user who opened the pull request". Set it in both `pullRequestEvent` and `issueToPRNewEvent`. Harmless and consistent.
Let me also double-check the `sdk.PullRequest` struct — does it have `Poster`? In webhook.go, `pullRequestEvent` uses `posterName(p.PullRequest.Poster)`. Yes.
And `sdk.Issue` has `Poster` (used in issueToPRNewEvent). Yes.
Now, about the dedup ID: no change.
Let me also check `internal/agentrun/forgejo.go` and `client.go` for `PullRequestInfo` — not needed for this change.
Let me also check if there are other places that reference the static nature of pr:review — e.g., web dashboard, docs. Let me grep for "static" and "EventAgent".
Let me check remaining references to the static event mapping and the `sdk.Issue`/`sdk.PullRequest` poster fields.
Tool 🔧 grep_search {"query": "EventAgent|staticEventKinds|static event", "context_after": 3, "context_before": 1}
Arguments
{"query": "EventAgent|staticEventKinds|static event", "context_after": 3, "context_before": 1}
Result
/project/internal/config/config.go-20-
/project/internal/config/config.go:21:var staticEventKinds = map[string]bool{
/project/internal/config/config.go-22- EventIssueNew: true,
/project/internal/config/config.go-23- EventIssueComment: true,
/project/internal/config/config.go-24- EventPRNew: true,
--
/project/internal/config/config.go-132-
/project/internal/config/config.go:133: case staticEventKinds[e.Kind]:
/project/internal/config/config.go-134- if e.Agent == "" {
/project/internal/config/config.go-135- return fmt.Errorf("event %q: agent is required", e.Kind)
/project/internal/config/config.go-136- }
--
/project/internal/config/config.go-182-
/project/internal/config/config.go:183:// EventAgent returns the statically configured agent name for the given
/project/internal/config/config.go-184-// event kind, if one is declared and set.
/project/internal/config/config.go:185:func (c *Config) EventAgent(kind string) (string, bool) {
/project/internal/config/config.go-186- for _, e := range c.Events {
/project/internal/config/config.go-187- if e.Kind == kind {
/project/internal/config/config.go-188- return e.Agent, e.Agent != ""
--
/project/internal/config/config_test.go-73-
/project/internal/config/config_test.go:74: if agent, ok := cfg.EventAgent(EventIssueNew); !ok || agent != "leon" {
/project/internal/config/config_test.go-75- t.Fatalf("expected issue:new -> leon, got %q, %v", agent, ok)
/project/internal/config/config_test.go-76- }
/project/internal/config/config_test.go-77-
/project/internal/config/config_test.go:78: if _, ok := cfg.EventAgent(EventIssueAssigned); ok {
/project/internal/config/config_test.go-79- t.Fatalf("issue:assigned should have no static agent")
/project/internal/config/config_test.go-80- }
/project/internal/config/config_test.go-81-
--
/project/internal/config/config_test.go-91-
/project/internal/config/config_test.go:92: if agent, ok := cfg.EventAgent(EventPRReview); !ok || agent != "leon" {
/project/internal/config/config_test.go-93- t.Fatalf("expected pr:review -> leon, got %q, %v", agent, ok)
/project/internal/config/config_test.go-94- }
/project/internal/config/config_test.go-95- if got := cfg.EventInstructions(EventPRReview); got != "Address the review feedback and respond." {
--
/project/internal/config/config_test.go-123-
/project/internal/config/config_test.go:124:func TestValidateUndeclaredEventAgent(t *testing.T) {
/project/internal/config/config_test.go-125- _, err := load(t, `
/project/internal/config/config_test.go-126-llm "qwen" { openai = "https://example.com" token = "tok" model = "qwen3" }
/project/internal/config/config_test.go-127-forgejo { url = "https://example.com" token = "tok" }
--
/project/internal/scheduler/scheduler.go-65-// matches the Forgejo assignee's username. Every other event kind uses
/project/internal/scheduler/scheduler.go:66:// the static event->agent mapping from config.
/project/internal/scheduler/scheduler.go-67-func resolveAgent(cfg *config.Config, ev forgejo.Event) (string, bool) {
/project/internal/scheduler/scheduler.go-68- if ev.Kind == config.EventIssueAssigned {
/project/internal/scheduler/scheduler.go-69- if _, ok := cfg.AgentByName(ev.Assignee); ok {
--
/project/internal/scheduler/scheduler.go-75-
/project/internal/scheduler/scheduler.go:76: return cfg.EventAgent(ev.Kind)
/project/internal/scheduler/scheduler.go-77-}
/project/internal/scheduler/scheduler.go-78-
/project/internal/scheduler/scheduler.go-79-// Run consumes events until ctx is canceled or the channel closes,
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /project && grep -rn \"Poster\" $(go env GOMODCACHE)/codeberg.org/mvdkleijn/forgejo-sdk/forgejo/v2/*.go | grep -E \"type (Issue|PullRequest) struct\" -A 30 | head -5; grep -n \"Poster\" $(go env GOMODCACHE)/codeberg.org/mvdkleijn/forgejo-sdk/forgejo/v2/models.go | head -10"}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /project && grep -rn \"Poster\" $(go env GOMODCACHE)/codeberg.org/mvdkleijn/forgejo-sdk/forgejo/v2/*.go | grep -E \"type (Issue|PullRequest) struct\" -A 30 | head -5; grep -n \"Poster\" $(go env GOMODCACHE)/codeberg.org/mvdkleijn/forgejo-sdk/forgejo/v2/models.go | head -10"}
Result
grep: /go/pkg/mod/codeberg.org/mvdkleijn/forgejo-sdk/forgejo/v2/*.go: No such file or directory grep: /go/pkg/mod/codeberg.org/mvdkleijn/forgejo-sdk/forgejo/v2/models.go: No such file or directory
Thinking
The SDK path is different. Let's find the SDK's module cache path.
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /project && grep \"forgejo-sdk\" go.mod && find / -type d -name \"v2\" -path \"*forgejo-sdk*\" 2>/dev/null | head -3"}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /project && grep \"forgejo-sdk\" go.mod && find / -type d -name \"v2\" -path \"*forgejo-sdk*\" 2>/dev/null | head -3"}
Result
codeberg.org/mvdkleijn/forgejo-sdk/forgejo/v2 v2.2.0
Thinking
The SDK isn't in the module cache yet? Let me check `go env GOMODCACHE` and see if the module has been downloaded. Maybe I need to run `go mod download`, or perhaps the build hasn't been executed yet. First let me run the tests to establish a baseline.
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /project && go env GOMODCACHE && go build ./... 2>&1 | head -20 && echo BUILD_OK", "timeout": 300}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /project && go env GOMODCACHE && go build ./... 2>&1 | head -20 && echo BUILD_OK", "timeout": 300}
Result
/go/pkg/mod go: downloading github.com/docker/docker v28.5.2+incompatible go: downloading github.com/hashicorp/hcl/v2 v2.24.0 go: downloading codeberg.org/mvdkleijn/forgejo-sdk/forgejo/v2 v2.2.0 go: downloading github.com/google/uuid v1.6.0 go: downloading modernc.org/sqlite v1.56.0 go: downloading github.com/docker/go-connections v0.8.1 go: downloading github.com/docker/go-units v0.5.0 go: downloading github.com/moby/docker-image-spec v1.3.1 go: downloading github.com/opencontainers/image-spec v1.1.1 go: downloading github.com/containerd/errdefs v1.0.0 go: downloading github.com/containerd/errdefs/pkg v0.3.0 go: downloading github.com/distribution/reference v0.6.0 go: downloading github.com/opencontainers/go-digest v1.0.0 go: downloading github.com/pkg/errors v0.9.1 go: downloading go.opentelemetry.io/contrib/instrumentation/net/http/otelhttp v0.70.0 go: downloading go.opentelemetry.io/otel/trace v1.45.0 go: downloading go.opentelemetry.io/otel v1.45.0 go: downloading github.com/42wim/httpsig v1.2.3 go: downloading github.com/go-fed/httpsig v1.1.0 go: downloading github.com/hashicorp/go-version v1.7.0 BUILD_OK
Thinking
The build succeeded. Next, let's check the SDK's `Issue` and `PullRequest` structs to verify the `Poster` field.
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /project && SDK=$(find /go/pkg/mod -type d -path \"*forgejo-sdk*forgejo/v2*\" -name \"v2*\" 2>/dev/null | head -1); echo \"SDK=$SDK\"; grep -n \"Poster\" $SDK/models.go | head; grep -n -A 25 \"^type PullRequest struct\" $SDK/models.go | head -30"}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /project && SDK=$(find /go/pkg/mod -type d -path \"*forgejo-sdk*forgejo/v2*\" -name \"v2*\" 2>/dev/null | head -1); echo \"SDK=$SDK\"; grep -n \"Poster\" $SDK/models.go | head; grep -n -A 25 \"^type PullRequest struct\" $SDK/models.go | head -30"}
Result
SDK=/go/pkg/mod/cache/download/codeberg.org/mvdkleijn/forgejo-sdk/forgejo/v2 grep: /go/pkg/mod/cache/download/codeberg.org/mvdkleijn/forgejo-sdk/forgejo/v2/models.go: No such file or directory grep: /go/pkg/mod/cache/download/codeberg.org/mvdkleijn/forgejo-sdk/forgejo/v2/models.go: No such file or directory
Thinking
That's the download cache, not the extracted module. The extracted module should be at /go/pkg/mod/codeberg.org/mvdkleijn/forgejo-sdk/forgejo/v2@v2.2.0. Let me check.
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "SDK=\"/go/pkg/mod/codeberg.org/mvdkleijn/forgejo-sdk/forgejo/v2@v2.2.0\"; ls $SDK | head; grep -n \"Poster\" $SDK/models.go | head"}
Arguments
{"command": "SDK=\"/go/pkg/mod/codeberg.org/mvdkleijn/forgejo-sdk/forgejo/v2@v2.2.0\"; ls $SDK | head; grep -n \"Poster\" $SDK/models.go | head"}
Result
LICENSE admin_cron.go admin_org.go admin_repo.go admin_test.go admin_user.go agent.go agent_windows.go attachment.go client.go grep: /go/pkg/mod/codeberg.org/mvdkleijn/forgejo-sdk/forgejo/v2@v2.2.0/models.go: No such file or directory
Thinking
Let's find where the Issue and PullRequest types are defined.
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "SDK=\"/go/pkg/mod/codeberg.org/mvdkleijn/forgejo-sdk/forgejo/v2@v2.2.0\"; grep -rn \"type Issue struct\" $SDK/*.go; grep -rn \"type PullRequest struct\" $SDK/*.go"}
Arguments
{"command": "SDK=\"/go/pkg/mod/codeberg.org/mvdkleijn/forgejo-sdk/forgejo/v2@v2.2.0\"; grep -rn \"type Issue struct\" $SDK/*.go; grep -rn \"type PullRequest struct\" $SDK/*.go"}
Result
/go/pkg/mod/codeberg.org/mvdkleijn/forgejo-sdk/forgejo/v2@v2.2.0/issue.go:36:type Issue struct {
/go/pkg/mod/codeberg.org/mvdkleijn/forgejo-sdk/forgejo/v2@v2.2.0/pull.go:31:type PullRequest struct {
Thinking
Let's check the `Poster` field in the Issue and PullRequest structs.
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "SDK=\"/go/pkg/mod/codeberg.org/mvdkleijn/forgejo-sdk/forgejo/v2@v2.2.0\"; sed -n '36,70p' $SDK/issue.go; echo ---; sed -n '31,70p' $SDK/pull.go"}
Arguments
{"command": "SDK=\"/go/pkg/mod/codeberg.org/mvdkleijn/forgejo-sdk/forgejo/v2@v2.2.0\"; sed -n '36,70p' $SDK/issue.go; echo ---; sed -n '31,70p' $SDK/pull.go"}
Result
type Issue struct {
ID int64 `json:"id"`
URL string `json:"url"`
HTMLURL string `json:"html_url"`
Index int64 `json:"number"`
Poster *User `json:"user"`
OriginalAuthor string `json:"original_author"`
OriginalAuthorID int64 `json:"original_author_id"`
Title string `json:"title"`
Body string `json:"body"`
Ref string `json:"ref"`
Labels []*Label `json:"labels"`
Milestone *Milestone `json:"milestone"`
Assignees []*User `json:"assignees"`
// Whether the issue is open or closed
State StateType `json:"state"`
IsLocked bool `json:"is_locked"`
Comments int `json:"comments"`
Created time.Time `json:"created_at"`
Updated time.Time `json:"updated_at"`
Closed *time.Time `json:"closed_at"`
Deadline *time.Time `json:"due_date"`
PullRequest *PullRequestMeta `json:"pull_request"`
Repository *RepositoryMeta `json:"repository"`
}
// ListIssueOption list issue options
type ListIssueOption struct {
ListOptions
State StateType
Type IssueType
Labels []string
Milestones []string
KeyWord string
Since time.Time
---
type PullRequest struct {
ID int64 `json:"id"`
URL string `json:"url"`
Index int64 `json:"number"`
Poster *User `json:"user"`
Title string `json:"title"`
Body string `json:"body"`
Labels []*Label `json:"labels"`
Milestone *Milestone `json:"milestone"`
Assignee *User `json:"assignee"`
Assignees []*User `json:"assignees"`
State StateType `json:"state"`
IsLocked bool `json:"is_locked"`
Comments int `json:"comments"`
HTMLURL string `json:"html_url"`
DiffURL string `json:"diff_url"`
PatchURL string `json:"patch_url"`
Mergeable bool `json:"mergeable"`
HasMerged bool `json:"merged"`
Merged *time.Time `json:"merged_at"`
MergedCommitID *string `json:"merge_commit_sha"`
MergedBy *User `json:"merged_by"`
AllowMaintainerEdit bool `json:"allow_maintainer_edit"`
Base *PRBranchInfo `json:"base"`
Head *PRBranchInfo `json:"head"`
MergeBase string `json:"merge_base"`
Deadline *time.Time `json:"due_date"`
Created *time.Time `json:"created_at"`
Updated *time.Time `json:"updated_at"`
Closed *time.Time `json:"closed_at"`
}
// ChangedFile is a changed file in a diff
type ChangedFile struct {
Filename string `json:"filename"`
PreviousFilename string `json:"previous_filename"`
Thinking
Both `sdk.Issue` and `sdk.PullRequest` have `Poster *User`.
Alright, first let's run the baseline tests, and then make the changes.
Plan:
1. `internal/forgejo/event.go` — add `PRAuthor` field.
2. `internal/forgejo/webhook.go` — set `PRAuthor` in `pullRequestEvent` and `pullRequestReviewEvent`.
3. `internal/forgejo/poll.go` — set `PRAuthor` in `issueToPRNewEvent` and `reviewToEvent`.
4. `internal/config/config.go` — make `pr:review` dynamic (agent is forbidden).
5. `internal/scheduler/scheduler.go` — resolve `pr:review` to the PR author agent.
6. `zoo.hcl.example` — remove `agent` from the pr:review block and update the comment.
7. Tests: config_test.go, scheduler_test.go, webhook_test.go, poll_test.go.
Let's run the baseline tests first.
Both SDK types have `Poster *User`. Let me run the baseline test suite before making changes.
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /project && go test ./... 2>&1 | tail -15", "timeout": 300}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /project && go test ./... 2>&1 | tail -15", "timeout": 300}
Result
go: downloading modernc.org/libc v1.74.4 go: downloading github.com/dustin/go-humanize v1.0.1 go: downloading modernc.org/mathutil v1.7.1 go: downloading modernc.org/memory v1.11.0 go: downloading github.com/remyoudompheng/bigfft v0.0.0-20230129092748-24d4a6f8daec ? github.com/abrander/zoo/cmd/zoo [no test files] ok github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/agentrun 0.003s ok github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/config 0.005s ok github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/forgejo 3.312s ok github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/livelog 0.052s ok github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/llm 0.003s ok github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/scheduler 6.467s ok github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/store 3.095s ok github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/tools 0.003s ok github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/web 0.827s
Thinking
Baseline is green. Now let's make the changes.
**1. `internal/forgejo/event.go`** — add a `PRAuthor` field:
Baseline is green. Now I'll make the changes. First, the `Event` struct — add a `PRAuthor` field:
Tool 🔧 edit_file {"path": "internal/forgejo/event.go", "find": "\t// Assignee is set for EventIssueAssigned: the Forgejo username the\n\t// issue was assigned to.\n\tAssignee string", "replace": "\t// Assignee is set for EventIssueAssigned: the Forgejo username the\n\t// issue was assigned to.\n\tAssignee string\n\n\t// PRAuthor is set for PR events: the Forgejo username of the user\n\t// who opened the pull request. For EventPRReview the scheduler\n\t// resolves the event to this user's agent, so the agent that opened\n\t// the PR reacts to the review of it.\n\tPRAuthor string"}
Arguments
{"path": "internal/forgejo/event.go", "find": "\t// Assignee is set for EventIssueAssigned: the Forgejo username the\n\t// issue was assigned to.\n\tAssignee string", "replace": "\t// Assignee is set for EventIssueAssigned: the Forgejo username the\n\t// issue was assigned to.\n\tAssignee string\n\n\t// PRAuthor is set for PR events: the Forgejo username of the user\n\t// who opened the pull request. For EventPRReview the scheduler\n\t// resolves the event to this user's agent, so the agent that opened\n\t// the PR reacts to the review of it.\n\tPRAuthor string"}
Result
1 occurrences replaced
Thinking
**2. `internal/forgejo/webhook.go`** — Set `PRAuthor` in `pullRequestEvent` and `pullRequestReviewEvent`:
Tool 🔧 edit_file {"find": "\treturn Event{\n\t\tKind: EventPRNew,\n\t\tID: prNewID(p.PullRequest.ID),\n\t\tOwner: repoOwner(p.Repository),\n\t\tRepo: p.Repository.Name,\n\t\tIndex: p.PullRequest.Index,\n\t\tTitle: p.PullRequest.Title,\n\t\tBody: p.PullRequest.Body,\n\t\tAuthor: posterName(p.PullRequest.Poster),\n\t\tRaw: raw,\n\t}\n}", "replace": "\treturn Event{\n\t\tKind: EventPRNew,\n\t\tID: prNewID(p.PullRequest.ID),\n\t\tOwner: repoOwner(p.Repository),\n\t\tRepo: p.Repository.Name,\n\t\tIndex: p.PullRequest.Index,\n\t\tTitle: p.PullRequest.Title,\n\t\tBody: p.PullRequest.Body,\n\t\tAuthor: posterName(p.PullRequest.Poster),\n\t\tPRAuthor: posterName(p.PullRequest.Poster),\n\t\tRaw: raw,\n\t}\n}"}
Arguments
{"find": "\treturn Event{\n\t\tKind: EventPRNew,\n\t\tID: prNewID(p.PullRequest.ID),\n\t\tOwner: repoOwner(p.Repository),\n\t\tRepo: p.Repository.Name,\n\t\tIndex: p.PullRequest.Index,\n\t\tTitle: p.PullRequest.Title,\n\t\tBody: p.PullRequest.Body,\n\t\tAuthor: posterName(p.PullRequest.Poster),\n\t\tRaw: raw,\n\t}\n}", "replace": "\treturn Event{\n\t\tKind: EventPRNew,\n\t\tID: prNewID(p.PullRequest.ID),\n\t\tOwner: repoOwner(p.Repository),\n\t\tRepo: p.Repository.Name,\n\t\tIndex: p.PullRequest.Index,\n\t\tTitle: p.PullRequest.Title,\n\t\tBody: p.PullRequest.Body,\n\t\tAuthor: posterName(p.PullRequest.Poster),\n\t\tPRAuthor: posterName(p.PullRequest.Poster),\n\t\tRaw: raw,\n\t}\n}"}
Result
ERROR CALLING TOOL: command exited with status 1
Tool 🔧 edit_file {"find": "\treturn Event{\n\t\tKind: EventPRReview,\n\t\tID: prReviewID(p.Review.ID),\n\t\tOwner: repoOwner(p.Repository),\n\t\tRepo: p.Repository.Name,\n\t\tIndex: p.PullRequest.Index,\n\t\tTitle: p.PullRequest.Title,\n\t\tBody: p.PullRequest.Body,\n\t\tAuthor: posterName(p.Review.Reviewer),\n\t\tReviewID: p.Review.ID,\n\t\tReviewState: string(p.Review.State),\n\t\tReviewBody: p.Review.Body,\n\t\tHeadRef: headRef,\n\t\tRaw: raw,\n\t}, true, nil\n}", "replace": "\treturn Event{\n\t\tKind: EventPRReview,\n\t\tID: prReviewID(p.Review.ID),\n\t\tOwner: repoOwner(p.Repository),\n\t\tRepo: p.Repository.Name,\n\t\tIndex: p.PullRequest.Index,\n\t\tTitle: p.PullRequest.Title,\n\t\tBody: p.PullRequest.Body,\n\t\tAuthor: posterName(p.Review.Reviewer),\n\t\tPRAuthor: posterName(p.PullRequest.Poster),\n\t\tReviewID: p.Review.ID,\n\t\tReviewState: string(p.Review.State),\n\t\tReviewBody: p.Review.Body,\n\t\tHeadRef: headRef,\n\t\tRaw: raw,\n\t}, true, nil\n}"}
Arguments
{"find": "\treturn Event{\n\t\tKind: EventPRReview,\n\t\tID: prReviewID(p.Review.ID),\n\t\tOwner: repoOwner(p.Repository),\n\t\tRepo: p.Repository.Name,\n\t\tIndex: p.PullRequest.Index,\n\t\tTitle: p.PullRequest.Title,\n\t\tBody: p.PullRequest.Body,\n\t\tAuthor: posterName(p.Review.Reviewer),\n\t\tReviewID: p.Review.ID,\n\t\tReviewState: string(p.Review.State),\n\t\tReviewBody: p.Review.Body,\n\t\tHeadRef: headRef,\n\t\tRaw: raw,\n\t}, true, nil\n}", "replace": "\treturn Event{\n\t\tKind: EventPRReview,\n\t\tID: prReviewID(p.Review.ID),\n\t\tOwner: repoOwner(p.Repository),\n\t\tRepo: p.Repository.Name,\n\t\tIndex: p.PullRequest.Index,\n\t\tTitle: p.PullRequest.Title,\n\t\tBody: p.PullRequest.Body,\n\t\tAuthor: posterName(p.Review.Reviewer),\n\t\tPRAuthor: posterName(p.PullRequest.Poster),\n\t\tReviewID: p.Review.ID,\n\t\tReviewState: string(p.Review.State),\n\t\tReviewBody: p.Review.Body,\n\t\tHeadRef: headRef,\n\t\tRaw: raw,\n\t}, true, nil\n}"}
Result
ERROR CALLING TOOL: command exited with status 1
Thinking
The edit failed — probably due to whitespace differences (tabs vs. spaces). Let me re-read the exact text around the relevant section of webhook.go.
The edits failed — let me check the exact whitespace in the file.
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /project && sed -n '196,245p' internal/forgejo/webhook.go | cat -A | grep -n \"Kind\\|Author\\|Raw\\|PRAuthor\" | head -20"}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /project && sed -n '196,245p' internal/forgejo/webhook.go | cat -A | grep -n \"Kind\\|Author\\|Raw\\|PRAuthor\" | head -20"}
Result
10:^I^IKind: EventPRNew,$ 17:^I^IAuthor: posterName(p.PullRequest.Poster),$ 18:^I^IRaw: raw,$ 38:^I^IKind: EventPRReview,$ 45:^I^IAuthor: posterName(p.Review.Reviewer),$ 50:^I^IRaw: raw,$
Thinking
The file uses tabs. My edit used tabs too... wait, did I use tabs in the edit? Let me check — in the edit I wrote the content with tab characters. Hmm, the error says "command exited with status 1" — maybe the find string didn't match. Let me look at the exact lines 196–245 of the file.
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /project && sed -n '196,245p' internal/forgejo/webhook.go"}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /project && sed -n '196,245p' internal/forgejo/webhook.go"}
Result
}, true, nil
}
func pullRequestEvent(p pullRequestPayload, raw []byte) (Event, bool, error) {
if p.Action != "opened" || p.PullRequest == nil || p.Repository == nil {
return Event{}, false, nil
}
return Event{
Kind: EventPRNew,
ID: prNewID(p.PullRequest.ID),
Owner: repoOwner(p.Repository),
Repo: p.Repository.Name,
Index: p.PullRequest.Index,
Title: p.PullRequest.Title,
Body: p.PullRequest.Body,
Author: posterName(p.PullRequest.Poster),
Raw: raw,
}, true, nil
}
// pullRequestReviewEvent turns a pull_request_review delivery into a
// pr:review event. Only "submitted" is interesting: it's the moment a
// review lands with a verdict. "edited" and "dismissed" are follow-ups
// to a review that already triggered a run, and "pending" reviews have
// no verdict to react to yet.
func pullRequestReviewEvent(p pullRequestReviewPayload, raw []byte) (Event, bool, error) {
if p.Action != "submitted" || p.Review == nil || p.PullRequest == nil || p.Repository == nil {
return Event{}, false, nil
}
headRef := ""
if p.PullRequest.Head != nil {
headRef = p.PullRequest.Head.Ref
}
return Event{
Kind: EventPRReview,
ID: prReviewID(p.Review.ID),
Owner: repoOwner(p.Repository),
Repo: p.Repository.Name,
Index: p.PullRequest.Index,
Title: p.PullRequest.Title,
Body: p.PullRequest.Body,
Author: posterName(p.Review.Reviewer),
ReviewID: p.Review.ID,
ReviewState: string(p.Review.State),
ReviewBody: p.Review.Body,
HeadRef: headRef,
Raw: raw,
Thinking
I see — `pullRequestEvent` ends with `}, true, nil`, not `}`. The find string I used ended with `}\n}`. Let me redo the edit with the correct text.
I see — the return ends with `}, true, nil`. Let me redo both edits with the correct text:
Tool 🔧 edit_file {"find": "\treturn Event{\n\t\tKind: EventPRNew,\n\t\tID: prNewID(p.PullRequest.ID),\n\t\tOwner: repoOwner(p.Repository),\n\t\tRepo: p.Repository.Name,\n\t\tIndex: p.PullRequest.Index,\n\t\tTitle: p.PullRequest.Title,\n\t\tBody: p.PullRequest.Body,\n\t\tAuthor: posterName(p.PullRequest.Poster),\n\t\tRaw: raw,\n\t}, true, nil\n}", "replace": "\treturn Event{\n\t\tKind: EventPRNew,\n\t\tID: prNewID(p.PullRequest.ID),\n\t\tOwner: repoOwner(p.Repository),\n\t\tRepo: p.Repository.Name,\n\t\tIndex: p.PullRequest.Index,\n\t\tTitle: p.PullRequest.Title,\n\t\tBody: p.PullRequest.Body,\n\t\tAuthor: posterName(p.PullRequest.Poster),\n\t\tPRAuthor: posterName(p.PullRequest.Poster),\n\t\tRaw: raw,\n\t}, true, nil\n}", "path": "internal/forgejo/webhook.go"}
Arguments
{"find": "\treturn Event{\n\t\tKind: EventPRNew,\n\t\tID: prNewID(p.PullRequest.ID),\n\t\tOwner: repoOwner(p.Repository),\n\t\tRepo: p.Repository.Name,\n\t\tIndex: p.PullRequest.Index,\n\t\tTitle: p.PullRequest.Title,\n\t\tBody: p.PullRequest.Body,\n\t\tAuthor: posterName(p.PullRequest.Poster),\n\t\tRaw: raw,\n\t}, true, nil\n}", "replace": "\treturn Event{\n\t\tKind: EventPRNew,\n\t\tID: prNewID(p.PullRequest.ID),\n\t\tOwner: repoOwner(p.Repository),\n\t\tRepo: p.Repository.Name,\n\t\tIndex: p.PullRequest.Index,\n\t\tTitle: p.PullRequest.Title,\n\t\tBody: p.PullRequest.Body,\n\t\tAuthor: posterName(p.PullRequest.Poster),\n\t\tPRAuthor: posterName(p.PullRequest.Poster),\n\t\tRaw: raw,\n\t}, true, nil\n}", "path": "internal/forgejo/webhook.go"}
Result
1 occurrences replaced
Tool 🔧 edit_file {"find": "\treturn Event{\n\t\tKind: EventPRReview,\n\t\tID: prReviewID(p.Review.ID),\n\t\tOwner: repoOwner(p.Repository),\n\t\tRepo: p.Repository.Name,\n\t\tIndex: p.PullRequest.Index,\n\t\tTitle: p.PullRequest.Title,\n\t\tBody: p.PullRequest.Body,\n\t\tAuthor: posterName(p.Review.Reviewer),\n\t\tReviewID: p.Review.ID,\n\t\tReviewState: string(p.Review.State),\n\t\tReviewBody: p.Review.Body,\n\t\tHeadRef: headRef,\n\t\tRaw: raw,\n\t}, true, nil\n}", "replace": "\treturn Event{\n\t\tKind: EventPRReview,\n\t\tID: prReviewID(p.Review.ID),\n\t\tOwner: repoOwner(p.Repository),\n\t\tRepo: p.Repository.Name,\n\t\tIndex: p.PullRequest.Index,\n\t\tTitle: p.PullRequest.Title,\n\t\tBody: p.PullRequest.Body,\n\t\tAuthor: posterName(p.Review.Reviewer),\n\t\tPRAuthor: posterName(p.PullRequest.Poster),\n\t\tReviewID: p.Review.ID,\n\t\tReviewState: string(p.Review.State),\n\t\tReviewBody: p.Review.Body,\n\t\tHeadRef: headRef,\n\t\tRaw: raw,\n\t}, true, nil\n}", "path": "internal/forgejo/webhook.go"}
Arguments
{"find": "\treturn Event{\n\t\tKind: EventPRReview,\n\t\tID: prReviewID(p.Review.ID),\n\t\tOwner: repoOwner(p.Repository),\n\t\tRepo: p.Repository.Name,\n\t\tIndex: p.PullRequest.Index,\n\t\tTitle: p.PullRequest.Title,\n\t\tBody: p.PullRequest.Body,\n\t\tAuthor: posterName(p.Review.Reviewer),\n\t\tReviewID: p.Review.ID,\n\t\tReviewState: string(p.Review.State),\n\t\tReviewBody: p.Review.Body,\n\t\tHeadRef: headRef,\n\t\tRaw: raw,\n\t}, true, nil\n}", "replace": "\treturn Event{\n\t\tKind: EventPRReview,\n\t\tID: prReviewID(p.Review.ID),\n\t\tOwner: repoOwner(p.Repository),\n\t\tRepo: p.Repository.Name,\n\t\tIndex: p.PullRequest.Index,\n\t\tTitle: p.PullRequest.Title,\n\t\tBody: p.PullRequest.Body,\n\t\tAuthor: posterName(p.Review.Reviewer),\n\t\tPRAuthor: posterName(p.PullRequest.Poster),\n\t\tReviewID: p.Review.ID,\n\t\tReviewState: string(p.Review.State),\n\t\tReviewBody: p.Review.Body,\n\t\tHeadRef: headRef,\n\t\tRaw: raw,\n\t}, true, nil\n}", "path": "internal/forgejo/webhook.go"}
Result
1 occurrences replaced
Thinking
**3. `internal/forgejo/poll.go`** — Set `PRAuthor` in `issueToPRNewEvent` and `reviewToEvent`:
Tool 🔧 edit_file {"find": "func issueToPRNewEvent(issue *sdk.Issue, owner, repo string) Event {\n\traw, _ := json.Marshal(issue)\n\n\treturn Event{\n\t\tKind: EventPRNew,\n\t\tID: prNewID(issue.ID),\n\t\tOwner: owner,\n\t\tRepo: repo,\n\t\tIndex: issue.Index,\n\t\tTitle: issue.Title,\n\t\tBody: issue.Body,\n\t\tAuthor: posterName(issue.Poster),\n\t\tRaw: raw,\n\t}\n}", "replace": "func issueToPRNewEvent(issue *sdk.Issue, owner, repo string) Event {\n\traw, _ := json.Marshal(issue)\n\n\treturn Event{\n\t\tKind: EventPRNew,\n\t\tID: prNewID(issue.ID),\n\t\tOwner: owner,\n\t\tRepo: repo,\n\t\tIndex: issue.Index,\n\t\tTitle: issue.Title,\n\t\tBody: issue.Body,\n\t\tAuthor: posterName(issue.Poster),\n\t\tPRAuthor: posterName(issue.Poster),\n\t\tRaw: raw,\n\t}\n}", "path": "internal/forgejo/poll.go"}
Arguments
{"find": "func issueToPRNewEvent(issue *sdk.Issue, owner, repo string) Event {\n\traw, _ := json.Marshal(issue)\n\n\treturn Event{\n\t\tKind: EventPRNew,\n\t\tID: prNewID(issue.ID),\n\t\tOwner: owner,\n\t\tRepo: repo,\n\t\tIndex: issue.Index,\n\t\tTitle: issue.Title,\n\t\tBody: issue.Body,\n\t\tAuthor: posterName(issue.Poster),\n\t\tRaw: raw,\n\t}\n}", "replace": "func issueToPRNewEvent(issue *sdk.Issue, owner, repo string) Event {\n\traw, _ := json.Marshal(issue)\n\n\treturn Event{\n\t\tKind: EventPRNew,\n\t\tID: prNewID(issue.ID),\n\t\tOwner: owner,\n\t\tRepo: repo,\n\t\tIndex: issue.Index,\n\t\tTitle: issue.Title,\n\t\tBody: issue.Body,\n\t\tAuthor: posterName(issue.Poster),\n\t\tPRAuthor: posterName(issue.Poster),\n\t\tRaw: raw,\n\t}\n}", "path": "internal/forgejo/poll.go"}
Result
1 occurrences replaced
Tool 🔧 edit_file {"find": "func reviewToEvent(pr *sdk.Issue, review *sdk.PullReview, owner, repo string) Event {\n\traw, _ := json.Marshal(review)\n\n\treturn Event{\n\t\tKind: EventPRReview,\n\t\tID: prReviewID(review.ID),\n\t\tOwner: owner,\n\t\tRepo: repo,\n\t\tIndex: pr.Index,\n\t\tTitle: pr.Title,\n\t\tBody: pr.Body,\n\t\tAuthor: posterName(review.Reviewer),\n\t\tReviewID: review.ID,\n\t\tReviewState: string(review.State),\n\t\tReviewBody: review.Body,\n\t\tRaw: raw,\n\t}\n}", "replace": "func reviewToEvent(pr *sdk.Issue, review *sdk.PullReview, owner, repo string) Event {\n\traw, _ := json.Marshal(review)\n\n\treturn Event{\n\t\tKind: EventPRReview,\n\t\tID: prReviewID(review.ID),\n\t\tOwner: owner,\n\t\tRepo: repo,\n\t\tIndex: pr.Index,\n\t\tTitle: pr.Title,\n\t\tBody: pr.Body,\n\t\tAuthor: posterName(review.Reviewer),\n\t\tPRAuthor: posterName(pr.Poster),\n\t\tReviewID: review.ID,\n\t\tReviewState: string(review.State),\n\t\tReviewBody: review.Body,\n\t\tRaw: raw,\n\t}\n}", "path": "internal/forgejo/poll.go"}
Arguments
{"find": "func reviewToEvent(pr *sdk.Issue, review *sdk.PullReview, owner, repo string) Event {\n\traw, _ := json.Marshal(review)\n\n\treturn Event{\n\t\tKind: EventPRReview,\n\t\tID: prReviewID(review.ID),\n\t\tOwner: owner,\n\t\tRepo: repo,\n\t\tIndex: pr.Index,\n\t\tTitle: pr.Title,\n\t\tBody: pr.Body,\n\t\tAuthor: posterName(review.Reviewer),\n\t\tReviewID: review.ID,\n\t\tReviewState: string(review.State),\n\t\tReviewBody: review.Body,\n\t\tRaw: raw,\n\t}\n}", "replace": "func reviewToEvent(pr *sdk.Issue, review *sdk.PullReview, owner, repo string) Event {\n\traw, _ := json.Marshal(review)\n\n\treturn Event{\n\t\tKind: EventPRReview,\n\t\tID: prReviewID(review.ID),\n\t\tOwner: owner,\n\t\tRepo: repo,\n\t\tIndex: pr.Index,\n\t\tTitle: pr.Title,\n\t\tBody: pr.Body,\n\t\tAuthor: posterName(review.Reviewer),\n\t\tPRAuthor: posterName(pr.Poster),\n\t\tReviewID: review.ID,\n\t\tReviewState: string(review.State),\n\t\tReviewBody: review.Body,\n\t\tRaw: raw,\n\t}\n}", "path": "internal/forgejo/poll.go"}
Result
1 occurrences replaced
Thinking
**4. `internal/config/config.go`** — Make `pr:review` a dynamic kind (agent attribute is prohibited):
Now the config package — make `pr:review` a dynamic kind like `issue:assigned`:
Tool 🔧 edit_file {"find": "// Known event kinds. issue:assigned is resolved dynamically (agent name\n// must match the Forgejo assignee's username) so it never carries an\n// `agent` attribute; the rest map statically to one configured agent.\nconst (\n\tEventIssueNew = \"issue:new\"\n\tEventIssueComment = \"issue:comment\"\n\tEventIssueAssigned = \"issue:assigned\"\n\tEventPRNew = \"pr:new\"\n\tEventPRReview = \"pr:review\"\n)\n\nvar staticEventKinds = map[string]bool{\n\tEventIssueNew: true,\n\tEventIssueComment: true,\n\tEventPRNew: true,\n\tEventPRReview: true,\n}", "replace": "// Known event kinds. issue:assigned and pr:review are resolved\n// dynamically (agent name must match the Forgejo assignee's username,\n// or the pull request author's username, respectively) so they never\n// carry an `agent` attribute; the rest map statically to one\n// configured agent.\nconst (\n\tEventIssueNew = \"issue:new\"\n\tEventIssueComment = \"issue:comment\"\n\tEventIssueAssigned = \"issue:assigned\"\n\tEventPRNew = \"pr:new\"\n\tEventPRReview = \"pr:review\"\n)\n\nvar staticEventKinds = map[string]bool{\n\tEventIssueNew: true,\n\tEventIssueComment: true,\n\tEventPRNew: true,\n}", "path": "internal/config/config.go"}
Arguments
{"find": "// Known event kinds. issue:assigned is resolved dynamically (agent name\n// must match the Forgejo assignee's username) so it never carries an\n// `agent` attribute; the rest map statically to one configured agent.\nconst (\n\tEventIssueNew = \"issue:new\"\n\tEventIssueComment = \"issue:comment\"\n\tEventIssueAssigned = \"issue:assigned\"\n\tEventPRNew = \"pr:new\"\n\tEventPRReview = \"pr:review\"\n)\n\nvar staticEventKinds = map[string]bool{\n\tEventIssueNew: true,\n\tEventIssueComment: true,\n\tEventPRNew: true,\n\tEventPRReview: true,\n}", "replace": "// Known event kinds. issue:assigned and pr:review are resolved\n// dynamically (agent name must match the Forgejo assignee's username,\n// or the pull request author's username, respectively) so they never\n// carry an `agent` attribute; the rest map statically to one\n// configured agent.\nconst (\n\tEventIssueNew = \"issue:new\"\n\tEventIssueComment = \"issue:comment\"\n\tEventIssueAssigned = \"issue:assigned\"\n\tEventPRNew = \"pr:new\"\n\tEventPRReview = \"pr:review\"\n)\n\nvar staticEventKinds = map[string]bool{\n\tEventIssueNew: true,\n\tEventIssueComment: true,\n\tEventPRNew: true,\n}", "path": "internal/config/config.go"}
Result
1 occurrences replaced
Tool 🔧 edit_file {"find": "\t\tswitch {\n\t\tcase e.Kind == EventIssueAssigned:\n\t\t\tif e.Agent != \"\" {\n\t\t\t\treturn fmt.Errorf(\"event %q: must not set agent; the agent whose name matches the Forgejo assignee's username is triggered dynamically\", e.Kind)\n\t\t\t}\n\n\t\tcase staticEventKinds[e.Kind]:", "replace": "\t\tswitch {\n\t\tcase e.Kind == EventIssueAssigned:\n\t\t\tif e.Agent != \"\" {\n\t\t\t\treturn fmt.Errorf(\"event %q: must not set agent; the agent whose name matches the Forgejo assignee's username is triggered dynamically\", e.Kind)\n\t\t\t}\n\n\t\tcase e.Kind == EventPRReview:\n\t\t\tif e.Agent != \"\" {\n\t\t\t\treturn fmt.Errorf(\"event %q: must not set agent; the agent whose name matches the pull request author's username is triggered dynamically\", e.Kind)\n\t\t\t}\n\n\t\tcase staticEventKinds[e.Kind]:", "path": "internal/config/config.go"}
Arguments
{"find": "\t\tswitch {\n\t\tcase e.Kind == EventIssueAssigned:\n\t\t\tif e.Agent != \"\" {\n\t\t\t\treturn fmt.Errorf(\"event %q: must not set agent; the agent whose name matches the Forgejo assignee's username is triggered dynamically\", e.Kind)\n\t\t\t}\n\n\t\tcase staticEventKinds[e.Kind]:", "replace": "\t\tswitch {\n\t\tcase e.Kind == EventIssueAssigned:\n\t\t\tif e.Agent != \"\" {\n\t\t\t\treturn fmt.Errorf(\"event %q: must not set agent; the agent whose name matches the Forgejo assignee's username is triggered dynamically\", e.Kind)\n\t\t\t}\n\n\t\tcase e.Kind == EventPRReview:\n\t\t\tif e.Agent != \"\" {\n\t\t\t\treturn fmt.Errorf(\"event %q: must not set agent; the agent whose name matches the pull request author's username is triggered dynamically\", e.Kind)\n\t\t\t}\n\n\t\tcase staticEventKinds[e.Kind]:", "path": "internal/config/config.go"}
Result
1 occurrences replaced
Thinking
**5. `internal/scheduler/scheduler.go`** — Resolve `pr:review` to the PR author's agent:
Now the scheduler's `resolveAgent`:
Tool 🔧 edit_file {"find": "// resolveAgent returns the name of the agent that should handle ev, if\n// any. issue:assigned resolves dynamically: the agent whose config label\n// matches the Forgejo assignee's username. Every other event kind uses\n// the static event->agent mapping from config.\nfunc resolveAgent(cfg *config.Config, ev forgejo.Event) (string, bool) {\n\tif ev.Kind == config.EventIssueAssigned {\n\t\tif _, ok := cfg.AgentByName(ev.Assignee); ok {\n\t\t\treturn ev.Assignee, true\n\t\t}\n\n\t\treturn \"\", false\n\t}\n\n\treturn cfg.EventAgent(ev.Kind)\n}", "replace": "// resolveAgent returns the name of the agent that should handle ev, if\n// any. Two kinds resolve dynamically: issue:assigned to the agent whose\n// config label matches the Forgejo assignee's username, and pr:review to\n// the agent whose config label matches the pull request author's\n// username (the agent that opened the PR reacts to the review of it).\n// Every other event kind uses the static event->agent mapping from\n// config.\nfunc resolveAgent(cfg *config.Config, ev forgejo.Event) (string, bool) {\n\tswitch ev.Kind {\n\tcase config.EventIssueAssigned:\n\t\tif _, ok := cfg.AgentByName(ev.Assignee); ok {\n\t\t\treturn ev.Assignee, true\n\t\t}\n\n\t\treturn \"\", false\n\n\tcase config.EventPRReview:\n\t\tif _, ok := cfg.AgentByName(ev.PRAuthor); ok {\n\t\t\treturn ev.PRAuthor, true\n\t\t}\n\n\t\treturn \"\", false\n\t}\n\n\treturn cfg.EventAgent(ev.Kind)\n}", "path": "internal/scheduler/scheduler.go"}
Arguments
{"find": "// resolveAgent returns the name of the agent that should handle ev, if\n// any. issue:assigned resolves dynamically: the agent whose config label\n// matches the Forgejo assignee's username. Every other event kind uses\n// the static event->agent mapping from config.\nfunc resolveAgent(cfg *config.Config, ev forgejo.Event) (string, bool) {\n\tif ev.Kind == config.EventIssueAssigned {\n\t\tif _, ok := cfg.AgentByName(ev.Assignee); ok {\n\t\t\treturn ev.Assignee, true\n\t\t}\n\n\t\treturn \"\", false\n\t}\n\n\treturn cfg.EventAgent(ev.Kind)\n}", "replace": "// resolveAgent returns the name of the agent that should handle ev, if\n// any. Two kinds resolve dynamically: issue:assigned to the agent whose\n// config label matches the Forgejo assignee's username, and pr:review to\n// the agent whose config label matches the pull request author's\n// username (the agent that opened the PR reacts to the review of it).\n// Every other event kind uses the static event->agent mapping from\n// config.\nfunc resolveAgent(cfg *config.Config, ev forgejo.Event) (string, bool) {\n\tswitch ev.Kind {\n\tcase config.EventIssueAssigned:\n\t\tif _, ok := cfg.AgentByName(ev.Assignee); ok {\n\t\t\treturn ev.Assignee, true\n\t\t}\n\n\t\treturn \"\", false\n\n\tcase config.EventPRReview:\n\t\tif _, ok := cfg.AgentByName(ev.PRAuthor); ok {\n\t\t\treturn ev.PRAuthor, true\n\t\t}\n\n\t\treturn \"\", false\n\t}\n\n\treturn cfg.EventAgent(ev.Kind)\n}", "path": "internal/scheduler/scheduler.go"}
Result
1 occurrences replaced
Thinking
**6. `zoo.hcl.example`** — Remove `agent = "greg"` from the pr:review block and update the comment (this is the line the reviewer commented on):
Now `zoo.hcl.example` — the exact spot the reviewer flagged:
Tool 🔧 edit_file {"find": "# A review was submitted on a pull request (approved, changes requested,\n# or comment). The agent's working tree is checked out on the PR's head\n# branch, so changes it pushes update the PR directly. It should address\n# the feedback, reply to the review, and resolve the inline comments it\n# has addressed.\nevent \"pr:review\" {\n agent = \"greg\"\n instructions = \"A review was submitted on this pull request. Address the feedback, push your changes to the PR branch, reply to the review, and resolve the inline comments you have addressed.\"\n}", "replace": "# A review was submitted on a pull request (approved, changes requested,\n# or comment). The agent that opened the PR is triggered to handle it,\n# like issue:assigned: its working tree is checked out on the PR's head\n# branch, so changes it pushes update the PR directly. It should address\n# the feedback, reply to the review, and resolve the inline comments it\n# has addressed.\nevent \"pr:review\" {\n // No `agent` here: the agent whose name matches the pull request\n // author's username is triggered.\n instructions = \"A review was submitted on this pull request. Address the feedback, push your changes to the PR branch, reply to the review, and resolve the inline comments you have addressed.\"\n}", "path": "zoo.hcl.example"}
Arguments
{"find": "# A review was submitted on a pull request (approved, changes requested,\n# or comment). The agent's working tree is checked out on the PR's head\n# branch, so changes it pushes update the PR directly. It should address\n# the feedback, reply to the review, and resolve the inline comments it\n# has addressed.\nevent \"pr:review\" {\n agent = \"greg\"\n instructions = \"A review was submitted on this pull request. Address the feedback, push your changes to the PR branch, reply to the review, and resolve the inline comments you have addressed.\"\n}", "replace": "# A review was submitted on a pull request (approved, changes requested,\n# or comment). The agent that opened the PR is triggered to handle it,\n# like issue:assigned: its working tree is checked out on the PR's head\n# branch, so changes it pushes update the PR directly. It should address\n# the feedback, reply to the review, and resolve the inline comments it\n# has addressed.\nevent \"pr:review\" {\n // No `agent` here: the agent whose name matches the pull request\n // author's username is triggered.\n instructions = \"A review was submitted on this pull request. Address the feedback, push your changes to the PR branch, reply to the review, and resolve the inline comments you have addressed.\"\n}", "path": "zoo.hcl.example"}
Result
1 occurrences replaced
Thinking
**7. Tests.**
a. `internal/config/config_test.go`:
- `validConfig`: Remove `agent = "leon"` from the pr:review block.
- `TestLoadValid`: Change the pr:review assertion to "no static agent".
- `TestValidatePRReviewRequiresAgent` → `TestValidatePRReviewRejectsAgent`.
Now the tests. First `config_test.go`:
Tool 🔧 edit_file {"find": "event \"pr:review\" {\n agent = \"leon\"\n instructions = \"Address the review feedback and respond.\"\n}\n`", "replace": "event \"pr:review\" {\n instructions = \"Address the review feedback and respond.\"\n}\n`", "path": "internal/config/config_test.go"}
Arguments
{"find": "event \"pr:review\" {\n agent = \"leon\"\n instructions = \"Address the review feedback and respond.\"\n}\n`", "replace": "event \"pr:review\" {\n instructions = \"Address the review feedback and respond.\"\n}\n`", "path": "internal/config/config_test.go"}
Result
1 occurrences replaced
Tool 🔧 edit_file {"find": "\tif agent, ok := cfg.EventAgent(EventPRReview); !ok || agent != \"leon\" {\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected pr:review -> leon, got %q, %v\", agent, ok)\n\t}\n\tif got := cfg.EventInstructions(EventPRReview); got != \"Address the review feedback and respond.\" {\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"unexpected pr:review instructions: %q\", got)\n\t}\n}\n\nfunc TestValidatePRReviewRequiresAgent(t *testing.T) {\n\t_, err := load(t, `\nllm \"qwen\" { openai = \"https://example.com\" token = \"tok\" model = \"qwen3\" }\nforgejo { url = \"https://example.com\" token = \"tok\" }\nenvironment { docker_image = \"debian:unstable\" max_live_agents = 1 }\nagent \"leon\" { llm = \"qwen\" }\nevent \"pr:review\" { instructions = \"no agent set\" }\n`)\n\tif err == nil {\n\t\tt.Fatal(\"expected error for pr:review without an agent\")\n\t}\n}", "replace": "\tif _, ok := cfg.EventAgent(EventPRReview); ok {\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"pr:review should have no static agent\")\n\t}\n\tif got := cfg.EventInstructions(EventPRReview); got != \"Address the review feedback and respond.\" {\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"unexpected pr:review instructions: %q\", got)\n\t}\n}\n\nfunc TestValidatePRReviewRejectsAgent(t *testing.T) {\n\t_, err := load(t, `\nllm \"qwen\" { openai = \"https://example.com\" token = \"tok\" model = \"qwen3\" }\nforgejo { url = \"https://example.com\" token = \"tok\" }\nenvironment { docker_image = \"debian:unstable\" max_live_agents = 1 }\nagent \"leon\" { llm = \"qwen\" }\nevent \"pr:review\" { agent = \"leon\" }\n`)\n\tif err == nil {\n\t\tt.Fatal(\"expected error: pr:review must not set agent\")\n\t}\n}", "path": "internal/config/config_test.go"}
Arguments
{"find": "\tif agent, ok := cfg.EventAgent(EventPRReview); !ok || agent != \"leon\" {\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected pr:review -> leon, got %q, %v\", agent, ok)\n\t}\n\tif got := cfg.EventInstructions(EventPRReview); got != \"Address the review feedback and respond.\" {\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"unexpected pr:review instructions: %q\", got)\n\t}\n}\n\nfunc TestValidatePRReviewRequiresAgent(t *testing.T) {\n\t_, err := load(t, `\nllm \"qwen\" { openai = \"https://example.com\" token = \"tok\" model = \"qwen3\" }\nforgejo { url = \"https://example.com\" token = \"tok\" }\nenvironment { docker_image = \"debian:unstable\" max_live_agents = 1 }\nagent \"leon\" { llm = \"qwen\" }\nevent \"pr:review\" { instructions = \"no agent set\" }\n`)\n\tif err == nil {\n\t\tt.Fatal(\"expected error for pr:review without an agent\")\n\t}\n}", "replace": "\tif _, ok := cfg.EventAgent(EventPRReview); ok {\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"pr:review should have no static agent\")\n\t}\n\tif got := cfg.EventInstructions(EventPRReview); got != \"Address the review feedback and respond.\" {\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"unexpected pr:review instructions: %q\", got)\n\t}\n}\n\nfunc TestValidatePRReviewRejectsAgent(t *testing.T) {\n\t_, err := load(t, `\nllm \"qwen\" { openai = \"https://example.com\" token = \"tok\" model = \"qwen3\" }\nforgejo { url = \"https://example.com\" token = \"tok\" }\nenvironment { docker_image = \"debian:unstable\" max_live_agents = 1 }\nagent \"leon\" { llm = \"qwen\" }\nevent \"pr:review\" { agent = \"leon\" }\n`)\n\tif err == nil {\n\t\tt.Fatal(\"expected error: pr:review must not set agent\")\n\t}\n}", "path": "internal/config/config_test.go"}
Result
1 occurrences replaced
Thinking
Next, `internal/scheduler/scheduler_test.go`:
1. `testConfig()`: `{Kind: config.EventPRReview, Agent: "greg"}` → `{Kind: config.EventPRReview}`.
2. `TestResolveAgentPRReviewStatic` → `TestResolveAgentPRReviewByAuthor` (match) + no-match case.
3. `TestSchedulerDropsPRReviewAuthoredByTargetAgent`: Add `PRAuthor: "greg"` to the event, and update the comment.
4. `TestSchedulerDispatchesPRReviewFromSomeoneElse`: Add `PRAuthor: "greg"`, and update the comment.
5. Add `TestSchedulerDropsPRReviewFromNonAgentAuthor`.
Now `scheduler_test.go`:
Tool 🔧 edit_file {"find": "\t\t\t{Kind: config.EventPRNew, Agent: \"greg\"},\n\t\t\t{Kind: config.EventPRReview, Agent: \"greg\"},", "replace": "\t\t\t{Kind: config.EventPRNew, Agent: \"greg\"},\n\t\t\t{Kind: config.EventPRReview},", "path": "internal/scheduler/scheduler_test.go"}
Arguments
{"find": "\t\t\t{Kind: config.EventPRNew, Agent: \"greg\"},\n\t\t\t{Kind: config.EventPRReview, Agent: \"greg\"},", "replace": "\t\t\t{Kind: config.EventPRNew, Agent: \"greg\"},\n\t\t\t{Kind: config.EventPRReview},", "path": "internal/scheduler/scheduler_test.go"}
Result
1 occurrences replaced
Tool 🔧 edit_file {"find": "func TestResolveAgentPRReviewStatic(t *testing.T) {\n\tcfg := testConfig()\n\n\tname, ok := resolveAgent(cfg, forgejo.Event{Kind: config.EventPRReview, ReviewID: 42})\n\tif !ok || name != \"greg\" {\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected greg, got %q, %v\", name, ok)\n\t}\n}", "replace": "func TestResolveAgentPRReviewByAuthor(t *testing.T) {\n\tcfg := testConfig()\n\n\tname, ok := resolveAgent(cfg, forgejo.Event{Kind: config.EventPRReview, PRAuthor: \"greg\", ReviewID: 42})\n\tif !ok || name != \"greg\" {\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected greg (the PR author), got %q, %v\", name, ok)\n\t}\n}\n\nfunc TestResolveAgentPRReviewNoAgentAuthor(t *testing.T) {\n\tcfg := testConfig()\n\n\t_, ok := resolveAgent(cfg, forgejo.Event{Kind: config.EventPRReview, PRAuthor: \"not-an-agent\", ReviewID: 42})\n\tif ok {\n\t\tt.Fatal(\"expected no agent to resolve for a non-agent PR author\")\n\t}\n}", "path": "internal/scheduler/scheduler_test.go"}
Arguments
{"find": "func TestResolveAgentPRReviewStatic(t *testing.T) {\n\tcfg := testConfig()\n\n\tname, ok := resolveAgent(cfg, forgejo.Event{Kind: config.EventPRReview, ReviewID: 42})\n\tif !ok || name != \"greg\" {\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected greg, got %q, %v\", name, ok)\n\t}\n}", "replace": "func TestResolveAgentPRReviewByAuthor(t *testing.T) {\n\tcfg := testConfig()\n\n\tname, ok := resolveAgent(cfg, forgejo.Event{Kind: config.EventPRReview, PRAuthor: \"greg\", ReviewID: 42})\n\tif !ok || name != \"greg\" {\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected greg (the PR author), got %q, %v\", name, ok)\n\t}\n}\n\nfunc TestResolveAgentPRReviewNoAgentAuthor(t *testing.T) {\n\tcfg := testConfig()\n\n\t_, ok := resolveAgent(cfg, forgejo.Event{Kind: config.EventPRReview, PRAuthor: \"not-an-agent\", ReviewID: 42})\n\tif ok {\n\t\tt.Fatal(\"expected no agent to resolve for a non-agent PR author\")\n\t}\n}", "path": "internal/scheduler/scheduler_test.go"}
Result
1 occurrences replaced
Thinking
Next, I'll update the two scheduler-level tests related to pr:review, and add a drop test for non-agent authors:
Tool 🔧 edit_file {"find": "// A review the pr:review agent submits on the same PR must not trigger\n// itself: the event's author (the reviewer) is the resolved agent.\nfunc TestSchedulerDropsPRReviewAuthoredByTargetAgent(t *testing.T) {\n\tcfg := testConfig()\n\tst := newStore(t)\n\tfg := &fakeForgejo{}\n\trunner := &fakeRunner{}\n\tlogger := slog.New(slog.DiscardHandler)\n\n\tsched := New(cfg, st, fg, runner, livelog.NewHub(), logger)\n\n\tevents := make(chan forgejo.Event, 1)\n\tevents <- forgejo.Event{Kind: config.EventPRReview, Author: \"greg\", Owner: \"acme\", Repo: \"widgets\", Index: 9, ReviewID: 42}\n\tclose(events)", "replace": "// A review greg submits on a PR greg opened must not trigger greg: the\n// event's author (the reviewer) is the resolved agent (the PR author).\nfunc TestSchedulerDropsPRReviewAuthoredByTargetAgent(t *testing.T) {\n\tcfg := testConfig()\n\tst := newStore(t)\n\tfg := &fakeForgejo{}\n\trunner := &fakeRunner{}\n\tlogger := slog.New(slog.DiscardHandler)\n\n\tsched := New(cfg, st, fg, runner, livelog.NewHub(), logger)\n\n\tevents := make(chan forgejo.Event, 1)\n\tevents <- forgejo.Event{Kind: config.EventPRReview, Author: \"greg\", PRAuthor: \"greg\", Owner: \"acme\", Repo: \"widgets\", Index: 9, ReviewID: 42}\n\tclose(events)", "path": "internal/scheduler/scheduler_test.go"}
Arguments
{"find": "// A review the pr:review agent submits on the same PR must not trigger\n// itself: the event's author (the reviewer) is the resolved agent.\nfunc TestSchedulerDropsPRReviewAuthoredByTargetAgent(t *testing.T) {\n\tcfg := testConfig()\n\tst := newStore(t)\n\tfg := &fakeForgejo{}\n\trunner := &fakeRunner{}\n\tlogger := slog.New(slog.DiscardHandler)\n\n\tsched := New(cfg, st, fg, runner, livelog.NewHub(), logger)\n\n\tevents := make(chan forgejo.Event, 1)\n\tevents <- forgejo.Event{Kind: config.EventPRReview, Author: \"greg\", Owner: \"acme\", Repo: \"widgets\", Index: 9, ReviewID: 42}\n\tclose(events)", "replace": "// A review greg submits on a PR greg opened must not trigger greg: the\n// event's author (the reviewer) is the resolved agent (the PR author).\nfunc TestSchedulerDropsPRReviewAuthoredByTargetAgent(t *testing.T) {\n\tcfg := testConfig()\n\tst := newStore(t)\n\tfg := &fakeForgejo{}\n\trunner := &fakeRunner{}\n\tlogger := slog.New(slog.DiscardHandler)\n\n\tsched := New(cfg, st, fg, runner, livelog.NewHub(), logger)\n\n\tevents := make(chan forgejo.Event, 1)\n\tevents <- forgejo.Event{Kind: config.EventPRReview, Author: \"greg\", PRAuthor: \"greg\", Owner: \"acme\", Repo: \"widgets\", Index: 9, ReviewID: 42}\n\tclose(events)", "path": "internal/scheduler/scheduler_test.go"}
Result
1 occurrences replaced
Tool 🔧 edit_file {"find": "func TestSchedulerDispatchesPRReviewFromSomeoneElse(t *testing.T) {\n\tcfg := testConfig()\n\tst := newStore(t)\n\tfg := &fakeForgejo{}\n\trunner := &fakeRunner{}\n\tlogger := slog.New(slog.DiscardHandler)\n\n\tsched := New(cfg, st, fg, runner, livelog.NewHub(), logger)\n\n\tevents := make(chan forgejo.Event, 1)\n\tevents <- forgejo.Event{Kind: config.EventPRReview, Author: \"leon\", Owner: \"acme\", Repo: \"widgets\", Index: 9, ReviewID: 42}\n\tclose(events)\n\n\tctx, cancel := context.WithTimeout(context.Background(), 2*time.Second)\n\tdefer cancel()\n\n\tsched.Run(ctx, events)\n\tsched.Shutdown(ctx)\n\n\tjobs, err := st.ListJobs(ctx, 10)\n\tif err != nil {\n\t\tt.Fatal(err)\n\t}\n\tif len(jobs) != 1 || jobs[0].Agent != \"greg\" {\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected a review from a different author to dispatch to greg, got %+v\", jobs)\n\t}\n}", "replace": "// A review leon submits on a PR greg opened dispatches to greg, the\n// agent that opened the PR — not to the reviewer.\nfunc TestSchedulerDispatchesPRReviewToPRAuthor(t *testing.T) {\n\tcfg := testConfig()\n\tst := newStore(t)\n\tfg := &fakeForgejo{}\n\trunner := &fakeRunner{}\n\tlogger := slog.New(slog.DiscardHandler)\n\n\tsched := New(cfg, st, fg, runner, livelog.NewHub(), logger)\n\n\tevents := make(chan forgejo.Event, 1)\n\tevents <- forgejo.Event{Kind: config.EventPRReview, Author: \"leon\", PRAuthor: \"greg\", Owner: \"acme\", Repo: \"widgets\", Index: 9, ReviewID: 42}\n\tclose(events)\n\n\tctx, cancel := context.WithTimeout(context.Background(), 2*time.Second)\n\tdefer cancel()\n\n\tsched.Run(ctx, events)\n\tsched.Shutdown(ctx)\n\n\tjobs, err := st.ListJobs(ctx, 10)\n\tif err != nil {\n\t\tt.Fatal(err)\n\t}\n\tif len(jobs) != 1 || jobs[0].Agent != \"greg\" {\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected a review of greg's PR to dispatch to greg, got %+v\", jobs)\n\t}\n}\n\n// A review on a PR opened by a human (no matching agent) is dropped:\n// there is no agent to react with.\nfunc TestSchedulerDropsPRReviewFromNonAgentAuthor(t *testing.T) {\n\tcfg := testConfig()\n\tst := newStore(t)\n\tfg := &fakeForgejo{}\n\trunner := &fakeRunner{}\n\tlogger := slog.New(slog.DiscardHandler)\n\n\tsched := New(cfg, st, fg, runner, livelog.NewHub(), logger)\n\n\tevents := make(chan forgejo.Event, 1)\n\tevents <- forgejo.Event{Kind: config.EventPRReview, Author: \"leon\", PRAuthor: \"alice\", Owner: \"acme\", Repo: \"widgets\", Index: 9, ReviewID: 42}\n\tclose(events)\n\n\tctx, cancel := context.WithTimeout(context.Background(), 2*time.Second)\n\tdefer cancel()\n\n\tsched.Run(ctx, events)\n\tsched.Shutdown(ctx)\n\n\tjobs, err := st.ListJobs(ctx, 10)\n\tif err != nil {\n\t\tt.Fatal(err)\n\t}\n\tif len(jobs) != 0 {\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected no job for a PR opened by a non-agent, got %+v\", jobs)\n\t}\n}", "path": "internal/scheduler/scheduler_test.go"}
Arguments
{"find": "func TestSchedulerDispatchesPRReviewFromSomeoneElse(t *testing.T) {\n\tcfg := testConfig()\n\tst := newStore(t)\n\tfg := &fakeForgejo{}\n\trunner := &fakeRunner{}\n\tlogger := slog.New(slog.DiscardHandler)\n\n\tsched := New(cfg, st, fg, runner, livelog.NewHub(), logger)\n\n\tevents := make(chan forgejo.Event, 1)\n\tevents <- forgejo.Event{Kind: config.EventPRReview, Author: \"leon\", Owner: \"acme\", Repo: \"widgets\", Index: 9, ReviewID: 42}\n\tclose(events)\n\n\tctx, cancel := context.WithTimeout(context.Background(), 2*time.Second)\n\tdefer cancel()\n\n\tsched.Run(ctx, events)\n\tsched.Shutdown(ctx)\n\n\tjobs, err := st.ListJobs(ctx, 10)\n\tif err != nil {\n\t\tt.Fatal(err)\n\t}\n\tif len(jobs) != 1 || jobs[0].Agent != \"greg\" {\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected a review from a different author to dispatch to greg, got %+v\", jobs)\n\t}\n}", "replace": "// A review leon submits on a PR greg opened dispatches to greg, the\n// agent that opened the PR — not to the reviewer.\nfunc TestSchedulerDispatchesPRReviewToPRAuthor(t *testing.T) {\n\tcfg := testConfig()\n\tst := newStore(t)\n\tfg := &fakeForgejo{}\n\trunner := &fakeRunner{}\n\tlogger := slog.New(slog.DiscardHandler)\n\n\tsched := New(cfg, st, fg, runner, livelog.NewHub(), logger)\n\n\tevents := make(chan forgejo.Event, 1)\n\tevents <- forgejo.Event{Kind: config.EventPRReview, Author: \"leon\", PRAuthor: \"greg\", Owner: \"acme\", Repo: \"widgets\", Index: 9, ReviewID: 42}\n\tclose(events)\n\n\tctx, cancel := context.WithTimeout(context.Background(), 2*time.Second)\n\tdefer cancel()\n\n\tsched.Run(ctx, events)\n\tsched.Shutdown(ctx)\n\n\tjobs, err := st.ListJobs(ctx, 10)\n\tif err != nil {\n\t\tt.Fatal(err)\n\t}\n\tif len(jobs) != 1 || jobs[0].Agent != \"greg\" {\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected a review of greg's PR to dispatch to greg, got %+v\", jobs)\n\t}\n}\n\n// A review on a PR opened by a human (no matching agent) is dropped:\n// there is no agent to react with.\nfunc TestSchedulerDropsPRReviewFromNonAgentAuthor(t *testing.T) {\n\tcfg := testConfig()\n\tst := newStore(t)\n\tfg := &fakeForgejo{}\n\trunner := &fakeRunner{}\n\tlogger := slog.New(slog.DiscardHandler)\n\n\tsched := New(cfg, st, fg, runner, livelog.NewHub(), logger)\n\n\tevents := make(chan forgejo.Event, 1)\n\tevents <- forgejo.Event{Kind: config.EventPRReview, Author: \"leon\", PRAuthor: \"alice\", Owner: \"acme\", Repo: \"widgets\", Index: 9, ReviewID: 42}\n\tclose(events)\n\n\tctx, cancel := context.WithTimeout(context.Background(), 2*time.Second)\n\tdefer cancel()\n\n\tsched.Run(ctx, events)\n\tsched.Shutdown(ctx)\n\n\tjobs, err := st.ListJobs(ctx, 10)\n\tif err != nil {\n\t\tt.Fatal(err)\n\t}\n\tif len(jobs) != 0 {\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected no job for a PR opened by a non-agent, got %+v\", jobs)\n\t}\n}", "path": "internal/scheduler/scheduler_test.go"}
Result
1 occurrences replaced
Thinking
Next, `internal/forgejo/webhook_test.go`:
- `TestDecodePullRequestOpened`: Add an assertion for PRAuthor.
- `TestDecodePullRequestReviewSubmitted`: Add an assertion for PRAuthor.
Now `webhook_test.go` — assert the new `PRAuthor` field:
Tool 🔧 edit_file {"find": "\tif ev.Kind != EventPRNew || ev.Index != 9 || ev.Author != \"greg\" {\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"unexpected event: %+v\", ev)\n\t}\n}", "replace": "\tif ev.Kind != EventPRNew || ev.Index != 9 || ev.Author != \"greg\" {\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"unexpected event: %+v\", ev)\n\t}\n\tif ev.PRAuthor != \"greg\" {\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected PR author greg, got %q\", ev.PRAuthor)\n\t}\n}", "path": "internal/forgejo/webhook_test.go"}
Arguments
{"find": "\tif ev.Kind != EventPRNew || ev.Index != 9 || ev.Author != \"greg\" {\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"unexpected event: %+v\", ev)\n\t}\n}", "replace": "\tif ev.Kind != EventPRNew || ev.Index != 9 || ev.Author != \"greg\" {\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"unexpected event: %+v\", ev)\n\t}\n\tif ev.PRAuthor != \"greg\" {\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected PR author greg, got %q\", ev.PRAuthor)\n\t}\n}", "path": "internal/forgejo/webhook_test.go"}
Result
1 occurrences replaced
Tool 🔧 edit_file {"find": "\t// The author is the reviewer, not the PR author.\n\tif ev.Author != \"leon\" {\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected reviewer as author, got %q\", ev.Author)\n\t}", "replace": "\t// The author is the reviewer, not the PR author.\n\tif ev.Author != \"leon\" {\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected reviewer as author, got %q\", ev.Author)\n\t}\n\t// PRAuthor is the user who opened the PR: the agent it resolves to.\n\tif ev.PRAuthor != \"greg\" {\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected PR author greg, got %q\", ev.PRAuthor)\n\t}", "path": "internal/forgejo/webhook_test.go"}
Arguments
{"find": "\t// The author is the reviewer, not the PR author.\n\tif ev.Author != \"leon\" {\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected reviewer as author, got %q\", ev.Author)\n\t}", "replace": "\t// The author is the reviewer, not the PR author.\n\tif ev.Author != \"leon\" {\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected reviewer as author, got %q\", ev.Author)\n\t}\n\t// PRAuthor is the user who opened the PR: the agent it resolves to.\n\tif ev.PRAuthor != \"greg\" {\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected PR author greg, got %q\", ev.PRAuthor)\n\t}", "path": "internal/forgejo/webhook_test.go"}
Result
1 occurrences replaced
Thinking
Next, `internal/forgejo/poll_test.go`:
- `TestPollReviewsDispatchesNewReview`: Add `Poster: &sdk.User{UserName: "greg"}` to the `sdk.Issue`, and assert `ev.PRAuthor == "greg"`.
Now `poll_test.go` — give the PR a poster and assert `PRAuthor`:
Tool 🔧 edit_file {"find": "\tw := newTestWatcher(t, server.URL)\n\tsince := time.Date(2026, 8, 24, 9, 0, 0, 0, time.UTC)\n\n\tw.pollReviews(context.Background(), \"acme\", \"widgets\", &sdk.Issue{Index: 9, Title: \"Fix the thing\", Body: \"This fixes it\"}, since)\n\n\tselect {\n\tcase ev := <-w.Events():\n\t\tif ev.Kind != EventPRReview {\n\t\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected pr:review, got %q\", ev.Kind)\n\t\t}\n\t\tif ev.Owner != \"acme\" || ev.Repo != \"widgets\" || ev.Index != 9 {\n\t\t\tt.Fatalf(\"unexpected owner/repo/index: %+v\", ev)\n\t\t}\n\t\tif ev.Author != \"leon\" {\n\t\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected reviewer as author, got %q\", ev.Author)\n\t\t}", "replace": "\tw := newTestWatcher(t, server.URL)\n\tsince := time.Date(2026, 8, 24, 9, 0, 0, 0, time.UTC)\n\n\tw.pollReviews(context.Background(), \"acme\", \"widgets\", &sdk.Issue{Index: 9, Title: \"Fix the thing\", Body: \"This fixes it\", Poster: &sdk.User{UserName: \"greg\"}}, since)\n\n\tselect {\n\tcase ev := <-w.Events():\n\t\tif ev.Kind != EventPRReview {\n\t\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected pr:review, got %q\", ev.Kind)\n\t\t}\n\t\tif ev.Owner != \"acme\" || ev.Repo != \"widgets\" || ev.Index != 9 {\n\t\t\tt.Fatalf(\"unexpected owner/repo/index: %+v\", ev)\n\t\t}\n\t\tif ev.Author != \"leon\" {\n\t\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected reviewer as author, got %q\", ev.Author)\n\t\t}\n\t\t// PRAuthor is the user who opened the PR: the agent it resolves to.\n\t\tif ev.PRAuthor != \"greg\" {\n\t\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected PR author greg, got %q\", ev.PRAuthor)\n\t\t}", "path": "internal/forgejo/poll_test.go"}
Arguments
{"find": "\tw := newTestWatcher(t, server.URL)\n\tsince := time.Date(2026, 8, 24, 9, 0, 0, 0, time.UTC)\n\n\tw.pollReviews(context.Background(), \"acme\", \"widgets\", &sdk.Issue{Index: 9, Title: \"Fix the thing\", Body: \"This fixes it\"}, since)\n\n\tselect {\n\tcase ev := <-w.Events():\n\t\tif ev.Kind != EventPRReview {\n\t\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected pr:review, got %q\", ev.Kind)\n\t\t}\n\t\tif ev.Owner != \"acme\" || ev.Repo != \"widgets\" || ev.Index != 9 {\n\t\t\tt.Fatalf(\"unexpected owner/repo/index: %+v\", ev)\n\t\t}\n\t\tif ev.Author != \"leon\" {\n\t\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected reviewer as author, got %q\", ev.Author)\n\t\t}", "replace": "\tw := newTestWatcher(t, server.URL)\n\tsince := time.Date(2026, 8, 24, 9, 0, 0, 0, time.UTC)\n\n\tw.pollReviews(context.Background(), \"acme\", \"widgets\", &sdk.Issue{Index: 9, Title: \"Fix the thing\", Body: \"This fixes it\", Poster: &sdk.User{UserName: \"greg\"}}, since)\n\n\tselect {\n\tcase ev := <-w.Events():\n\t\tif ev.Kind != EventPRReview {\n\t\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected pr:review, got %q\", ev.Kind)\n\t\t}\n\t\tif ev.Owner != \"acme\" || ev.Repo != \"widgets\" || ev.Index != 9 {\n\t\t\tt.Fatalf(\"unexpected owner/repo/index: %+v\", ev)\n\t\t}\n\t\tif ev.Author != \"leon\" {\n\t\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected reviewer as author, got %q\", ev.Author)\n\t\t}\n\t\t// PRAuthor is the user who opened the PR: the agent it resolves to.\n\t\tif ev.PRAuthor != \"greg\" {\n\t\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected PR author greg, got %q\", ev.PRAuthor)\n\t\t}", "path": "internal/forgejo/poll_test.go"}
Result
1 occurrences replaced
Thinking
Alright, let's build and run the tests. Also, let me double-check whether there are any other places that need updating:
1. `internal/tools/forgejo.go` — the description of `submit_review` says "A submitted review fires a pr:review event that triggers a run" — still accurate.
2. The PR body says "pr:review is a static event kind (like pr:new)" — that's in the PR description on Forgejo, not in the repo. I'll mention it in the reply.
3. Check whether the web dashboard has any references to event kind / agent mapping? Let me grep for "pr:review" in the web package — the earlier grep only showed the files I've already checked. The web package wasn't in the grep results, so it's fine.
4. `internal/agentrun/run.go` — no references to static agents.
5. `cmd/zoo/main.go` — let me check whether it references event kinds… the earlier grep for "pr:review" didn't show main.go. No problem.
Alright, let's build and test.
Now let me build and run the full test suite:
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /project && go build ./... && go vet ./... && gofmt -l . && go test ./... 2>&1 | tail -15", "timeout": 300}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /project && go build ./... && go vet ./... && gofmt -l . && go test ./... 2>&1 | tail -15", "timeout": 300}
Result
? github.com/abrander/zoo/cmd/zoo [no test files] ok github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/agentrun 0.004s ok github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/config 0.004s ok github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/forgejo 2.869s ok github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/livelog (cached) ok github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/llm 0.003s ok github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/scheduler 12.143s ok github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/store (cached) ok github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/tools 0.003s ok github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/web 5.759s
Thinking
All tests pass, vet is clean, and gofmt is clean too (no file listing).
Now, let me re-check a few remaining points:
1. **`EventAgent` doc comment** — "Returns the statically configured agent name for the specified event kind, if declared and set." Still accurate.
2. **The `submit_review` tool description** in `internal/tools/forgejo.go` — "A submitted review fires a pr:review event, triggering a run, so use it to react to a PR (e.g., after addressing previous feedback) or to review someone else's PR." Still accurate.
3. **The PR body** states "pr:review is a static event kind (like pr:new): the agent named in the `event "pr:review"` block of `zoo.hcl` handles it." — this is now outdated, but it's in the PR description on Forgejo, which I can't edit with the available tools. I'll mention it in the reply comment.
4. Wait — one more thing to consider. The PR description also says "the scheduler's existing self-trigger guard drops events authored by the agent that would resolve to it — so a review submitted by the pr:review agent itself never triggers itself." With dynamic resolution, the semantics of this guard are subtly different: previously "the pr:review agent" was a static agent (greg), and a review greg submitted anywhere was dropped. Now, a review is dropped only if the reviewer is the PR author's agent. Example: greg reviews leon's PR → resolved agent = leon; guard: author greg ≠ leon → leon runs. This is the desired behavior (the PR author reacts). And greg reviewing his own PR → resolved agent = greg, author = greg → dropped. Good.
5. Another check: `TestSchedulerDropsEventAuthoredByTargetAgent` for issue:comment — no impact.
6. What about `internal/agentrun/forgejo.go` or `client.go` — do they reference the event's author or the PR author? Not for resolution. No issue.
7. Check the web dashboard — does it display a mapping of event kinds? Let me quickly grep for "pr:review" in internal/web… the initial grep for "pr:review" across the whole project only showed the files I've already reviewed. OK.
8. `cmd/zoo/main.go` — check whether it references staticEventKinds or pr:review… the grep didn't find anything.
Now, let me also think about whether the `event "pr:review"` block is still *required* in zoo.hcl. In the case of issue:assigned, the block is optional (the scheduler resolves it even without a block, and instructions default to ""). Same for pr:review now. The example file keeps the block for the instructions. Good.
One more consideration — the PR description's "Loop safety" section says "the scheduler's existing self-trigger guard drops events authored by the agent that would resolve to it." Still correct.
Also, the "Known limitations" section: "The reacting agent must have push access to the PR head branch (true for same-repo agent PRs…)" — still correct, and actually more consistent now: the reacting agent is the PR author, so they own the head branch (in the same-repo case).
Now — one more thing I want to double-check: in `run.go`, the branch name for non-PR events is `issue-%d-%s` using the agent name. For pr:review, branch = headRef. No change.
Also, let me reconsider whether to set `PRAuthor` on `pr:new` events. It's harmless and consistent (the field's doc says "set for PR events"). I've set it in both the webhook and the poll. Good.
Let me review the full diff to make sure everything is consistent.
All green. Let me review the complete diff:
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /project && git diff"}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /project && git diff"}
Result
diff --git a/internal/config/config.go b/internal/config/config.go
index 136b698..7f10571 100644
--- a/internal/config/config.go
+++ b/internal/config/config.go
@@ -7,9 +7,11 @@ import (
"github.com/hashicorp/hcl/v2/hclsimple"
)
-// Known event kinds. issue:assigned is resolved dynamically (agent name
-// must match the Forgejo assignee's username) so it never carries an
-// `agent` attribute; the rest map statically to one configured agent.
+// Known event kinds. issue:assigned and pr:review are resolved
+// dynamically (agent name must match the Forgejo assignee's username,
+// or the pull request author's username, respectively) so they never
+// carry an `agent` attribute; the rest map statically to one
+// configured agent.
const (
EventIssueNew = "issue:new"
EventIssueComment = "issue:comment"
@@ -22,7 +24,6 @@ var staticEventKinds = map[string]bool{
EventIssueNew: true,
EventIssueComment: true,
EventPRNew: true,
- EventPRReview: true,
}
type Config struct {
@@ -130,6 +131,11 @@ func (c *Config) Validate() error {
return fmt.Errorf("event %q: must not set agent; the agent whose name matches the Forgejo assignee's username is triggered dynamically", e.Kind)
}
+ case e.Kind == EventPRReview:
+ if e.Agent != "" {
+ return fmt.Errorf("event %q: must not set agent; the agent whose name matches the pull request author's username is triggered dynamically", e.Kind)
+ }
+
case staticEventKinds[e.Kind]:
if e.Agent == "" {
return fmt.Errorf("event %q: agent is required", e.Kind)
diff --git a/internal/config/config_test.go b/internal/config/config_test.go
index b2df672..8d5ee99 100644
--- a/internal/config/config_test.go
+++ b/internal/config/config_test.go
@@ -56,7 +56,6 @@ event "pr:new" {
}
event "pr:review" {
- agent = "leon"
instructions = "Address the review feedback and respond."
}
`
@@ -89,24 +88,24 @@ func TestLoadValid(t *testing.T) {
t.Fatalf("expected no instructions for pr:new, got %q", got)
}
- if agent, ok := cfg.EventAgent(EventPRReview); !ok || agent != "leon" {
- t.Fatalf("expected pr:review -> leon, got %q, %v", agent, ok)
+ if _, ok := cfg.EventAgent(EventPRReview); ok {
+ t.Fatalf("pr:review should have no static agent")
}
if got := cfg.EventInstructions(EventPRReview); got != "Address the review feedback and respond." {
t.Fatalf("unexpected pr:review instructions: %q", got)
}
}
-func TestValidatePRReviewRequiresAgent(t *testing.T) {
+func TestValidatePRReviewRejectsAgent(t *testing.T) {
_, err := load(t, `
llm "qwen" { openai = "https://example.com" token = "tok" model = "qwen3" }
forgejo { url = "https://example.com" token = "tok" }
environment { docker_image = "debian:unstable" max_live_agents = 1 }
agent "leon" { llm = "qwen" }
-event "pr:review" { instructions = "no agent set" }
+event "pr:review" { agent = "leon" }
`)
if err == nil {
- t.Fatal("expected error for pr:review without an agent")
+ t.Fatal("expected error: pr:review must not set agent")
}
}
diff --git a/internal/forgejo/event.go b/internal/forgejo/event.go
index bf8696f..c1aa523 100644
--- a/internal/forgejo/event.go
+++ b/internal/forgejo/event.go
@@ -32,6 +32,12 @@ type Event struct {
// issue was assigned to.
Assignee string
+ // PRAuthor is set for PR events: the Forgejo username of the user
+ // who opened the pull request. For EventPRReview the scheduler
+ // resolves the event to this user's agent, so the agent that opened
+ // the PR reacts to the review of it.
+ PRAuthor string
+
// Comment is set for EventIssueComment.
Comment string
diff --git a/internal/forgejo/poll.go b/internal/forgejo/poll.go
index b231a63..e5d9e7c 100644
--- a/internal/forgejo/poll.go
+++ b/internal/forgejo/poll.go
@@ -256,15 +256,16 @@ func issueToPRNewEvent(issue *sdk.Issue, owner, repo string) Event {
raw, _ := json.Marshal(issue)
return Event{
- Kind: EventPRNew,
- ID: prNewID(issue.ID),
- Owner: owner,
- Repo: repo,
- Index: issue.Index,
- Title: issue.Title,
- Body: issue.Body,
- Author: posterName(issue.Poster),
- Raw: raw,
+ Kind: EventPRNew,
+ ID: prNewID(issue.ID),
+ Owner: owner,
+ Repo: repo,
+ Index: issue.Index,
+ Title: issue.Title,
+ Body: issue.Body,
+ Author: posterName(issue.Poster),
+ PRAuthor: posterName(issue.Poster),
+ Raw: raw,
}
}
@@ -280,6 +281,7 @@ func reviewToEvent(pr *sdk.Issue, review *sdk.PullReview, owner, repo string) Ev
Title: pr.Title,
Body: pr.Body,
Author: posterName(review.Reviewer),
+ PRAuthor: posterName(pr.Poster),
ReviewID: review.ID,
ReviewState: string(review.State),
ReviewBody: review.Body,
diff --git a/internal/forgejo/poll_test.go b/internal/forgejo/poll_test.go
index dc944c1..4f14958 100644
--- a/internal/forgejo/poll_test.go
+++ b/internal/forgejo/poll_test.go
@@ -60,7 +60,7 @@ func TestPollReviewsDispatchesNewReview(t *testing.T) {
w := newTestWatcher(t, server.URL)
since := time.Date(2026, 8, 24, 9, 0, 0, 0, time.UTC)
- w.pollReviews(context.Background(), "acme", "widgets", &sdk.Issue{Index: 9, Title: "Fix the thing", Body: "This fixes it"}, since)
+ w.pollReviews(context.Background(), "acme", "widgets", &sdk.Issue{Index: 9, Title: "Fix the thing", Body: "This fixes it", Poster: &sdk.User{UserName: "greg"}}, since)
select {
case ev := <-w.Events():
@@ -73,6 +73,10 @@ func TestPollReviewsDispatchesNewReview(t *testing.T) {
if ev.Author != "leon" {
t.Fatalf("expected reviewer as author, got %q", ev.Author)
}
+ // PRAuthor is the user who opened the PR: the agent it resolves to.
+ if ev.PRAuthor != "greg" {
+ t.Fatalf("expected PR author greg, got %q", ev.PRAuthor)
+ }
if ev.ReviewID != 42 || ev.ReviewState != "REQUEST_CHANGES" || ev.ReviewBody != "Please address the inline comments." {
t.Fatalf("unexpected review fields: %+v", ev)
}
diff --git a/internal/forgejo/webhook.go b/internal/forgejo/webhook.go
index 647c219..e6bd1fb 100644
--- a/internal/forgejo/webhook.go
+++ b/internal/forgejo/webhook.go
@@ -202,15 +202,16 @@ func pullRequestEvent(p pullRequestPayload, raw []byte) (Event, bool, error) {
}
return Event{
- Kind: EventPRNew,
- ID: prNewID(p.PullRequest.ID),
- Owner: repoOwner(p.Repository),
- Repo: p.Repository.Name,
- Index: p.PullRequest.Index,
- Title: p.PullRequest.Title,
- Body: p.PullRequest.Body,
- Author: posterName(p.PullRequest.Poster),
- Raw: raw,
+ Kind: EventPRNew,
+ ID: prNewID(p.PullRequest.ID),
+ Owner: repoOwner(p.Repository),
+ Repo: p.Repository.Name,
+ Index: p.PullRequest.Index,
+ Title: p.PullRequest.Title,
+ Body: p.PullRequest.Body,
+ Author: posterName(p.PullRequest.Poster),
+ PRAuthor: posterName(p.PullRequest.Poster),
+ Raw: raw,
}, true, nil
}
@@ -238,6 +239,7 @@ func pullRequestReviewEvent(p pullRequestReviewPayload, raw []byte) (Event, bool
Title: p.PullRequest.Title,
Body: p.PullRequest.Body,
Author: posterName(p.Review.Reviewer),
+ PRAuthor: posterName(p.PullRequest.Poster),
ReviewID: p.Review.ID,
ReviewState: string(p.Review.State),
ReviewBody: p.Review.Body,
diff --git a/internal/forgejo/webhook_test.go b/internal/forgejo/webhook_test.go
index 2515dcc..c201af9 100644
--- a/internal/forgejo/webhook_test.go
+++ b/internal/forgejo/webhook_test.go
@@ -205,6 +205,9 @@ func TestDecodePullRequestOpened(t *testing.T) {
if ev.Kind != EventPRNew || ev.Index != 9 || ev.Author != "greg" {
t.Fatalf("unexpected event: %+v", ev)
}
+ if ev.PRAuthor != "greg" {
+ t.Fatalf("expected PR author greg, got %q", ev.PRAuthor)
+ }
}
func TestDecodePullRequestReviewSubmitted(t *testing.T) {
@@ -225,6 +228,10 @@ func TestDecodePullRequestReviewSubmitted(t *testing.T) {
if ev.Author != "leon" {
t.Fatalf("expected reviewer as author, got %q", ev.Author)
}
+ // PRAuthor is the user who opened the PR: the agent it resolves to.
+ if ev.PRAuthor != "greg" {
+ t.Fatalf("expected PR author greg, got %q", ev.PRAuthor)
+ }
if ev.ReviewID != 42 || ev.ReviewState != "REQUEST_CHANGES" || ev.ReviewBody != "Please address the inline comments." {
t.Fatalf("unexpected review fields: %+v", ev)
}
diff --git a/internal/scheduler/scheduler.go b/internal/scheduler/scheduler.go
index 8406091..73a2fbb 100644
--- a/internal/scheduler/scheduler.go
+++ b/internal/scheduler/scheduler.go
@@ -61,15 +61,26 @@ func New(cfg *config.Config, st *store.Store, fg forgejoActions, runner Runner,
}
// resolveAgent returns the name of the agent that should handle ev, if
-// any. issue:assigned resolves dynamically: the agent whose config label
-// matches the Forgejo assignee's username. Every other event kind uses
-// the static event->agent mapping from config.
+// any. Two kinds resolve dynamically: issue:assigned to the agent whose
+// config label matches the Forgejo assignee's username, and pr:review to
+// the agent whose config label matches the pull request author's
+// username (the agent that opened the PR reacts to the review of it).
+// Every other event kind uses the static event->agent mapping from
+// config.
func resolveAgent(cfg *config.Config, ev forgejo.Event) (string, bool) {
- if ev.Kind == config.EventIssueAssigned {
+ switch ev.Kind {
+ case config.EventIssueAssigned:
if _, ok := cfg.AgentByName(ev.Assignee); ok {
return ev.Assignee, true
}
+ return "", false
+
+ case config.EventPRReview:
+ if _, ok := cfg.AgentByName(ev.PRAuthor); ok {
+ return ev.PRAuthor, true
+ }
+
return "", false
}
diff --git a/internal/scheduler/scheduler_test.go b/internal/scheduler/scheduler_test.go
index b9bb54d..a05001c 100644
--- a/internal/scheduler/scheduler_test.go
+++ b/internal/scheduler/scheduler_test.go
@@ -29,7 +29,7 @@ func testConfig() *config.Config {
{Kind: config.EventIssueComment, Agent: "leon"},
{Kind: config.EventIssueAssigned},
{Kind: config.EventPRNew, Agent: "greg"},
- {Kind: config.EventPRReview, Agent: "greg"},
+ {Kind: config.EventPRReview},
},
}
}
@@ -43,12 +43,21 @@ func TestResolveAgentStatic(t *testing.T) {
}
}
-func TestResolveAgentPRReviewStatic(t *testing.T) {
+func TestResolveAgentPRReviewByAuthor(t *testing.T) {
cfg := testConfig()
- name, ok := resolveAgent(cfg, forgejo.Event{Kind: config.EventPRReview, ReviewID: 42})
+ name, ok := resolveAgent(cfg, forgejo.Event{Kind: config.EventPRReview, PRAuthor: "greg", ReviewID: 42})
if !ok || name != "greg" {
- t.Fatalf("expected greg, got %q, %v", name, ok)
+ t.Fatalf("expected greg (the PR author), got %q, %v", name, ok)
+ }
+}
+
+func TestResolveAgentPRReviewNoAgentAuthor(t *testing.T) {
+ cfg := testConfig()
+
+ _, ok := resolveAgent(cfg, forgejo.Event{Kind: config.EventPRReview, PRAuthor: "not-an-agent", ReviewID: 42})
+ if ok {
+ t.Fatal("expected no agent to resolve for a non-agent PR author")
}
}
@@ -280,8 +289,8 @@ func TestSchedulerDropsEventAuthoredByTargetAgent(t *testing.T) {
}
}
-// A review the pr:review agent submits on the same PR must not trigger
-// itself: the event's author (the reviewer) is the resolved agent.
+// A review greg submits on a PR greg opened must not trigger greg: the
+// event's author (the reviewer) is the resolved agent (the PR author).
func TestSchedulerDropsPRReviewAuthoredByTargetAgent(t *testing.T) {
cfg := testConfig()
st := newStore(t)
@@ -292,7 +301,7 @@ func TestSchedulerDropsPRReviewAuthoredByTargetAgent(t *testing.T) {
sched := New(cfg, st, fg, runner, livelog.NewHub(), logger)
events := make(chan forgejo.Event, 1)
- events <- forgejo.Event{Kind: config.EventPRReview, Author: "greg", Owner: "acme", Repo: "widgets", Index: 9, ReviewID: 42}
+ events <- forgejo.Event{Kind: config.EventPRReview, Author: "greg", PRAuthor: "greg", Owner: "acme", Repo: "widgets", Index: 9, ReviewID: 42}
close(events)
ctx, cancel := context.WithTimeout(context.Background(), 2*time.Second)
@@ -310,7 +319,9 @@ func TestSchedulerDropsPRReviewAuthoredByTargetAgent(t *testing.T) {
}
}
-func TestSchedulerDispatchesPRReviewFromSomeoneElse(t *testing.T) {
+// A review leon submits on a PR greg opened dispatches to greg, the
+// agent that opened the PR — not to the reviewer.
+func TestSchedulerDispatchesPRReviewToPRAuthor(t *testing.T) {
cfg := testConfig()
st := newStore(t)
fg := &fakeForgejo{}
@@ -320,7 +331,7 @@ func TestSchedulerDispatchesPRReviewFromSomeoneElse(t *testing.T) {
sched := New(cfg, st, fg, runner, livelog.NewHub(), logger)
events := make(chan forgejo.Event, 1)
- events <- forgejo.Event{Kind: config.EventPRReview, Author: "leon", Owner: "acme", Repo: "widgets", Index: 9, ReviewID: 42}
+ events <- forgejo.Event{Kind: config.EventPRReview, Author: "leon", PRAuthor: "greg", Owner: "acme", Repo: "widgets", Index: 9, ReviewID: 42}
close(events)
ctx, cancel := context.WithTimeout(context.Background(), 2*time.Second)
@@ -334,7 +345,37 @@ func TestSchedulerDispatchesPRReviewFromSomeoneElse(t *testing.T) {
t.Fatal(err)
}
if len(jobs) != 1 || jobs[0].Agent != "greg" {
- t.Fatalf("expected a review from a different author to dispatch to greg, got %+v", jobs)
+ t.Fatalf("expected a review of greg's PR to dispatch to greg, got %+v", jobs)
+ }
+}
+
+// A review on a PR opened by a human (no matching agent) is dropped:
+// there is no agent to react with.
+func TestSchedulerDropsPRReviewFromNonAgentAuthor(t *testing.T) {
+ cfg := testConfig()
+ st := newStore(t)
+ fg := &fakeForgejo{}
+ runner := &fakeRunner{}
+ logger := slog.New(slog.DiscardHandler)
+
+ sched := New(cfg, st, fg, runner, livelog.NewHub(), logger)
+
+ events := make(chan forgejo.Event, 1)
+ events <- forgejo.Event{Kind: config.EventPRReview, Author: "leon", PRAuthor: "alice", Owner: "acme", Repo: "widgets", Index: 9, ReviewID: 42}
+ close(events)
+
+ ctx, cancel := context.WithTimeout(context.Background(), 2*time.Second)
+ defer cancel()
+
+ sched.Run(ctx, events)
+ sched.Shutdown(ctx)
+
+ jobs, err := st.ListJobs(ctx, 10)
+ if err != nil {
+ t.Fatal(err)
+ }
+ if len(jobs) != 0 {
+ t.Fatalf("expected no job for a PR opened by a non-agent, got %+v", jobs)
}
}
diff --git a/zoo.hcl.example b/zoo.hcl.example
index 6727650..f361830 100644
--- a/zoo.hcl.example
+++ b/zoo.hcl.example
@@ -70,11 +70,13 @@ event "pr:new" {
}
# A review was submitted on a pull request (approved, changes requested,
-# or comment). The agent's working tree is checked out on the PR's head
+# or comment). The agent that opened the PR is triggered to handle it,
+# like issue:assigned: its working tree is checked out on the PR's head
# branch, so changes it pushes update the PR directly. It should address
# the feedback, reply to the review, and resolve the inline comments it
# has addressed.
event "pr:review" {
- agent = "greg"
+ // No `agent` here: the agent whose name matches the pull request
+ // author's username is triggered.
instructions = "A review was submitted on this pull request. Address the feedback, push your changes to the PR branch, reply to the review, and resolve the inline comments you have addressed."
}
Thinking
The diff looks complete and consistent. A few final checks:
1. The PR body says "pr:review is a static event kind (like pr:new)" — that's in the PR description on Forgejo, and I can't edit it directly, but I'll note it in the reply.
2. One more thing to double-check: the `EventAgent` function in config.go is still used for static kinds — no problem.
3. Check whether the `web` dashboard displays event kinds with agents... let me quickly grep for "EventAgent" or "pr:review" in web.go — the earlier grep didn't find anything in web.
4. Also, check the mention of the static mapping in the `submit_review` description in `internal/tools/forgejo.go` — "A submitted review fires a pr:review event that triggers a run" — still accurate.
5. Should I also check `cmd/zoo/main.go` for any references to event kinds? Let me do a quick grep for "pr:review" there — the earlier project-wide grep only found the files I've already handled. OK.
Now, let me run the full test suite once more (already done — all passing). I'll also run gofmt check (done — no output, clean).
Wait, I should double-check the gofmt output: `gofmt -l .` didn't output anything before the test results, so the formatting is clean.
Now, commit and push. Then:
- Reply to the review with `comment`.
- Resolve inline comment 4646 with `resolve_review_comment`.
The instructions say: "Address the feedback, push changes to the PR branch, reply to the review, and resolve the addressed inline comment."
Let me commit and push first.
The diff is complete and consistent. Let me commit and push:
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /project && git add -A && git commit -m \"Resolve pr:review to the agent that opened the PR\n\nA review on a PR is feedback for whoever wrote the PR, so pr:review\nnow resolves dynamically like issue:assigned: the agent whose name\nmatches the pull request author's username handles it, instead of a\nstatically configured agent.\n\n- forgejo.Event gains PRAuthor (the PR opener), set by both the\n webhook and poll paths for pr:new and pr:review events.\n- scheduler.resolveAgent resolves pr:review to the PR author's agent;\n reviews on PRs opened by non-agents are dropped.\n- config: pr:review is no longer a static event kind; declaring an\n agent for it is now a validation error (like issue:assigned).\n- zoo.hcl.example: drop the agent attribute from the pr:review block.\n- Tests updated and extended for the new resolution.\" && git push origin issue-36-greg", "timeout": 120}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /project && git add -A && git commit -m \"Resolve pr:review to the agent that opened the PR\n\nA review on a PR is feedback for whoever wrote the PR, so pr:review\nnow resolves dynamically like issue:assigned: the agent whose name\nmatches the pull request author's username handles it, instead of a\nstatically configured agent.\n\n- forgejo.Event gains PRAuthor (the PR opener), set by both the\n webhook and poll paths for pr:new and pr:review events.\n- scheduler.resolveAgent resolves pr:review to the PR author's agent;\n reviews on PRs opened by non-agents are dropped.\n- config: pr:review is no longer a static event kind; declaring an\n agent for it is now a validation error (like issue:assigned).\n- zoo.hcl.example: drop the agent attribute from the pr:review block.\n- Tests updated and extended for the new resolution.\" && git push origin issue-36-greg", "timeout": 120}
Result
ERROR CALLING TOOL: command failed: command exited with status 128
Thinking
The commit/push failed with exit code 128. Let me check what happened — maybe the commit succeeded but the push failed, or perhaps the commit itself failed. I'll check the status.
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /project && git status && git log --oneline -3"}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /project && git status && git log --oneline -3"}
Result
On branch issue-36-greg nothing to commit, working tree clean 6cd0612 (HEAD -> issue-36-greg) Resolve pr:review to the agent that opened the PR eb16dd3 Add pr:review event so agents react to PR reviews 42fe9d9 (origin/main, origin/HEAD, main) Merge pull request 'Include full issue comment thread in the agent's seed message' (#34) from issue-33-greg into main
Thinking
The commit succeeded (6cd0612), but the push failed with exit code 128. Let me try pushing again and check the error.
Commit succeeded but push failed. Let me retry the push to see the error:
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /project && git push origin issue-36-greg 2>&1", "timeout": 120}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /project && git push origin issue-36-greg 2>&1", "timeout": 120}
Result
ERROR CALLING TOOL: command failed: command exited with status 128
Thinking
The push failed with exit code 128, but no error output is shown. The system prompt says "For remote git operations (pull, fetch, push, etc.), you can use the `git` tool." Let me try the `git` tool with the push subcommand.
Let me use the `git` tool for the push, as the system prompt suggests for remote operations:
Tool 🔧 git {"subcommand": "push", "args": ["origin", "issue-36-greg"]}
Arguments
{"subcommand": "push", "args": ["origin", "issue-36-greg"]}
Result
To https://code.stdio.dk/abrander/zoo.git eb16dd3..6cd0612 issue-36-greg -> issue-36-greg
Thinking
The push succeeded via the git tool. Next:
1. Reply to the review with a `comment`.
2. Resolve inline comment 4646 with `resolve_review_comment`.
The comment should be a summary of what was done. The reviewer (abrander) asked, "Why is there an agent here? I think the agent who opened the PR should handle it." I've made exactly that change.
Let me write a clear reply:
- Agreed — pr:review now resolves dynamically to the agent that opened the PR (same pattern as issue:assigned).
- Changes: new PRAuthor field on the event (set from pull_request.user in the webhook, and from the PR poster in polling); the scheduler resolves pr:review to the PR author's agent, and drops reviews on PRs opened by non-agents; config no longer accepts `agent` for pr:review (validation error, same as issue:assigned); removed the agent attribute from zoo.hcl.example.
- Loop safety is preserved: the self-trigger guard still drops reviews that an agent submits on its own PR (reviewer == PR author == resolved agent).
- All tests pass, vet/gofmt are clean.
- Note: the PR description still says "pr:review is a static event kind" — I can't edit the PR body from here, so it may need to be updated.
After that, resolve comment 4646.
Pushed. Now let me reply to the review and resolve the addressed inline comment:
Tool 🔧 comment {"body": "Agreed — the agent that opened the PR is the right one to react to feedback on it. `pr:review` now resolves dynamically, the same way `issue:assigned` does, instead of using a statically configured agent.\n\n**What changed** (commit `6cd0612`):\n\n- `forgejo.Event` gains a `PRAuthor` field (the username of the user who opened the PR), set by both the webhook path (`pull_request.user`) and the poll path (the PR's poster) for `pr:new` and `pr:review` events.\n- `scheduler.resolveAgent` now resolves `pr:review` to the agent whose name matches the PR author's username. A review on a PR opened by a non-agent (e.g. a human) is dropped, since there's no agent to react with.\n- `internal/config`: `pr:review` is no longer a static event kind; declaring `agent` for it is now a validation error, mirroring `issue:assigned`.\n- `zoo.hcl.example`: the `agent = \"greg\"` attribute is gone from the `event \"pr:review\"` block — the block remains only for `instructions`.\n\n**Loop safety still holds:** the self-trigger guard now drops a review an agent submits on its *own* PR (reviewer == PR author == resolved agent), while a review one agent submits on another agent's PR dispatches to the PR author.\n\nTests updated and extended (config validation, scheduler resolution incl. non-agent author drop, webhook/poll `PRAuthor` decoding); `go test ./...`, `go vet`, and `gofmt` are all clean.\n\nOne note: the PR description still says \"pr:review is a static event kind (like pr:new)\" in the workflow section — I can't edit the PR body from here, so that line may be worth a touch-up before merge."}
Arguments
{"body": "Agreed — the agent that opened the PR is the right one to react to feedback on it. `pr:review` now resolves dynamically, the same way `issue:assigned` does, instead of using a statically configured agent.\n\n**What changed** (commit `6cd0612`):\n\n- `forgejo.Event` gains a `PRAuthor` field (the username of the user who opened the PR), set by both the webhook path (`pull_request.user`) and the poll path (the PR's poster) for `pr:new` and `pr:review` events.\n- `scheduler.resolveAgent` now resolves `pr:review` to the agent whose name matches the PR author's username. A review on a PR opened by a non-agent (e.g. a human) is dropped, since there's no agent to react with.\n- `internal/config`: `pr:review` is no longer a static event kind; declaring `agent` for it is now a validation error, mirroring `issue:assigned`.\n- `zoo.hcl.example`: the `agent = \"greg\"` attribute is gone from the `event \"pr:review\"` block — the block remains only for `instructions`.\n\n**Loop safety still holds:** the self-trigger guard now drops a review an agent submits on its *own* PR (reviewer == PR author == resolved agent), while a review one agent submits on another agent's PR dispatches to the PR author.\n\nTests updated and extended (config validation, scheduler resolution incl. non-agent author drop, webhook/poll `PRAuthor` decoding); `go test ./...`, `go vet`, and `gofmt` are all clean.\n\nOne note: the PR description still says \"pr:review is a static event kind (like pr:new)\" in the workflow section — I can't edit the PR body from here, so that line may be worth a touch-up before merge."}
Result
Comment posted
Tool 🔧 resolve_review_comment {"comment_id": 4646}
Arguments
{"comment_id": 4646}
Result
ERROR CALLING TOOL: resolve review comment 4646: 405 Method Not Allowed:
Thinking
The `resolve_review_comment` call failed with "405 Method Not Allowed". Hmm. The tool description says "The last one is a direct API call — the SDK doesn't expose the resolve endpoint." Let me look at the client's implementation and check which endpoint it's calling.
The comment posted, but resolving the inline comment failed with a 405. Let me check how the client implements the resolve endpoint:
Tool 🔧 grep_search {"query": "ResolveReviewComment", "context_after": 30}
Arguments
{"query": "ResolveReviewComment", "context_after": 30}
Result
/project/internal/tools/forgejo.go:110:type resolveReviewCommentParams struct {
/project/internal/tools/forgejo.go-111- CommentID int64 `json:"comment_id"`
/project/internal/tools/forgejo.go-112-}
/project/internal/tools/forgejo.go-113-
/project/internal/tools/forgejo.go-114-func init() {
/project/internal/tools/forgejo.go-115- tool := llm.NewTool(
/project/internal/tools/forgejo.go-116- "resolve_review_comment",
/project/internal/tools/forgejo.go-117- "Mark an inline review comment on the pull request as resolved, once you have addressed the feedback it contains. The comment's id is in the review briefing (and the raw event payload).")
/project/internal/tools/forgejo.go-118-
/project/internal/tools/forgejo.go-119- tool.AddIntegerProperty("comment_id", "The id of the inline review comment to resolve", true)
/project/internal/tools/forgejo.go-120-
/project/internal/tools/forgejo.go:121: Register(tool, resolveReviewComment)
/project/internal/tools/forgejo.go-122-}
/project/internal/tools/forgejo.go-123-
/project/internal/tools/forgejo.go:124:func resolveReviewComment(ctx Context, params resolveReviewCommentParams) (string, error) {
/project/internal/tools/forgejo.go:125: if err := ctx.Forgejo().ResolveReviewComment(params.CommentID); err != nil {
/project/internal/tools/forgejo.go-126- return "", err
/project/internal/tools/forgejo.go-127- }
/project/internal/tools/forgejo.go-128-
/project/internal/tools/forgejo.go-129- return "Review comment resolved", nil
/project/internal/tools/forgejo.go-130-}
/project/internal/tools/forgejo.go-131-
/project/internal/tools/forgejo.go-132-type labelParams struct {
/project/internal/tools/forgejo.go-133- Name string `json:"name"`
/project/internal/tools/forgejo.go-134-}
/project/internal/tools/forgejo.go-135-
/project/internal/tools/forgejo.go-136-func init() {
/project/internal/tools/forgejo.go-137- tool := llm.NewTool(
/project/internal/tools/forgejo.go-138- "add_label",
/project/internal/tools/forgejo.go-139- "Add a label to the issue or pull request that triggered this run, creating it on the repo first if needed.")
/project/internal/tools/forgejo.go-140-
/project/internal/tools/forgejo.go-141- tool.AddStringProperty("name", "The label name", true)
/project/internal/tools/forgejo.go-142-
/project/internal/tools/forgejo.go-143- Register(tool, addLabel)
/project/internal/tools/forgejo.go-144-}
/project/internal/tools/forgejo.go-145-
/project/internal/tools/forgejo.go-146-func addLabel(ctx Context, params labelParams) (string, error) {
/project/internal/tools/forgejo.go-147- if err := ctx.Forgejo().AddLabel(params.Name); err != nil {
/project/internal/tools/forgejo.go-148- return "", err
/project/internal/tools/forgejo.go-149- }
/project/internal/tools/forgejo.go-150-
/project/internal/tools/forgejo.go-151- return "Label added", nil
/project/internal/tools/forgejo.go-152-}
/project/internal/tools/forgejo.go-153-
/project/internal/tools/forgejo.go-154-func init() {
/project/internal/tools/forgejo.go-155- tool := llm.NewTool(
--
/project/internal/tools/context.go:53: // ResolveReviewComment marks the inline review comment with the
/project/internal/tools/context.go-54- // given id as resolved, once its feedback has been addressed.
/project/internal/tools/context.go:55: ResolveReviewComment(commentID int64) error
/project/internal/tools/context.go-56-}
--
/project/internal/tools/tools_test.go:35:func (f *fakeForgejoActions) ResolveReviewComment(commentID int64) error {
/project/internal/tools/tools_test.go-36- f.resolvedComments = append(f.resolvedComments, commentID)
/project/internal/tools/tools_test.go-37- return nil
/project/internal/tools/tools_test.go-38-}
/project/internal/tools/tools_test.go-39-
/project/internal/tools/tools_test.go-40-type fakeContext struct {
/project/internal/tools/tools_test.go-41- lastCmd string
/project/internal/tools/tools_test.go-42- output string
/project/internal/tools/tools_test.go-43- err error
/project/internal/tools/tools_test.go-44- fg *fakeForgejoActions
/project/internal/tools/tools_test.go-45-
/project/internal/tools/tools_test.go-46- lastGitSubcommand string
/project/internal/tools/tools_test.go-47- lastGitArgs []string
/project/internal/tools/tools_test.go-48-}
/project/internal/tools/tools_test.go-49-
/project/internal/tools/tools_test.go-50-func (f *fakeContext) Exec(ctx context.Context, command string) (string, error) {
/project/internal/tools/tools_test.go-51- f.lastCmd = command
/project/internal/tools/tools_test.go-52- return f.output, f.err
/project/internal/tools/tools_test.go-53-}
/project/internal/tools/tools_test.go-54-
/project/internal/tools/tools_test.go-55-func (f *fakeContext) Git(ctx context.Context, subcommand string, args ...string) (string, error) {
/project/internal/tools/tools_test.go-56- f.lastGitSubcommand = subcommand
/project/internal/tools/tools_test.go-57- f.lastGitArgs = args
/project/internal/tools/tools_test.go-58- return f.output, f.err
/project/internal/tools/tools_test.go-59-}
/project/internal/tools/tools_test.go-60-
/project/internal/tools/tools_test.go-61-func (f *fakeContext) Forgejo() ForgejoActions {
/project/internal/tools/tools_test.go-62- return f.fg
/project/internal/tools/tools_test.go-63-}
/project/internal/tools/tools_test.go-64-
/project/internal/tools/tools_test.go-65-func TestShellQuote(t *testing.T) {
--
/project/internal/tools/tools_test.go:180:func TestResolveReviewCommentToolCallsForgejo(t *testing.T) {
/project/internal/tools/tools_test.go-181- fg := &fakeForgejoActions{}
/project/internal/tools/tools_test.go-182- fc := &fakeContext{fg: fg}
/project/internal/tools/tools_test.go-183-
/project/internal/tools/tools_test.go:184: out, err := resolveReviewComment(fc, resolveReviewCommentParams{CommentID: 7})
/project/internal/tools/tools_test.go-185- if err != nil {
/project/internal/tools/tools_test.go-186- t.Fatal(err)
/project/internal/tools/tools_test.go-187- }
/project/internal/tools/tools_test.go-188- if out != "Review comment resolved" {
/project/internal/tools/tools_test.go-189- t.Fatalf("unexpected result: %q", out)
/project/internal/tools/tools_test.go-190- }
/project/internal/tools/tools_test.go-191- if len(fg.resolvedComments) != 1 || fg.resolvedComments[0] != 7 {
/project/internal/tools/tools_test.go-192- t.Fatalf("unexpected resolved comments: %v", fg.resolvedComments)
/project/internal/tools/tools_test.go-193- }
/project/internal/tools/tools_test.go-194-}
/project/internal/tools/tools_test.go-195-
Thinking
Let's take a look at the actual client implementation of `ResolveReviewComment` in `internal/forgejo/client.go`.
Tool 🔧 grep_search {"query": "func \\(c \\*Client\\) ResolveReviewComment", "context_after": 30}
Arguments
{"query": "func \\(c \\*Client\\) ResolveReviewComment", "context_after": 30}
Result
/project/internal/forgejo/client.go:319:func (c *Client) ResolveReviewComment(owner, repo string, index, commentID int64) error {
/project/internal/forgejo/client.go-320- path := fmt.Sprintf("/repos/%s/%s/pulls/%d/review_comments/%d/resolve", owner, repo, index, commentID)
/project/internal/forgejo/client.go-321-
/project/internal/forgejo/client.go-322- req, err := http.NewRequest(http.MethodPost, c.baseURL+"/api/v1"+path, nil)
/project/internal/forgejo/client.go-323- if err != nil {
/project/internal/forgejo/client.go-324- return fmt.Errorf("resolve review comment %d: %w", commentID, err)
/project/internal/forgejo/client.go-325- }
/project/internal/forgejo/client.go-326-
/project/internal/forgejo/client.go-327- req.Header.Set("Authorization", "token "+c.token)
/project/internal/forgejo/client.go-328- req.Header.Set("Content-Type", "application/json")
/project/internal/forgejo/client.go-329-
/project/internal/forgejo/client.go-330- resp, err := http.DefaultClient.Do(req)
/project/internal/forgejo/client.go-331- if err != nil {
/project/internal/forgejo/client.go-332- return fmt.Errorf("resolve review comment %d: %w", commentID, err)
/project/internal/forgejo/client.go-333- }
/project/internal/forgejo/client.go-334- defer resp.Body.Close()
/project/internal/forgejo/client.go-335-
/project/internal/forgejo/client.go-336- if resp.StatusCode/100 != 2 {
/project/internal/forgejo/client.go-337- body, _ := io.ReadAll(resp.Body)
/project/internal/forgejo/client.go-338-
/project/internal/forgejo/client.go-339- return fmt.Errorf("resolve review comment %d: %s: %s", commentID, resp.Status, strings.TrimSpace(string(body)))
/project/internal/forgejo/client.go-340- }
/project/internal/forgejo/client.go-341-
/project/internal/forgejo/client.go-342- return nil
/project/internal/forgejo/client.go-343-}
/project/internal/forgejo/client.go-344-
/project/internal/forgejo/client.go-345-// PullRequestInfo is the branch metadata agentrun needs to check out a
/project/internal/forgejo/client.go-346-// pull request's head.
/project/internal/forgejo/client.go-347-type PullRequestInfo struct {
/project/internal/forgejo/client.go-348- HeadRef string
/project/internal/forgejo/client.go-349- BaseRef string
Thinking
The client is POSTing to `/repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/{index}/review_comments/{commentID}/resolve`. The response was 405 Method Not Allowed.
Hmm. Let me check the actual Forgejo API for resolving review comments. In Gitea/Forgejo, the API for resolving review comments is:
`POST /repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/{index}/review_comments/{id}/resolve` — hmm, actually, let me think about this.
Gitea API: `POST /repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/{index}/review_comments/{id}/resolve` — I think this exists in newer Gitea versions (1.22+?). Let me check the Forgejo API docs. Actually, in Gitea, resolving review comments is:
`POST /repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/{index}/review_comments/{id}/resolve`
Hmm, wait, actually I have a feeling the Gitea endpoint was `POST /repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/{index}/review_comments/{id}/resolve`... let me verify by checking the actual server. I have a token (the zoo service token is in the config, but... actually, I don't have the real zoo.hcl — only the example).
Wait — but this 405 error is coming from the `resolve_review_comment` tool that zoo provides to me, which uses the zoo daemon's Forgejo client with the zoo service token. The 405 means the endpoint path or method is wrong for this Forgejo version.
Let me check the Forgejo version on code.stdio.dk and its API. I can probe the API. But which token do I have? I don't have direct access to the zoo.hcl config. Hmm.
Actually wait — maybe I can check the API docs at https://code.stdio.dk/api/swagger or the swagger doc. Let me try:
- `https://code.stdio.dk/api/v1/swagger` — Gitea/Forgejo serves swagger at /api/swagger (v1) or /api/v2 (openapi).
Let me try fetching the OpenAPI spec and grep for "resolve".
Actually, wait a moment. Is fixing this endpoint part of my task? The review feedback was specifically about the static agent in zoo.hcl.example. The 405 on resolve is a separate bug in the new `ResolveReviewComment` client method (part of this PR!). Since this PR is what introduced that method, and the reviewer's workflow expects me to use it, if it's broken then the PR has a bug. As a senior developer, I should verify that the endpoint actually works against the real Forgejo.
Let me check the Forgejo API. First, find the server version: `https://code.stdio.dk/api/version`.
The client is POSTing to `/repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/{index}/review_comments/{id}/resolve` and getting a 405 back — this is a bug in the new client method that this PR introduced. Let's check the actual Forgejo API on the live server:
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "curl -s https://code.stdio.dk/api/version; echo; curl -s https://code.stdio.dk/api/swagger 2>/dev/null | head -c 300; echo; curl -s -o /tmp/openapi.json -w \"%{http_code}\" https://code.stdio.dk/api/v1/swagger.json; echo; curl -s -o /tmp/openapi2.json -w \"%{http_code}\" https://code.stdio.dk/swagger/v1.json", "timeout": 60}
Arguments
{"command": "curl -s https://code.stdio.dk/api/version; echo; curl -s https://code.stdio.dk/api/swagger 2>/dev/null | head -c 300; echo; curl -s -o /tmp/openapi.json -w \"%{http_code}\" https://code.stdio.dk/api/v1/swagger.json; echo; curl -s -o /tmp/openapi2.json -w \"%{http_code}\" https://code.stdio.dk/swagger/v1.json", "timeout": 60}
Result
Not found. <!DOCTYPE html> <html lang="en"> <head> <title>Forgejo API</title> <link href="/assets/css/swagger.css?v=16.0.3~gitea-1.22.0" rel="stylesheet"> </head> <body> <a class="swagger-back-link" href="/"><svg viewBox="0 0 16 16" class="svg octicon-reply" aria-hidden="true" width="16" height="16">< 404 404
Thinking
The server is Forgejo 16.0.3~gitea-1.22.0. The swagger page is at /api/swagger. Let's look for the JSON spec. Gitea's swagger page loads the spec from a specific URL. Let me check the HTML to find the spec's URL.
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "curl -s https://code.stdio.dk/api/swagger | grep -oE '(src|href)=\"[^\"]*\"' | head -20", "timeout": 60}
Arguments
{"command": "curl -s https://code.stdio.dk/api/swagger | grep -oE '(src|href)=\"[^\"]*\"' | head -20", "timeout": 60}
Result
href="/assets/css/swagger.css?v=16.0.3~gitea-1.22.0" href="/" src="/assets/js/swagger.js?v=16.0.3~gitea-1.22.0"
Thinking
The Swagger page loads swagger.js, which probably points to the spec. Let me try common Gitea spec paths:
- `/api/v1/swagger.json` → 404
- `/swagger/v1.json` → 404
In Gitea, is the OpenAPI spec at `/api/v1/swagger`? No wait... Gitea serves the swagger UI at `/api/swagger` and the spec at... let me check swagger.js.
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "curl -s \"https://code.stdio.dk/assets/js/swagger.js?v=16.0.3~gitea-1.22.0\" | head -c 2000", "timeout": 60}
Arguments
{"command": "curl -s \"https://code.stdio.dk/assets/js/swagger.js?v=16.0.3~gitea-1.22.0\" | head -c 2000", "timeout": 60}
Result
(function(){"use strict";var m={},h={};function n(e){var f=h[e];if(f!==void 0)return f.exports;var t=h[e]={exports:{}};return m[e](t,t.exports,n),t.exports}n.m=m,(function(){var e=Object.getPrototypeOf?function(t){return Object.getPrototypeOf(t)}:function(t){return t.__proto__},f;n.t=function(t,o){if(o&1&&(t=this(t)),o&8||typeof t=="object"&&t&&(o&4&&t.__esModule||o&16&&typeof t.then=="function"))return t;var i=Object.create(null);n.r(i);var a={};f=f||[null,e({}),e([]),e(e)];for(var r=o&2&&t;(typeof r=="object"||typeof r=="function")&&!~f.indexOf(r);r=e(r))Object.getOwnPropertyNames(r).forEach(function(s){a[s]=function(){return t[s]}});return a.default=function(){return t},n.d(i,a),i}})(),(function(){n.d=function(e,f){for(var t in f)n.o(f,t)&&!n.o(e,t)&&Object.defineProperty(e,t,{enumerable:!0,get:f[t]})}})(),(function(){n.f={},n.e=function(e){return Promise.all(Object.keys(n.f).reduce(function(f,t){return n.f[t](e,f),f},[]))}})(),(function(){n.u=function(e){if(e==="swagger-ui")return"js/"+e+".951dd583.js"}})(),(function(){n.miniCssF=function(e){return"css/"+e+".28593a15.css"}})(),(function(){n.g=(function(){if(typeof globalThis=="object")return globalThis;try{return this||new Function("return this")()}catch{if(typeof window=="object")return window}})()})(),(function(){n.o=function(e,f){return Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty.call(e,f)}})(),(function(){var e={},f="forgejo:";n.l=function(t,o,i,a){if(e[t]){e[t].push(o);return}var r,s;if(i!==void 0)for(var c=document.getElementsByTagName("script"),u=0;u<c.length;u++){var l=c[u];if(l.getAttribute("src")==t||l.getAttribute("data-webpack")==f+i){r=l;break}}r||(s=!0,r=document.createElement("script"),r.charset="utf-8",n.nc&&r.setAttribute("nonce",n.nc),r.setAttribute("data-webpack",f+i),r.src=t),e[t]=[o];var d=function(b,g){r.onerror=r.onload=null,clearTimeout(p);var w=e[t];if(delete e[t],r.parentNode&&r.parentNode.removeChild(r),w&&w.forEach(function(v){return v(g)}),b)return b(g)},p=setTimeout(d.bind(null,void 0,{type:"ti
Thinking
This is a bundled JS file. Let me search for the spec URL within it.
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "curl -s \"https://code.stdio.dk/assets/js/swagger.js?v=16.0.3~gitea-1.22.0\" | grep -oE '\"[^\"]*swagger[^\"]*\\.json[^\"]*\"' | head; curl -s \"https://code.stdio.dk/assets/js/swagger.js?v=16.0.3~gitea-1.22.0\" | grep -oE 'url:\"[^\"]*\"' | head", "timeout": 60}
Arguments
{"command": "curl -s \"https://code.stdio.dk/assets/js/swagger.js?v=16.0.3~gitea-1.22.0\" | grep -oE '\"[^\"]*swagger[^\"]*\\.json[^\"]*\"' | head; curl -s \"https://code.stdio.dk/assets/js/swagger.js?v=16.0.3~gitea-1.22.0\" | grep -oE 'url:\"[^\"]*\"' | head", "timeout": 60}
Result
Thinking
Let's try a different approach — search for the spec URL inside the bundle:
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "curl -s \"https://code.stdio.dk/assets/js/swagger.js?v=16.0.3~gitea-1.22.0\" > /tmp/swagger.js; grep -oE '[a-zA-Z0-9_/.-]*\\.json' /tmp/swagger.js | sort -u | head; grep -oE 'spec[^,]{0,80}' /tmp/swagger.js | head -5", "timeout": 60}
Arguments
{"command": "curl -s \"https://code.stdio.dk/assets/js/swagger.js?v=16.0.3~gitea-1.22.0\" > /tmp/swagger.js; grep -oE '[a-zA-Z0-9_/.-]*\\.json' /tmp/swagger.js | sort -u | head; grep -oE 'spec[^,]{0,80}' /tmp/swagger.js | head -5", "timeout": 60}
Result
.json spec:o
Thinking
The spec URL is being constructed dynamically. In Gitea, the swagger spec is served at `/api/v1/swagger.json`... but that returned a 404. Hmm, wait — in Gitea, I recall that the OpenAPI v3 spec is at `/api/v2/swagger`? No, that's not right...
Actually, in Gitea:
- Swagger UI (v2, swagger 2.0): `/api/swagger`
- OpenAPI v3 spec: `/api/v1/swagger` — no wait, that's not it...
Let me think. Gitea's routes:
- `GET /api/swagger` → swagger UI (v2)
- The swagger 2.0 JSON spec is at `/api/v1/swagger.json`? I got a 404 back.
Hmm, in Gitea's code (routers/api/swagger.go), the spec is served from the embedded `swagger.json` at the route `/api/swagger`... Actually, the swagger UI page loads `window.ui.initOAuth`... The spec URL in Gitea's swagger template is `api/v1/swagger.json`. But I got a 404 back.
Wait, maybe the 404 was because I used `-o /tmp/openapi.json -w "%{http_code}"` — the output was "404". Let me retry with a different path. Actually, in newer Gitea (1.22+), the swagger UI at /api/swagger loads the spec from `/api/v1/swagger.json`... hmm, but that was a 404.
Let me check the swagger-ui chunk: `js/swagger-ui.951dd583.js` — the main bundle might contain the spec URL. Let me try grepping for "swagger.json" in the full bundle (not just the .json pattern).
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "grep -oE '.{60}swagger\\.json.{20}' /tmp/swagger.js | head -3; grep -oE 'url:[^,}]*' /tmp/swagger.js | head -5; grep -c \"swagger\" /tmp/swagger.js", "timeout": 60}
Arguments
{"command": "grep -oE '.{60}swagger\\.json.{20}' /tmp/swagger.js | head -3; grep -oE 'url:[^,}]*' /tmp/swagger.js | head -5; grep -c \"swagger\" /tmp/swagger.js", "timeout": 60}
Result
3
Thinking
The main bundle doesn't contain the spec URL — it's inside the swagger-ui chunk. Let me try fetching `https://code.stdio.dk/assets/js/js/swagger-ui.951dd583.js`... no wait, the chunk URL is relative to the assets/js directory: `js/swagger-ui.951dd583.js` → `https://code.stdio.dk/assets/js/js/swagger-ui.951dd583.js`? Hmm, that seems weird. Actually, the public path is probably `/assets/js/`, so the chunk would be at `/assets/js/swagger-ui.951dd583.js`? No wait — `n.u=function(e){if(e==="swagger-ui")return"js/"+e+".951dd583.js"}` — the chunk file is `js/swagger-ui.951dd583.js` relative to the public path. The main bundle is at `/assets/js/swagger.js`, so the public path is probably `/assets/js/`, and the chunk would be at `/assets/js/js/swagger-ui.951dd583.js`.
But actually, this is getting too deep into the weeds. The spec URL in Gitea's swagger UI is hardcoded in the swagger template. In Gitea's source (templates/swagger/swagger.tmpl), the spec URL is `api/v1/swagger.json`... no, actually, I just remembered: Gitea serves the spec at `/api/v1/swagger.json` only when... hmm.
Let me try a few candidate URLs directly.
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "for p in \"api/v1/swagger.json\" \"api/swagger.json\" \"api/v2/swagger\" \"api/v2/swagger.json\" \"api/openapi\" \"api/v1/openapi.json\"; do code=$(curl -s -o /tmp/spec.out -w \"%{http_code}\" \"https://code.stdio.dk/$p\"); size=$(wc -c < /tmp/spec.out); echo \"$p -> $code ($size bytes)\"; if [ \"$code\" = \"200\" ]; then head -c 200 /tmp/spec.out; echo; break; fi; done", "timeout": 120}
Arguments
{"command": "for p in \"api/v1/swagger.json\" \"api/swagger.json\" \"api/v2/swagger\" \"api/v2/swagger.json\" \"api/openapi\" \"api/v1/openapi.json\"; do code=$(curl -s -o /tmp/spec.out -w \"%{http_code}\" \"https://code.stdio.dk/$p\"); size=$(wc -c < /tmp/spec.out); echo \"$p -> $code ($size bytes)\"; if [ \"$code\" = \"200\" ]; then head -c 200 /tmp/spec.out; echo; break; fi; done", "timeout": 120}
Result
api/v1/swagger.json -> 404 (19 bytes) api/swagger.json -> 404 (11 bytes) api/v2/swagger -> 404 (11 bytes) api/v2/swagger.json -> 404 (11 bytes) api/openapi -> 404 (11 bytes) api/v1/openapi.json -> 404 (19 bytes)
Thinking
The spec isn't publicly available (probably disabled, or requires authentication). Let me try a different approach — check the Gitea 1.22 source for the review comment resolve endpoint. I know Gitea's API routes from the source. In Gitea 1.22, `routers/api/v1/api.go` has the following:
```go
m.Post("/review_comments/{id}/resolve", reqAdmin, bind(...), misc.ResolveReviewComment)
```
Hmm, wait. Let me try to remember. Gitea added "resolve review comment" functionality in 1.22 (PR #26791? or was it Forgejo?). The route in Gitea's `routers/api/v1/repo/pull_review.go`:
```go
// ResolveReviewComment ...
m.Post("/review_comments/{id}/resolve", reqAdmin, ...
```
Hmm, I'm not 100% sure about the exact path. Let me think about what the 405 means: the path exists but the method isn't allowed, or the path routing matched a different route. A 405 from Gitea means a route matched the path pattern but not the method.
Actually — in Gitea, the route for review comments is under `/repos/{owner}/{repo}/issues/{index}/comments/{id}`... and the pull request review comment routes are under `/repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/{index}/review_comments/{id}`.
Gitea 1.22's `routers/api/v1/repo/pull_review.go`:
```go
func PullReviewRoutes(route *web.Route) {
route.Group("/pulls/{index}", func() {
...
route.Comments("/review_comments", ...)
})
}
```
Hmm. Let me look at the actual Gitea 1.22 source. I remember there was a `ResolveReviewComment` API added in Gitea 1.22:
From Gitea's source (1.22), `routers/api/v1/repo/issue.go`:
```go
m.Group("/comments/{id}", func() {
m.Delete("", reqAdmin, DeleteIssueComment)
m.Patch("/resolve", reqAdmin, ResolveIssueComment) // ???
})
```
Hmm, no. Actually, I recall that Gitea had "resolve comment" for issue comments: `POST /repos/{owner}/{repo}/issues/{index}/comments/{id}/resolve`? Hmm, no...
Let me check the Forgejo 16 / Gitea 1.22 API docs. The best approach: fetch the swagger spec from the swagger UI page. The UI must be getting the spec from somewhere. Let me look at the swagger-ui chunk.
The spec isn't publicly exposed. Let me check the swagger-ui chunk for the spec URL:
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "curl -s \"https://code.stdio.dk/assets/js/js/swagger-ui.951dd583.js\" -o /tmp/swu.js -w \"%{http_code}\\n\"; wc -c /tmp/swu.js; grep -oE '.{40}swagger\\.json.{10}' /tmp/swu.js | head -3", "timeout": 60}
Arguments
{"command": "curl -s \"https://code.stdio.dk/assets/js/js/swagger-ui.951dd583.js\" -o /tmp/swu.js -w \"%{http_code}\\n\"; wc -c /tmp/swu.js; grep -oE '.{40}swagger\\.json.{10}' /tmp/swu.js | head -3", "timeout": 60}
Result
404 0 /tmp/swu.js
Thinking
Let's take a different approach. Let's check the actual Gitea/Forgejo source code for the review comment resolution endpoint. The server is Forgejo 16.0.3~gitea-1.22.0.
In Gitea 1.22, the API route for resolving review comments is:
`POST /repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/{index}/review_comments/{id}/resolve`
Hmm, wait. Let me actually check the Gitea source. In Gitea's `routers/api/v1/repo/pull_review.go`:
```go
func PullReviewRoutes(route *web.Route) {
route.Comments("/review_comments", ...)
}
```
Let me look at the actual Gitea 1.22 code. From my memory of Gitea's source (v1.22.0), `routers/api/v1/repo/pull_review.go`:
```go
// PullReviewRoutes pull review routes
func PullReviewRoutes(route *web.Route) {
route.Comments("/review_comments", func() {
route.Get("/list", reqAccessToken, listReviewComments)
route.Get("/{id}", reqAccessToken, getReviewComment)
route.Post("", reqAccessToken, createReviewComment)
route.Patch("/{id}", reqAccessToken, updateReviewComment)
route.Delete("/{id}", reqAccessToken, deleteReviewComment)
})
}
```
Hmm, I don't remember whether there was a resolve endpoint in Gitea 1.22. Let me check the Forgejo 16 source. Forgejo 16 is based on Gitea 1.22.
Actually, I remember: Gitea added the "resolve review comment" API in 1.23? Or was it 1.22? The UI has a "resolve" button for review comments. The API endpoint is:
`POST /repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/{index}/review_comments/{id}/resolve`
Hmm, but the 405 suggests the path exists but the method isn't allowed. Or maybe the path doesn't match at all (in which case Gitea would return 404). A 405 means the path matched a route with a different method.
Wait, actually — the 405 might be coming from a different path. Let me re-read the error: "resolve review comment 4646: 405 Method Not Allowed". The client POSTs to `/repos/abrander/zoo/pulls/37/review_comments/4646/resolve`.
Hmm, wait. But which token was used? The `resolve_review_comment` tool that I (the agent) use runs via the zoo daemon, and the daemon uses `r.forgejoAs(agent.Name, agent.Token)` — my per-agent token. So the request is authenticated as greg.
Let me check the Gitea 1.22 source for the review comment routes. I'll fetch it from the web. Gitea's source on GitHub: https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/blob/v1.22.0/routers/api/v1/repo/pull_review.go
Let me fetch that.
Let me check the actual Gitea 1.22 source for the review-comment routes:
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "curl -sL \"https://raw.githubusercontent.com/go-gitea/gitea/v1.22.0/routers/api/v1/repo/pull_review.go\" | grep -n -B2 -A6 \"resolve\\|review_comments\" | head -60", "timeout": 60}
Arguments
{"command": "curl -sL \"https://raw.githubusercontent.com/go-gitea/gitea/v1.22.0/routers/api/v1/repo/pull_review.go\" | grep -n -B2 -A6 \"resolve\\|review_comments\" | head -60", "timeout": 60}
Result
Thinking
The output is empty. Let me check whether the file exists at that path in v1.22.0.
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "curl -sL -w \"\\nHTTP %{http_code}\\n\" \"https://raw.githubusercontent.com/go-gitea/gitea/v1.22.0/routers/api/v1/repo/pull_review.go\" | head -50", "timeout": 60}
Arguments
{"command": "curl -sL -w \"\\nHTTP %{http_code}\\n\" \"https://raw.githubusercontent.com/go-gitea/gitea/v1.22.0/routers/api/v1/repo/pull_review.go\" | head -50", "timeout": 60}
Result
// Copyright 2020 The Gitea Authors. All rights reserved.
// SPDX-License-Identifier: MIT
package repo
import (
"errors"
"fmt"
"net/http"
"strings"
issues_model "code.gitea.io/gitea/models/issues"
"code.gitea.io/gitea/models/organization"
access_model "code.gitea.io/gitea/models/perm/access"
user_model "code.gitea.io/gitea/models/user"
"code.gitea.io/gitea/modules/gitrepo"
api "code.gitea.io/gitea/modules/structs"
"code.gitea.io/gitea/modules/web"
"code.gitea.io/gitea/routers/api/v1/utils"
"code.gitea.io/gitea/services/context"
"code.gitea.io/gitea/services/convert"
issue_service "code.gitea.io/gitea/services/issue"
pull_service "code.gitea.io/gitea/services/pull"
)
// ListPullReviews lists all reviews of a pull request
func ListPullReviews(ctx *context.APIContext) {
// swagger:operation GET /repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/{index}/reviews repository repoListPullReviews
// ---
// summary: List all reviews for a pull request
// produces:
// - application/json
// parameters:
// - name: owner
// in: path
// description: owner of the repo
// type: string
// required: true
// - name: repo
// in: path
// description: name of the repo
// type: string
// required: true
// - name: index
// in: path
// description: index of the pull request
// type: integer
// format: int64
// required: true
// - name: page
Thinking
The file exists. Next, let's search for the route registration for review_comments in Gitea 1.22. The route is probably registered in `routers/api/v1/api.go`. I'll try searching for "review_comments" in the api.go of v1.22.0.
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "curl -sL \"https://raw.githubusercontent.com/go-gitea/gitea/v1.22.0/routers/api/v1/api.go\" > /tmp/api.go; grep -n \"review_comments\" /tmp/api.go", "timeout": 60}
Arguments
{"command": "curl -sL \"https://raw.githubusercontent.com/go-gitea/gitea/v1.22.0/routers/api/v1/api.go\" > /tmp/api.go; grep -n \"review_comments\" /tmp/api.go", "timeout": 60}
Result
ERROR CALLING TOOL: command failed: command exited with status 1
Thinking
grep didn't find anything in api.go (exit 1 = no match). The route must be registered somewhere else. Let me search for where the review_comments route is defined in Gitea 1.22. I'll try grepping the entire repo via GitHub code search... or better yet, let me download the tarball of the relevant directory. Actually, let me just grep for "review_comments" in the pull.go route file:
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "for f in \"routers/api/v1/repo/pull.go\" \"routers/api/v1/repo/issue.go\"; do echo \"=== $f ===\"; curl -sL \"https://raw.githubusercontent.com/go-gitea/gitea/v1.22.0/$f\" | grep -n \"review_comments\\|Resolve\" | head -20; done", "timeout": 120}
Arguments
{"command": "for f in \"routers/api/v1/repo/pull.go\" \"routers/api/v1/repo/issue.go\"; do echo \"=== $f ===\"; curl -sL \"https://raw.githubusercontent.com/go-gitea/gitea/v1.22.0/$f\" | grep -n \"review_comments\\|Resolve\" | head -20; done", "timeout": 120}
Result
=== routers/api/v1/repo/pull.go === === routers/api/v1/repo/issue.go ===
Thinking
Hmm, there's no "review_comments" in either one. Let me search for where the route is registered. In Gitea, routes are registered via `web.Route` groups. Let me grep for the "PullReviewRoutes" or "review" route registration in api.go.
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "grep -n \"Review\\|review\" /tmp/api.go | head -20"}
Arguments
{"command": "grep -n \"Review\\|review\" /tmp/api.go | head -20"}
Result
1138: m.Get("/reviewers", reqToken(), reqAnyRepoReader(), repo.GetReviewers)
1247: m.Group("/reviews", func() {
1249: Get(repo.ListPullReviews).
1250: Post(reqToken(), bind(api.CreatePullReviewOptions{}), repo.CreatePullReview)
1253: Get(repo.GetPullReview).
1254: Delete(reqToken(), repo.DeletePullReview).
1255: Post(reqToken(), bind(api.SubmitPullReviewOptions{}), repo.SubmitPullReview)
1257: Get(repo.GetPullReviewComments)
1258: m.Post("/dismissals", reqToken(), bind(api.DismissPullReviewOptions{}), repo.DismissPullReview)
1259: m.Post("/undismissals", reqToken(), repo.UnDismissPullReview)
1262: m.Combo("/requested_reviewers", reqToken()).
1263: Delete(bind(api.PullReviewRequestOptions{}), repo.DeleteReviewRequests).
1264: Post(bind(api.PullReviewRequestOptions{}), repo.CreateReviewRequests)
Thinking
Let's take a look at the section around lines 1247-1262 of api.go to check the full structure of the review routes, and where review_comments is registered.
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "sed -n '1230,1290p' /tmp/api.go"}
Arguments
{"command": "sed -n '1230,1290p' /tmp/api.go"}
Result
}, reqAdmin(), reqToken())
m.Get("/editorconfig/{filename}", context.ReferencesGitRepo(), context.RepoRefForAPI, reqRepoReader(unit.TypeCode), repo.GetEditorconfig)
m.Group("/pulls", func() {
m.Combo("").Get(repo.ListPullRequests).
Post(reqToken(), mustNotBeArchived, bind(api.CreatePullRequestOption{}), repo.CreatePullRequest)
m.Get("/pinned", repo.ListPinnedPullRequests)
m.Group("/{index}", func() {
m.Combo("").Get(repo.GetPullRequest).
Patch(reqToken(), bind(api.EditPullRequestOption{}), repo.EditPullRequest)
m.Get(".{diffType:diff|patch}", repo.DownloadPullDiffOrPatch)
m.Post("/update", reqToken(), repo.UpdatePullRequest)
m.Get("/commits", repo.GetPullRequestCommits)
m.Get("/files", repo.GetPullRequestFiles)
m.Combo("/merge").Get(repo.IsPullRequestMerged).
Post(reqToken(), mustNotBeArchived, bind(forms.MergePullRequestForm{}), repo.MergePullRequest).
Delete(reqToken(), mustNotBeArchived, repo.CancelScheduledAutoMerge)
m.Group("/reviews", func() {
m.Combo("").
Get(repo.ListPullReviews).
Post(reqToken(), bind(api.CreatePullReviewOptions{}), repo.CreatePullReview)
m.Group("/{id}", func() {
m.Combo("").
Get(repo.GetPullReview).
Delete(reqToken(), repo.DeletePullReview).
Post(reqToken(), bind(api.SubmitPullReviewOptions{}), repo.SubmitPullReview)
m.Combo("/comments").
Get(repo.GetPullReviewComments)
m.Post("/dismissals", reqToken(), bind(api.DismissPullReviewOptions{}), repo.DismissPullReview)
m.Post("/undismissals", reqToken(), repo.UnDismissPullReview)
})
})
m.Combo("/requested_reviewers", reqToken()).
Delete(bind(api.PullReviewRequestOptions{}), repo.DeleteReviewRequests).
Post(bind(api.PullReviewRequestOptions{}), repo.CreateReviewRequests)
})
m.Get("/{base}/*", repo.GetPullRequestByBaseHead)
}, mustAllowPulls, reqRepoReader(unit.TypeCode), context.ReferencesGitRepo())
m.Group("/statuses", func() {
m.Combo("/{sha}").Get(repo.GetCommitStatuses).
Post(reqToken(), reqRepoWriter(unit.TypeCode), bind(api.CreateStatusOption{}), repo.NewCommitStatus)
}, reqRepoReader(unit.TypeCode))
m.Group("/commits", func() {
m.Get("", context.ReferencesGitRepo(), repo.GetAllCommits)
m.Group("/{ref}", func() {
m.Get("/status", repo.GetCombinedCommitStatusByRef)
m.Get("/statuses", repo.GetCommitStatusesByRef)
m.Get("/pull", repo.GetCommitPullRequest)
}, context.ReferencesGitRepo())
}, reqRepoReader(unit.TypeCode))
m.Group("/git", func() {
m.Group("/commits", func() {
m.Get("/{sha}", repo.GetSingleCommit)
m.Get("/{sha}.{diffType:diff|patch}", repo.DownloadCommitDiffOrPatch)
})
m.Get("/refs", repo.GetGitAllRefs)
m.Get("/refs/*", repo.GetGitRefs)
m.Get("/trees/{sha}", repo.GetTree)
m.Get("/blobs/{sha}", repo.GetBlob)
m.Get("/tags/{sha}", repo.GetAnnotatedTag)
m.Get("/notes/{sha}", repo.GetNote)
Thinking
I don't see a `review_comments` route under `/pulls/{index}` in Gitea 1.22.0's api.go. The review comment routes must be somewhere else. Let me search for the "review_comments" route in the Gitea 1.22 source. I'll try searching for "review_comments" across the entire routers directory.
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /tmp && rm -rf gitea-src && mkdir gitea-src && cd gitea-src && curl -sL \"https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/archive/refs/tags/v1.22.0.tar.gz\" -o gitea.tgz && tar xzf gitea.tgz --wildcards \"*/routers/api/v1/*\" 2>/dev/null; grep -rn \"review_comments\" gitea-1.22.0/routers/api/v1/ | head -20", "timeout": 300}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /tmp && rm -rf gitea-src && mkdir gitea-src && cd gitea-src && curl -sL \"https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/archive/refs/tags/v1.22.0.tar.gz\" -o gitea.tgz && tar xzf gitea.tgz --wildcards \"*/routers/api/v1/*\" 2>/dev/null; grep -rn \"review_comments\" gitea-1.22.0/routers/api/v1/ | head -20", "timeout": 300}
Result
Thinking
Hmm, no output. Maybe the tarball extraction failed. Let me check.
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /tmp/gitea-src && ls -la && ls gitea-1.22.0 2>/dev/null | head"}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /tmp/gitea-src && ls -la && ls gitea-1.22.0 2>/dev/null | head"}
Result
total 9368 drwxr-xr-x 3 root root 4096 Aug 23 23:40 . drwxrwxrwt 1 root root 4096 Aug 23 23:40 .. drwxr-xr-x 3 root root 4096 Aug 23 23:40 gitea-1.22.0 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 9577392 Aug 23 23:40 gitea.tgz routers
Thinking
The tarball was only partially extracted (only the routers directory). Let me try grepping within it.
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /tmp/gitea-src && find . -name \"*.go\" | head -5; grep -rn \"review_comments\" . | head -20"}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /tmp/gitea-src && find . -name \"*.go\" | head -5; grep -rn \"review_comments\" . | head -20"}
Result
./gitea-1.22.0/routers/api/v1/misc/nodeinfo.go ./gitea-1.22.0/routers/api/v1/misc/markup_test.go ./gitea-1.22.0/routers/api/v1/misc/gitignore.go ./gitea-1.22.0/routers/api/v1/misc/version.go ./gitea-1.22.0/routers/api/v1/misc/markup.go
Thinking
The `--wildcards` pattern only matched the `misc` directory... weird. It seems the `--wildcards "*/routers/api/v1/*"` pattern only extracted some of the files. Let me try extracting the entire routers directory.
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /tmp/gitea-src && tar xzf gitea.tgz \"gitea-1.22.0/routers\" 2>&1 | head -2; grep -rn \"review_comments\" gitea-1.22.0/routers/ | head -20", "timeout": 120}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /tmp/gitea-src && tar xzf gitea.tgz \"gitea-1.22.0/routers\" 2>&1 | head -2; grep -rn \"review_comments\" gitea-1.22.0/routers/ | head -20", "timeout": 120}
Result
Thinking
Still no output — that's strange. Maybe the tarball is using a different top-level directory name. Let me check the contents of the tarball.
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /tmp/gitea-src && tar tzf gitea.tgz | head -5; tar tzf gitea.tgz | grep -c \"routers/api/v1\"", "timeout": 120}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /tmp/gitea-src && tar tzf gitea.tgz | head -5; tar tzf gitea.tgz | grep -c \"routers/api/v1\"", "timeout": 120}
Result
gitea-1.22.0/ gitea-1.22.0/.air.toml gitea-1.22.0/.changelog.yml gitea-1.22.0/.devcontainer/ gitea-1.22.0/.devcontainer/devcontainer.json 133
Thinking
The tarball contains `gitea-1.22.0/routers/api/v1` (133 entries). The reason the extraction with the "gitea-1.22.0/routers" pattern didn't work is... hmm, maybe it's because of the trailing slash. Let me try extracting with a glob.
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /tmp/gitea-src && tar xzf gitea.tgz --wildcards \"gitea-1.22.0/routers/*\" && grep -rn \"review_comments\" gitea-1.22.0/routers/ | head -20", "timeout": 120}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /tmp/gitea-src && tar xzf gitea.tgz --wildcards \"gitea-1.22.0/routers/*\" && grep -rn \"review_comments\" gitea-1.22.0/routers/ | head -20", "timeout": 120}
Result
Thinking
Still nothing! That's very strange. Let me check whether the file was extracted.
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /tmp/gitea-src && ls gitea-1.22.0/routers/api/v1/ | head; grep -rn \"review\" gitea-1.22.0/routers/api/v1/api.go | head"}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /tmp/gitea-src && ls gitea-1.22.0/routers/api/v1/ | head; grep -rn \"review\" gitea-1.22.0/routers/api/v1/api.go | head"}
Result
activitypub
admin
api.go
misc
notify
org
packages
repo
settings
shared
1138: m.Get("/reviewers", reqToken(), reqAnyRepoReader(), repo.GetReviewers)
1247: m.Group("/reviews", func() {
1262: m.Combo("/requested_reviewers", reqToken()).
Thinking
The file has been extracted. In other words, in Gitea 1.22.0, there's no "review_comments" route in the API router. So where is the "resolve review comment" feature? Let me search for "Resolve" in the API router:
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /tmp/gitea-src && grep -rn \"Resolve\" gitea-1.22.0/routers/api/v1/ | head -20"}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /tmp/gitea-src && grep -rn \"Resolve\" gitea-1.22.0/routers/api/v1/ | head -20"}
Result
gitea-1.22.0/routers/api/v1/utils/git.go:17:// ResolveRefOrSha resolve ref to sha if exist
gitea-1.22.0/routers/api/v1/utils/git.go:18:func ResolveRefOrSha(ctx *context.APIContext, ref string) string {
gitea-1.22.0/routers/api/v1/repo/status.go:180: filter := utils.ResolveRefOrSha(ctx, ctx.Params("ref"))
gitea-1.22.0/routers/api/v1/repo/status.go:260: sha := utils.ResolveRefOrSha(ctx, ctx.Params("ref"))
Thinking
Gitea 1.22.0's API doesn't have a "resolve review comment" endpoint! Interesting. So how does the Web UI resolve review comments? Let me check the Web router (non-API). In Gitea, the Web UI's "resolve" for review comments might use a form POST (not the API). Let me search for "resolve" in the Web router.
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /tmp/gitea-src && grep -rni \"resolve\" gitea-1.22.0/routers/web/ | grep -i \"comment\\|review\" | head -10"}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /tmp/gitea-src && grep -rni \"resolve\" gitea-1.22.0/routers/web/ | grep -i \"comment\\|review\" | head -10"}
Result
gitea-1.22.0/routers/web/web.go:1226: m.Post("/resolve_conversation", repo.SetShowOutdatedComments, repo.UpdateResolveConversation)
gitea-1.22.0/routers/web/repo/pull_review.go:116:// UpdateResolveConversation add or remove an Conversation resolved mark
gitea-1.22.0/routers/web/repo/pull_review.go:117:func UpdateResolveConversation(ctx *context.Context) {
gitea-1.22.0/routers/web/repo/pull_review.go:153: if action == "Resolve" || action == "UnResolve" {
gitea-1.22.0/routers/web/repo/pull_review.go:154: err = issues_model.MarkConversation(ctx, comment, ctx.Doer, action == "Resolve")
gitea-1.22.0/routers/web/repo/issue.go:1747: if err = comment.LoadResolveDoer(ctx); err != nil {
Thinking
In Gitea 1.22, resolving a review comment conversation is done via a **web** route:
`POST /{owner}/{repo}/issues/{index}/resolve_conversation` — let's check the exact path in web.go.
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /tmp/gitea-src && sed -n '1215,1235p' gitea-1.22.0/routers/web/web.go && sed -n '110,175p' gitea-1.22.0/routers/web/repo/pull_review.go"}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /tmp/gitea-src && sed -n '1215,1235p' gitea-1.22.0/routers/web/web.go && sed -n '110,175p' gitea-1.22.0/routers/web/repo/pull_review.go"}
Result
m.Post("/content-history/soft-delete", repo.SoftDeleteContentHistory)
})
m.Post("/labels", reqRepoIssuesOrPullsWriter, repo.UpdateIssueLabel)
m.Post("/milestone", reqRepoIssuesOrPullsWriter, repo.UpdateIssueMilestone)
m.Post("/projects", reqRepoIssuesOrPullsWriter, reqRepoProjectsReader, repo.UpdateIssueProject)
m.Post("/assignee", reqRepoIssuesOrPullsWriter, repo.UpdateIssueAssignee)
m.Post("/request_review", repo.UpdatePullReviewRequest)
m.Post("/dismiss_review", reqRepoAdmin, web.Bind(forms.DismissReviewForm{}), repo.DismissReview)
m.Post("/status", reqRepoIssuesOrPullsWriter, repo.UpdateIssueStatus)
m.Post("/delete", reqRepoAdmin, repo.BatchDeleteIssues)
m.Post("/resolve_conversation", repo.SetShowOutdatedComments, repo.UpdateResolveConversation)
m.Post("/attachments", repo.UploadIssueAttachment)
m.Post("/attachments/remove", repo.DeleteAttachment)
m.Delete("/unpin/{index}", reqRepoAdmin, repo.IssueUnpin)
m.Post("/move_pin", reqRepoAdmin, repo.IssuePinMove)
}, context.RepoMustNotBeArchived())
m.Group("/comments/{id}", func() {
m.Post("", repo.UpdateCommentContent)
m.Post("/delete", repo.DeleteComment)
log.Trace("Comment created: %-v #%d[%d] Comment[%d]", ctx.Repo.Repository, issue.Index, issue.ID, comment.ID)
renderConversation(ctx, comment, form.Origin)
}
// UpdateResolveConversation add or remove an Conversation resolved mark
func UpdateResolveConversation(ctx *context.Context) {
origin := ctx.FormString("origin")
action := ctx.FormString("action")
commentID := ctx.FormInt64("comment_id")
comment, err := issues_model.GetCommentByID(ctx, commentID)
if err != nil {
ctx.ServerError("GetIssueByID", err)
return
}
if err = comment.LoadIssue(ctx); err != nil {
ctx.ServerError("comment.LoadIssue", err)
return
}
if comment.Issue.RepoID != ctx.Repo.Repository.ID {
ctx.NotFound("comment's repoID is incorrect", errors.New("comment's repoID is incorrect"))
return
}
var permResult bool
if permResult, err = issues_model.CanMarkConversation(ctx, comment.Issue, ctx.Doer); err != nil {
ctx.ServerError("CanMarkConversation", err)
return
}
if !permResult {
ctx.Error(http.StatusForbidden)
return
}
if !comment.Issue.IsPull {
ctx.Error(http.StatusBadRequest)
return
}
if action == "Resolve" || action == "UnResolve" {
err = issues_model.MarkConversation(ctx, comment, ctx.Doer, action == "Resolve")
if err != nil {
ctx.ServerError("MarkConversation", err)
return
}
} else {
ctx.Error(http.StatusBadRequest)
return
}
renderConversation(ctx, comment, origin)
}
func renderConversation(ctx *context.Context, comment *issues_model.Comment, origin string) {
ctx.Data["PageIsPullFiles"] = origin == "diff"
showOutdatedComments := origin == "timeline" || ctx.Data["ShowOutdatedComments"].(bool)
comments, err := issues_model.FetchCodeCommentsByLine(ctx, comment.Issue, ctx.Doer, comment.TreePath, comment.Line, showOutdatedComments)
if err != nil {
ctx.ServerError("FetchCodeCommentsByLine", err)
return
}
Thinking
So, in Gitea 1.22 / Forgejo 16, the "resolve conversation" feature is a **web form POST** to:
`POST /{owner}/{repo}/issues/{index}/resolve_conversation`
The form fields are `origin`, `action` ("Resolve"/"UnResolve"), `comment_id`. This is an HTML form endpoint that renders a template (renderConversation), not a JSON API. This is a pain to use from a client: it requires a CSRF token (web forms need a `__csrf` token) and returns HTML.
Hmm, wait — but Forgejo 16 might be different from Gitea 1.22.0! Forgejo 16 is based on Gitea 1.22, but Forgejo has its own changes. Forgejo 16.0.x — let me check the Forgejo 16 source. Forgejo's repo: github.com/forgejo/forgejo, tag 16.0.3? Hmm, actually the version string was "16.0.3~gitea-1.22.0".
Wait, actually — hold on. Let me reconsider. Maybe a newer version of Gitea (1.23/1.24) added a proper API endpoint `POST /repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/{index}/review_comments/{id}/resolve`. Let me check Gitea 1.23 or 1.24.
Actually, I just remembered: Gitea PR #31443 "Add API to resolve/unresolve review comments"? Hmm, not sure. Let me check the latest Gitea (1.24) api.go.
In Gitea 1.22, resolving is done via a web form POST. Let's check whether a newer Gitea version has a proper API endpoint, and also check the Forgejo 16 source:
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /tmp && curl -sL \"https://raw.githubusercontent.com/go-gitea/gitea/main/routers/api/v1/api.go\" -o api-main.go; grep -n \"review_comments\" api-main.go | head; echo ===; curl -sL \"https://raw.githubusercontent.com/forgejo/forgejo/16.0.3/routers/api/v1/api.go\" -o api-fj.go -w \"forgejo api.go HTTP %{http_code}\\n\"; grep -n \"review_comments\" api-fj.go | head", "timeout": 120}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /tmp && curl -sL \"https://raw.githubusercontent.com/go-gitea/gitea/main/routers/api/v1/api.go\" -o api-main.go; grep -n \"review_comments\" api-main.go | head; echo ===; curl -sL \"https://raw.githubusercontent.com/forgejo/forgejo/16.0.3/routers/api/v1/api.go\" -o api-fj.go -w \"forgejo api.go HTTP %{http_code}\\n\"; grep -n \"review_comments\" api-fj.go | head", "timeout": 120}
Result
=== forgejo api.go HTTP 404
Thinking
Gitea's main branch doesn't have the `review_comments` route either (at least not in api.go — it might be in a different file). And the Forgejo tag 16.0.3 doesn't exist in that format. Let me check the Forgejo tags.
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /tmp && curl -sL \"https://api.github.com/repos/forgejo/forgejo/tags?per_page=10\" | grep '\"name\"' | head -10", "timeout": 60}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /tmp && curl -sL \"https://api.github.com/repos/forgejo/forgejo/tags?per_page=10\" | grep '\"name\"' | head -10", "timeout": 60}
Result
Thinking
The GitHub API didn't return anything (probably rate-limited or blocked). Let me try a different approach — check the Forgejo 16.0.3 tag on their own instance, or try a different tag format. Actually, the Forgejo version was "16.0.3~gitea-1.22.0". Forgejo tags are in formats like "v16.0.3" or "16.0.3". Let me try the raw file with the "v16.0.3" tag.
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /tmp && for tag in v16.0.3 v16.0.0 16.0.0; do code=$(curl -sL -o api-fj.go -w \"%{http_code}\" \"https://raw.githubusercontent.com/forgejo/forgejo/$tag/routers/api/v1/api.go\"); echo \"$tag -> $code\"; if [ \"$code\" = \"200\" ]; then grep -n \"review_comments\" api-fj.go | head; break; fi; done", "timeout": 120}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /tmp && for tag in v16.0.3 v16.0.0 16.0.0; do code=$(curl -sL -o api-fj.go -w \"%{http_code}\" \"https://raw.githubusercontent.com/forgejo/forgejo/$tag/routers/api/v1/api.go\"); echo \"$tag -> $code\"; if [ \"$code\" = \"200\" ]; then grep -n \"review_comments\" api-fj.go | head; break; fi; done", "timeout": 120}
Result
v16.0.3 -> 404 v16.0.0 -> 404 16.0.0 -> 404
Thinking
Hmm, Forgejo's GitHub repo might have moved. Forgejo is now at codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo. Let me try the raw from codeberg.
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /tmp && code=$(curl -sL -o api-fj.go -w \"%{http_code}\" \"https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/raw/branch/16.0.3/routers/api/v1/api.go\"); echo \"16.0.3 -> $code\"; if [ \"$code\" != \"200\" ]; then code=$(curl -sL -o api-fj.go -w \"%{http_code}\" \"https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/raw/branch/main/routers/api/v1/api.go\"); echo \"main -> $code\"; fi; grep -n \"review_comments\" api-fj.go | head", "timeout": 120}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /tmp && code=$(curl -sL -o api-fj.go -w \"%{http_code}\" \"https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/raw/branch/16.0.3/routers/api/v1/api.go\"); echo \"16.0.3 -> $code\"; if [ \"$code\" != \"200\" ]; then code=$(curl -sL -o api-fj.go -w \"%{http_code}\" \"https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/raw/branch/main/routers/api/v1/api.go\"); echo \"main -> $code\"; fi; grep -n \"review_comments\" api-fj.go | head", "timeout": 120}
Result
16.0.3 -> 404 main -> 404
Thinking
Codeberg's raw URL might be different. Let me check what the actual URL is. Codeberg's raw file URL format: `https://codeberg.org/{org}/{repo}/raw/branch/{branch}/{path}`. Hmm, that's what I used. Maybe the branch name is different. Let me check the repo page.
Actually, let me step back and think about what matters here.
The important question is: **what is the correct API call to resolve a review comment on this Forgejo 16.0.3~gitea-1.22.0 server?**
From the Gitea 1.22 source, I know the following:
- The API v1 has no endpoint for resolving review comments.
- The Web UI uses `POST /{owner}/{repo}/issues/{index}/resolve_conversation` with form fields `origin`, `action` (Resolve/UnResolve), `comment_id`, and (since it's a web form) a CSRF token `__csrf`.
Wait, actually — hmm, let me double-check whether Forgejo 16 added an API endpoint. Forgejo has added several API features. Let me check the actual server: I can probe the API endpoint directly. But authentication is required. I don't have a token…
Wait, actually — do I have a token? The `resolve_review_comment` tool I ran used the zoo daemon's client with my agent token (greg's). The 405 response came back from the server. So the request reached the server and was authenticated (a 405, not a 401/403).
Let me probe the server to find the correct endpoint. I can't call the API directly without a token… hmm, but wait: maybe I can test the unauthenticated behavior to distinguish a 404 (route doesn't exist) from a 401/405 (route exists). For a route that requires authentication:
- If the route doesn't exist: 404.
- If the route exists but the method is wrong: 405.
- If the route exists with the correct method but no authentication: 401 (or 403).
Let me probe:
1. `POST /api/v1/repos/abrander/zoo/pulls/37/review_comments/4646/resolve` (no auth) → if 404, the route doesn't exist; if 401/403, the route exists.
2. `POST /api/v1/repos/abrander/zoo/issues/37/resolve_conversation` (no auth) → same thing.
3. `POST /abrander/zoo/issues/37/resolve_conversation` (web route, no auth) → 404 or a redirect to login.
Let me try that.
Let me probe the live server to determine which routes exist (404 = no route, 401/403 = route exists but needs auth):
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "echo \"1) API resolve (POST):\"; curl -s -o /dev/null -w \"%{http_code}\\n\" -X POST \"https://code.stdio.dk/api/v1/repos/abrander/zoo/pulls/37/review_comments/4646/resolve\"\necho \"2) API resolve (GET):\"; curl -s -o /dev/null -w \"%{http_code}\\n\" \"https://code.stdio.dk/api/v1/repos/abrander/zoo/pulls/37/review_comments/4646/resolve\"\necho \"3) API issues resolve_conversation (POST):\"; curl -s -o /dev/null -w \"%{http_code}\\n\" -X POST \"https://code.stdio.dk/api/v1/repos/abrander/zoo/issues/37/resolve_conversation\"\necho \"4) web resolve_conversation (POST):\"; curl -s -o /dev/null -w \"%{http_code}\\n\" -X POST \"https://code.stdio.dk/abrander/zoo/issues/37/resolve_conversation\"\necho \"5) API review_comments list (GET):\"; curl -s -o /dev/null -w \"%{http_code}\\n\" \"https://code.stdio.dk/api/v1/repos/abrander/zoo/pulls/37/reviews\"", "timeout": 120}
Arguments
{"command": "echo \"1) API resolve (POST):\"; curl -s -o /dev/null -w \"%{http_code}\\n\" -X POST \"https://code.stdio.dk/api/v1/repos/abrander/zoo/pulls/37/review_comments/4646/resolve\"\necho \"2) API resolve (GET):\"; curl -s -o /dev/null -w \"%{http_code}\\n\" \"https://code.stdio.dk/api/v1/repos/abrander/zoo/pulls/37/review_comments/4646/resolve\"\necho \"3) API issues resolve_conversation (POST):\"; curl -s -o /dev/null -w \"%{http_code}\\n\" -X POST \"https://code.stdio.dk/api/v1/repos/abrander/zoo/issues/37/resolve_conversation\"\necho \"4) web resolve_conversation (POST):\"; curl -s -o /dev/null -w \"%{http_code}\\n\" -X POST \"https://code.stdio.dk/abrander/zoo/issues/37/resolve_conversation\"\necho \"5) API review_comments list (GET):\"; curl -s -o /dev/null -w \"%{http_code}\\n\" \"https://code.stdio.dk/api/v1/repos/abrander/zoo/pulls/37/reviews\"", "timeout": 120}
Result
1) API resolve (POST): 405 2) API resolve (GET): 404 3) API issues resolve_conversation (POST): 404 4) web resolve_conversation (POST): 404 5) API review_comments list (GET): 404
Thinking
Interesting results:
1. `POST /api/v1/repos/abrander/zoo/pulls/37/review_comments/4646/resolve` → **405** (route matches the path, but POST isn't allowed — meaning some method is allowed on that path!)
2. `GET .../resolve` → 404
3. `POST /api/v1/.../issues/37/resolve_conversation` → 404 (no such API route)
4. `POST /abrander/zoo/issues/37/resolve_conversation` → 404 (hmm, the web route should exist in Gitea 1.22… but it's 404? Maybe the web route requires a different path, or maybe Forgejo changed it. Actually, wait — the web route is under `/{owner}/{repo}/issues/{index}/resolve_conversation`. Got 404 back… hmm, maybe the web route needs a session, or maybe the path is different. Or maybe Forgejo 16 moved it.)
5. `GET /api/v1/.../pulls/37/reviews` → 404?? That's weird — that route should definitely exist. Oh wait — maybe the repo is private, and unauthenticated requests get 404 (private repos return 404 to unauthenticated users). That's it! For private repos, Gitea returns 404 to unauthenticated users instead of 403. So result 5 (404) just means unauthenticated + private repo.
So, for result 1: 405 on POST. Hmm, but if the repo is private and unauthenticated, wouldn't Gitea return 404 before even checking the method? Apparently not — the 405 came back. Interesting: in Gitea's router (chi), method-not-allowed is determined at the routing level before middleware (like repo access checks) runs. So:
- 405 on POST to `.../review_comments/4646/resolve` means: the path pattern `.../pulls/{index}/review_comments/{id}/resolve`… no wait, that's wrong. A 405 means the path matched a route with a different method. Which route matches `pulls/37/review_comments/4646/resolve`?
Hmm, wait. Let me think about the Gitea 1.22 API routes that could match that path:
- `GET /repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/{index}/files` — no.
- Hmm, `m.Get("/{base}/*", repo.GetPullRequestByBaseHead)` — this is under `/pulls`, so the path is `/pulls/{base}/*`. `pulls/37/review_comments/4646/resolve` could match `/pulls/{base}/*` with base="37" and the rest being "review_comments/4646/resolve"! And that's a GET route. So POST to that path → 405 (because the only matching route is GET).
That explains the 405! The path `pulls/37/review_comments/4646/resolve` is being caught by the catch-all GET route `pulls/{base}/*`, and POST isn't allowed there → 405. So the resolve API route really doesn't exist on this server.
Let me verify: GET to that path should return 404 (repo not found for unauthenticated) — but I already got 404 on GET (result 2). Consistent.
So: **this Forgejo server has no API endpoint for resolving review comments.** The PR description said "the last is a direct API call — the SDK doesn't expose the resolve endpoint" — and the endpoint they implemented (`POST /repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/{index}/review_comments/{id}/resolve`) doesn't exist on this server (Gitea 1.22-based Forgejo 16.0.3).
Wait, wait. Hold on. Let me double-check. Maybe Forgejo 16 has it and it's registered in a different file (not api.go). Let me check the Forgejo source properly. Forgejo's repo on codeberg: forgejo/forgejo. Let me find the correct raw URL.
The 405 is caused by the catch-all route `GET /pulls/{base}/*` — the resolve API route doesn't exist. Let me check the actual Forgejo 16 source to see if there's an alternative:
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /tmp && curl -sL \"https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/src/branch/main/routers/api/v1/api.go\" -o fj-main.html -w \"main api.go: %{http_code}\\n\"; grep -c \"review_comments\" fj-main.html; grep -oE \"m\\.(Post|Get|Patch|Delete|Combo)\\(\\\"[^\\\"]*review[^\\\"]*\\\"\" fj-main.html | head", "timeout": 120}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /tmp && curl -sL \"https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/src/branch/main/routers/api/v1/api.go\" -o fj-main.html -w \"main api.go: %{http_code}\\n\"; grep -c \"review_comments\" fj-main.html; grep -oE \"m\\.(Post|Get|Patch|Delete|Combo)\\(\\\"[^\\\"]*review[^\\\"]*\\\"\" fj-main.html | head", "timeout": 120}
Result
main api.go: 404 0
Thinking
Codeberg's raw URL format must be different. Let me try `https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/raw/branch/main/routers/api/v1/api.go` — I tried that before and got a 404. Maybe the default branch isn't "main". Let me check the repository's landing page.
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /tmp && curl -sL \"https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo\" -o fj-home.html -w \"%{http_code}\\n\"; grep -oE 'raw/branch/[a-z0-9.-]+' fj-home.html | sort -u | head; grep -oE '\"default_branch\":\\s*\"[^\"]*\"' fj-home.html | head -2", "timeout": 60}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /tmp && curl -sL \"https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo\" -o fj-home.html -w \"%{http_code}\\n\"; grep -oE 'raw/branch/[a-z0-9.-]+' fj-home.html | sort -u | head; grep -oE '\"default_branch\":\\s*\"[^\"]*\"' fj-home.html | head -2", "timeout": 60}
Result
200
Thinking
The homepage loads, but I can't find the raw link. Let me try the API: `https://codeberg.org/api/v1/repos/forgejo/forgejo` to get the default branch.
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /tmp && curl -sL \"https://codeberg.org/api/v1/repos/forgejo/forgejo\" | head -c 600; echo", "timeout": 60}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /tmp && curl -sL \"https://codeberg.org/api/v1/repos/forgejo/forgejo\" | head -c 600; echo", "timeout": 60}
Result
{"id":73144,"owner":{"id":70422,"login":"forgejo","login_name":"","source_id":0,"full_name":"Forgejo","email":"forgejo@noreply.codeberg.org","avatar_url":"https://codeberg.org/avatars/dae8ab126a96f6fbd6942cf08ab92382","html_url":"https://codeberg.org/forgejo","language":"","is_admin":false,"last_login":"0001-01-01T00:00:00Z","created":"2022-11-06T07:18:11+01:00","restricted":false,"active":false,"prohibit_login":false,"location":"","pronouns":"","website":"https://forgejo.org","description":"Beyond coding. We forge.","visibility":"public","followers_count":595,"following_count":0,"starred_repo
Thinking
The repository exists. Let's get the default branch and list the tags.
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /tmp && curl -sL \"https://codeberg.org/api/v1/repos/forgejo/forgejo\" | python3 -c \"import json,sys; d=json.load(sys.stdin); print('default_branch:', d['default_branch'])\"; curl -sL \"https://codeberg.org/api/v1/repos/forgejo/forgejo/tags?limit=15\" | python3 -c \"import json,sys; [print(t['name']) for t in json.load(sys.stdin)]\"", "timeout": 60}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /tmp && curl -sL \"https://codeberg.org/api/v1/repos/forgejo/forgejo\" | python3 -c \"import json,sys; d=json.load(sys.stdin); print('default_branch:', d['default_branch'])\"; curl -sL \"https://codeberg.org/api/v1/repos/forgejo/forgejo/tags?limit=15\" | python3 -c \"import json,sys; [print(t['name']) for t in json.load(sys.stdin)]\"", "timeout": 60}
Result
default_branch: forgejo v16.0.3 v15.0.7 v15.0.6 v16.0.2 v16.0.1 v16.0.0 v15.0.5 v11.0.16 v15.0.4 v17.0.0-dev v15.0.3 v11.0.15 v15.0.2 v11.0.14 v14.0.5
Thinking
The tag is `v16.0.3`, and the default branch is `forgejo`. Let's try fetching api.go from tag v16.0.3.
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /tmp && code=$(curl -sL -o api-fj.go -w \"%{http_code}\" \"https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/raw/branch/v16.0.3/routers/api/v1/api.go\"); echo \"v16.0.3 -> $code\"; grep -n \"review_comments\\|resolve\" api-fj.go | head", "timeout": 120}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /tmp && code=$(curl -sL -o api-fj.go -w \"%{http_code}\" \"https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/raw/branch/v16.0.3/routers/api/v1/api.go\"); echo \"v16.0.3 -> $code\"; grep -n \"review_comments\\|resolve\" api-fj.go | head", "timeout": 120}
Result
v16.0.3 -> 404
Thinking
Still 404. Codeberg's raw URL format is... let me check the format of the "raw" link on the file's HTML page. I'll fetch the HTML of the file's page:
`https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/src/branch/v16.0.3/routers/api/v1/api.go`
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /tmp && curl -sL \"https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/src/branch/v16.0.3/routers/api/v1/api.go\" -o fj-file.html -w \"%{http_code}\\n\"; grep -oE 'href=\"[^\"]*raw[^\"]*\"' fj-file.html | head -3; grep -oE '\"raw_url\":\\s*\"[^\"]*\"' fj-file.html | head -2", "timeout": 60}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /tmp && curl -sL \"https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo/src/branch/v16.0.3/routers/api/v1/api.go\" -o fj-file.html -w \"%{http_code}\\n\"; grep -oE 'href=\"[^\"]*raw[^\"]*\"' fj-file.html | head -3; grep -oE '\"raw_url\":\\s*\"[^\"]*\"' fj-file.html | head -2", "timeout": 60}
Result
404
Thinking
The src page for that tag is also returning 404. Maybe the tag's ref format is different, or the path is different. Let me try using the API to fetch the file contents: `https://codeberg.org/api/v1/repos/forgejo/forgejo/raw/routers/api/v1/api.go?ref=v16.0.3`.
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /tmp && code=$(curl -sL -o api-fj.go -w \"%{http_code}\" \"https://codeberg.org/api/v1/repos/forgejo/forgejo/raw/routers/api/v1/api.go?ref=v16.0.3\"); echo \"-> $code\"; wc -c api-fj.go; grep -n \"review_comments\" api-fj.go | head", "timeout": 120}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /tmp && code=$(curl -sL -o api-fj.go -w \"%{http_code}\" \"https://codeberg.org/api/v1/repos/forgejo/forgejo/raw/routers/api/v1/api.go?ref=v16.0.3\"); echo \"-> $code\"; wc -c api-fj.go; grep -n \"review_comments\" api-fj.go | head", "timeout": 120}
Result
-> 200 60974 api-fj.go
Thinking
Fetched Forgejo v16.0.3's api.go (60974 bytes), but there's no `review_comments` in it. In other words, Forgejo 16.0.3's API v1 also doesn't have a review_comments route.
So then, how does the Forgejo 16 Web UI resolve review comments? Let me check the Web router in Forgejo v16.0.3.
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /tmp && code=$(curl -sL -o web-fj.go -w \"%{http_code}\" \"https://codeberg.org/api/v1/repos/forgejo/forgejo/raw/routers/web/web.go?ref=v16.0.3\"); echo \"web.go -> $code\"; grep -n \"resolve\" web-fj.go | head; code=$(curl -sL -o pr-fj.go -w \"%{http_code}\" \"https://codeberg.org/api/v1/repos/forgejo/forgejo/raw/routers/web/repo/pull_review.go?ref=v16.0.3\"); echo \"pull_review.go -> $code\"; grep -n \"func \\|resolve\\|Resolve\" pr-fj.go | head -20", "timeout": 120}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /tmp && code=$(curl -sL -o web-fj.go -w \"%{http_code}\" \"https://codeberg.org/api/v1/repos/forgejo/forgejo/raw/routers/web/web.go?ref=v16.0.3\"); echo \"web.go -> $code\"; grep -n \"resolve\" web-fj.go | head; code=$(curl -sL -o pr-fj.go -w \"%{http_code}\" \"https://codeberg.org/api/v1/repos/forgejo/forgejo/raw/routers/web/repo/pull_review.go?ref=v16.0.3\"); echo \"pull_review.go -> $code\"; grep -n \"func \\|resolve\\|Resolve\" pr-fj.go | head -20", "timeout": 120}
Result
web.go -> 200
1441: m.Post("/resolve_conversation", reqRepoIssuesOrPullsReader, repo.SetShowOutdatedComments, repo.UpdateResolveConversation)
pull_review.go -> 200
31:func RenderNewCodeCommentForm(ctx *context.Context) {
71:func CreateCodeComment(ctx *context.Context) {
150:// UpdateResolveConversation add or remove an Conversation resolved mark
151:func UpdateResolveConversation(ctx *context.Context) {
187: if action == "Resolve" || action == "UnResolve" {
188: err = issues_model.MarkConversation(ctx, comment, ctx.Doer, action == "Resolve")
201:func renderConversation(ctx *context.Context, comment *issues_model.Comment, origin string) {
242:func SubmitReview(ctx *context.Context) {
298:func DismissReview(ctx *context.Context) {
320:func UpdateViewedFiles(ctx *context.Context) {
Thinking
Confirmed: Forgejo 16.0.3 (the version running on code.stdio.dk) has **no JSON API** for resolving review comments. The only way is the Web form route:
`POST /{owner}/{repo}/issues/{index}/resolve_conversation`
Form fields: `origin` (e.g. "diff"), `action` ("Resolve" or "UnResolve"), `comment_id`, plus the CSRF token `__csrf` (Web forms require CSRF protection).
This is a Web route that renders an HTML template response, not JSON. Using this from the Go client requires:
1. Obtaining a CSRF token — for a session-based Web form. With token authentication… hmm, does Forgejo's Web CSRF work with token auth? The CSRF middleware typically requires a session cookie. With `Authorization: token X`, there's no session, so no CSRF token either. This is a problem.
Hmm, wait. Let me check how the CSRF middleware handles API token auth. In Gitea/Forgejo, `context.WebSetCSRF` generates a CSRF token in the session. For token-authenticated requests, the session is empty… actually, Gitea's CSRF middleware: `web.SetCSRF(&web.CSRFOptions{...})`. The token is stored in the session. If there's no session cookie, the CSRF token won't be available.
Hmm, but wait — is there really no other way? Let me check the `MarkConversation` model function and see if there's an API in a newer version. Let me check Gitea main (1.24/1.25-dev) for a review comment resolve API.
No wait, let me check Gitea main's api.go more carefully — my earlier grep for "review_comments" against api-main.go returned nothing. Let me re-verify that the download succeeded.
Forgejo 16.0.3 only has a web-form route for resolving. Let me check if newer Gitea/Forgejo added a proper API:
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /tmp && wc -c api-main.go; grep -n \"review\" api-main.go | head; echo ===; code=$(curl -sL -o api-fj-main.go -w \"%{http_code}\" \"https://codeberg.org/api/v1/repos/forgejo/forgejo/raw/routers/api/v1/api.go?ref=forgejo\"); echo \"forgejo main -> $code\"; grep -n \"review_comments\\|resolve\" api-fj-main.go | head", "timeout": 120}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /tmp && wc -c api-main.go; grep -n \"review\" api-main.go | head; echo ===; code=$(curl -sL -o api-fj-main.go -w \"%{http_code}\" \"https://codeberg.org/api/v1/repos/forgejo/forgejo/raw/routers/api/v1/api.go?ref=forgejo\"); echo \"forgejo main -> $code\"; grep -n \"review_comments\\|resolve\" api-fj-main.go | head", "timeout": 120}
Result
76598 api-main.go
1363: m.Get("/reviewers", reqToken(), reqAnyRepoReader(), repo.GetReviewers)
1517: m.Group("/reviews", func() {
1532: m.Combo("/requested_reviewers", reqToken()).
===
forgejo main -> 200
Thinking
Neither Gitea main nor Forgejo main has a `review_comments` API route or a resolve endpoint. In other words, **no version of Gitea/Forgejo (up to main) has a JSON API for resolving review comments**.
So, the `ResolveReviewComment` client method in this PR is calling a non-existent endpoint. The 405 I got when using the `resolve_review_comment` tool confirms it's broken against the actual server.
Now, how should this be fixed? Options:
**Option A**: Use the web form route `POST /{owner}/{repo}/issues/{index}/resolve_conversation` with form fields. Problem: CSRF token. Let me check how Forgejo's CSRF middleware works with token auth.
Let me look at the CSRF implementation. In Gitea, `modules/web/middleware/csrf.go` — the CSRF token is stored in the session (`ctx.Session.Get("csrf_token")`). For a request authenticated via `Authorization: token`, is there a session? Gitea creates a session for every request (the session middleware runs first). The CSRF token is generated on the first request within a session and stored in the session. But to read it, you need the session cookie — a stateless client can't know the token.
Hmm, wait, but there's a subtle point: Gitea's CSRF middleware, in the case of a POST without a CSRF token, checks the `X-CSRF-Token` header or the `__csrf` form field. Without a session, the token is unknown. So a stateless token-authenticated client can't pass CSRF…
However: Gitea has a special case! Let me check: in `csrf.go`, if the request is authenticated with an API token… hmm, I don't remember such an exception.
Let me look at the actual middleware code in Forgejo 16.0.3.
Neither Gitea nor Forgejo main has such an API. The web form route requires a CSRF token — let me check how Forgejo's CSRF middleware handles token-authenticated requests:
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /tmp && code=$(curl -sL -o csrf-fj.go -w \"%{http_code}\" \"https://codeberg.org/api/v1/repos/forgejo/forgejo/raw/modules/web/middleware/csrf.go?ref=v16.0.3\"); echo \"csrf.go -> $code\"; grep -n \"token\\|Token\\|session\\|Session\" csrf-fj.go | head -30", "timeout": 120}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /tmp && code=$(curl -sL -o csrf-fj.go -w \"%{http_code}\" \"https://codeberg.org/api/v1/repos/forgejo/forgejo/raw/modules/web/middleware/csrf.go?ref=v16.0.3\"); echo \"csrf.go -> $code\"; grep -n \"token\\|Token\\|session\\|Session\" csrf-fj.go | head -30", "timeout": 120}
Result
csrf.go -> 404
Thinking
Let's find the correct path for the CSRF middleware in Forgejo 16.
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /tmp && curl -sL \"https://codeberg.org/api/v1/repos/forgejo/forgejo/git/trees/v16.0.3?recursive=1\" -o tree.json -w \"%{http_code}\\n\"; python3 -c \"\nimport json\nd = json.load(open('tree.json'))\nfor t in d.get('tree', []):\n p = t['path']\n if 'csrf' in p.lower() or ('middleware' in p and p.endswith('.go') and 'web' in p):\n print(p)\n\" | head -20", "timeout": 120}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /tmp && curl -sL \"https://codeberg.org/api/v1/repos/forgejo/forgejo/git/trees/v16.0.3?recursive=1\" -o tree.json -w \"%{http_code}\\n\"; python3 -c \"\nimport json\nd = json.load(open('tree.json'))\nfor t in d.get('tree', []):\n p = t['path']\n if 'csrf' in p.lower() or ('middleware' in p and p.endswith('.go') and 'web' in p):\n print(p)\n\" | head -20", "timeout": 120}
Result
200
Thinking
The tree API didn't return anything matching the filter. Maybe the recursive tree is truncated, or the path is different. Let me check the tree's JSON.
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /tmp && python3 -c \"\nimport json\nd = json.load(open('tree.json'))\nprint('truncated:', d.get('truncated'))\nprint('entries:', len(d.get('tree', [])))\nfor t in d.get('tree', [])[:10]:\n print(t['path'])\n\""}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /tmp && python3 -c \"\nimport json\nd = json.load(open('tree.json'))\nprint('truncated:', d.get('truncated'))\nprint('entries:', len(d.get('tree', [])))\nfor t in d.get('tree', [])[:10]:\n print(t['path'])\n\""}
Result
truncated: True entries: 1000 .air.toml .deadcode-out .devcontainer .devcontainer/devcontainer.json .dockerignore .editorconfig .envrc.example .forgejo .forgejo/cascading-pr-end-to-end .forgejo/cascading-release-end-to-end
Thinking
The tree is truncated at 1000 entries. Let me try listing the modules/web/middleware directory directly via the API.
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /tmp && curl -sL \"https://codeberg.org/api/v1/repos/forgejo/forgejo/contents/modules/web/middleware?ref=v16.0.3\" | python3 -c \"import json,sys; [print(f['name']) for f in json.load(sys.stdin)]\" 2>/dev/null | head -30", "timeout": 60}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /tmp && curl -sL \"https://codeberg.org/api/v1/repos/forgejo/forgejo/contents/modules/web/middleware?ref=v16.0.3\" | python3 -c \"import json,sys; [print(f['name']) for f in json.load(sys.stdin)]\" 2>/dev/null | head -30", "timeout": 60}
Result
binding.go cookie.go data.go flash.go locale.go
Thinking
Hmm, the listing of the middleware directory only shows 5 files? That's weird — maybe the contents API is paginated, or maybe the CSRF file is in a different location. Let me search for the CSRF file in the Gitea 1.22 source I already downloaded to /tmp/gitea-src (the routers directory was extracted, but modules wasn't). Let me extract modules/web from the Gitea tarball.
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /tmp/gitea-src && tar xzf gitea.tgz --wildcards \"gitea-1.22.0/modules/web/*\" && ls gitea-1.22.0/modules/web/middleware/ | head -20", "timeout": 120}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /tmp/gitea-src && tar xzf gitea.tgz --wildcards \"gitea-1.22.0/modules/web/*\" && ls gitea-1.22.0/modules/web/middleware/ | head -20", "timeout": 120}
Result
binding.go cookie.go data.go flash.go locale.go request.go
Thinking
Hmm, Gitea 1.22's modules/web/middleware only has 6 files — no csrf.go. So where is the CSRF handling? In Gitea, is the CSRF in `modules/web/middleware/`? No wait — in Gitea 1.22, is the CSRF token handling in `routers/init.go`? Or is it in `modules/base`? Let me search for "csrf" in the Gitea 1.22 source.
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /tmp/gitea-src && tar xzf gitea.tgz --wildcards \"gitea-1.22.0/routers/*\" 2>/dev/null; grep -rln \"csrf\" gitea-1.22.0/routers/ | head; grep -rn \"CSRF\" gitea-1.22.0/routers/web/web.go | head -5", "timeout": 120}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /tmp/gitea-src && tar xzf gitea.tgz --wildcards \"gitea-1.22.0/routers/*\" 2>/dev/null; grep -rln \"csrf\" gitea-1.22.0/routers/ | head; grep -rn \"CSRF\" gitea-1.22.0/routers/web/web.go | head -5", "timeout": 120}
Result
gitea-1.22.0/routers/web/user/setting/keys.go
179: if !options.SignOutRequired && !options.DisableCSRF && ctx.Req.Method == "POST" {
293:var ignSignInAndCsrf = verifyAuthWithOptions(&common.VerifyOptions{DisableCSRF: true})
Thinking
Let's take a look at the verifyAuth function around line 179 of web.go — this is where CSRF is being enforced.
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /tmp/gitea-src && sed -n '120,230p' gitea-1.22.0/routers/web/web.go"}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /tmp/gitea-src && sed -n '120,230p' gitea-1.22.0/routers/web/web.go"}
Result
if err != nil {
log.Error("Failed to verify user: %v", err)
ctx.Error(http.StatusUnauthorized, "Verify")
return
}
ctx.Doer = ar.Doer
ctx.IsSigned = ar.Doer != nil
ctx.IsBasicAuth = ar.IsBasicAuth
if ctx.Doer == nil {
// ensure the session uid is deleted
_ = ctx.Session.Delete("uid")
}
}
}
// verifyAuthWithOptions checks authentication according to options
func verifyAuthWithOptions(options *common.VerifyOptions) func(ctx *context.Context) {
return func(ctx *context.Context) {
// Check prohibit login users.
if ctx.IsSigned {
if !ctx.Doer.IsActive && setting.Service.RegisterEmailConfirm {
ctx.Data["Title"] = ctx.Tr("auth.active_your_account")
ctx.HTML(http.StatusOK, "user/auth/activate")
return
}
if !ctx.Doer.IsActive || ctx.Doer.ProhibitLogin {
log.Info("Failed authentication attempt for %s from %s", ctx.Doer.Name, ctx.RemoteAddr())
ctx.Data["Title"] = ctx.Tr("auth.prohibit_login")
ctx.HTML(http.StatusOK, "user/auth/prohibit_login")
return
}
if ctx.Doer.MustChangePassword {
if ctx.Req.URL.Path != "/user/settings/change_password" {
if strings.HasPrefix(ctx.Req.UserAgent(), "git") {
ctx.Error(http.StatusUnauthorized, ctx.Locale.TrString("auth.must_change_password"))
return
}
ctx.Data["Title"] = ctx.Tr("auth.must_change_password")
ctx.Data["ChangePasscodeLink"] = setting.AppSubURL + "/user/change_password"
if ctx.Req.URL.Path != "/user/events" {
middleware.SetRedirectToCookie(ctx.Resp, setting.AppSubURL+ctx.Req.URL.RequestURI())
}
ctx.Redirect(setting.AppSubURL + "/user/settings/change_password")
return
}
} else if ctx.Req.URL.Path == "/user/settings/change_password" {
// make sure that the form cannot be accessed by users who don't need this
ctx.Redirect(setting.AppSubURL + "/")
return
}
}
// Redirect to dashboard (or alternate location) if user tries to visit any non-login page.
if options.SignOutRequired && ctx.IsSigned && ctx.Req.URL.RequestURI() != "/" {
ctx.RedirectToCurrentSite(ctx.FormString("redirect_to"))
return
}
if !options.SignOutRequired && !options.DisableCSRF && ctx.Req.Method == "POST" {
ctx.Csrf.Validate(ctx)
if ctx.Written() {
return
}
}
if options.SignInRequired {
if !ctx.IsSigned {
if ctx.Req.URL.Path != "/user/events" {
middleware.SetRedirectToCookie(ctx.Resp, setting.AppSubURL+ctx.Req.URL.RequestURI())
}
ctx.Redirect(setting.AppSubURL + "/user/login")
return
} else if !ctx.Doer.IsActive && setting.Service.RegisterEmailConfirm {
ctx.Data["Title"] = ctx.Tr("auth.active_your_account")
ctx.HTML(http.StatusOK, "user/auth/activate")
return
}
}
// Redirect to log in page if auto-signin info is provided and has not signed in.
if !options.SignOutRequired && !ctx.IsSigned &&
ctx.GetSiteCookie(setting.CookieRememberName) != "" {
if ctx.Req.URL.Path != "/user/events" {
middleware.SetRedirectToCookie(ctx.Resp, setting.AppSubURL+ctx.Req.URL.RequestURI())
}
ctx.Redirect(setting.AppSubURL + "/user/login")
return
}
if options.AdminRequired {
if !ctx.Doer.IsAdmin {
ctx.Error(http.StatusForbidden)
return
}
ctx.Data["PageIsAdmin"] = true
}
}
}
func ctxDataSet(args ...any) func(ctx *context.Context) {
return func(ctx *context.Context) {
for i := 0; i < len(args); i += 2 {
ctx.Data[args[i].(string)] = args[i+1]
}
}
}
// Routes returns all web routes
func Routes() *web.Route {
routes := web.NewRoute()
Thinking
The CSRF check is `ctx.Csrf.Validate(ctx)` — the CSRF token is session-based. To use the web form route, the client needs a session with a CSRF token, which means:
1. First, log in (or access a page to get a session cookie),
2. Extract the CSRF token from the HTML,
3. POST the form with the cookie + token.
This is a fragile, hacky approach for a daemon client. Not good.
**Option B**: Check whether the Forgejo SDK (the one zoo uses, `codeberg.org/mvdkleijn/forgejo-sdk`) has a resolve method — maybe it's using a different endpoint. Let me check the SDK v2.2.0 source.
Let me check the forgejo-sdk itself for any resolve support:
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "SDK=\"/go/pkg/mod/codeberg.org/mvdkleijn/forgejo-sdk/forgejo/v2@v2.2.0\"; grep -rni \"resolve\" $SDK/*.go | grep -vi \"resolves\\|resolveRef\\|resolved:\" | head -20"}
Arguments
{"command": "SDK=\"/go/pkg/mod/codeberg.org/mvdkleijn/forgejo-sdk/forgejo/v2@v2.2.0\"; grep -rni \"resolve\" $SDK/*.go | grep -vi \"resolves\\|resolveRef\\|resolved:\" | head -20"}
Result
/go/pkg/mod/codeberg.org/mvdkleijn/forgejo-sdk/forgejo/v2@v2.2.0/issue_milestone.go:82: m, resp, err := c.resolveMilestoneByName(owner, repo, name)
/go/pkg/mod/codeberg.org/mvdkleijn/forgejo-sdk/forgejo/v2@v2.2.0/issue_milestone.go:173: m, _, err := c.resolveMilestoneByName(owner, repo, name)
/go/pkg/mod/codeberg.org/mvdkleijn/forgejo-sdk/forgejo/v2@v2.2.0/issue_milestone.go:207: m, _, err := c.resolveMilestoneByName(owner, repo, name)
/go/pkg/mod/codeberg.org/mvdkleijn/forgejo-sdk/forgejo/v2@v2.2.0/issue_milestone.go:220:// resolveMilestoneByName is a fallback method to find milestone id by name
/go/pkg/mod/codeberg.org/mvdkleijn/forgejo-sdk/forgejo/v2@v2.2.0/issue_milestone.go:221:func (c *Client) resolveMilestoneByName(owner, repo, name string) (*Milestone, *Response, error) {
/go/pkg/mod/codeberg.org/mvdkleijn/forgejo-sdk/forgejo/v2@v2.2.0/issue_milestone_test.go:63: // test fallback resolveMilestoneByName
/go/pkg/mod/codeberg.org/mvdkleijn/forgejo-sdk/forgejo/v2@v2.2.0/issue_milestone_test.go:64: m, _, err := c.resolveMilestoneByName(repo.Owner.UserName, repo.Name, "V3.0")
/go/pkg/mod/codeberg.org/mvdkleijn/forgejo-sdk/forgejo/v2@v2.2.0/issue_milestone_test.go:67: _, _, err = c.resolveMilestoneByName(repo.Owner.UserName, repo.Name, "NoEvidenceOfExist")
/go/pkg/mod/codeberg.org/mvdkleijn/forgejo-sdk/forgejo/v2@v2.2.0/pull.go:369:// which stays available to resolve the commit sha. This is fixed for forgejo >= 1.14.0
/go/pkg/mod/codeberg.org/mvdkleijn/forgejo-sdk/forgejo/v2@v2.2.0/pull.go:379: return fmt.Errorf("unable to resolve PR ref '%s'", pr.Head.Ref)
/go/pkg/mod/codeberg.org/mvdkleijn/forgejo-sdk/forgejo/v2@v2.2.0/pull_review.go:64: Resolver *User `json:"resolver"`
/go/pkg/mod/codeberg.org/mvdkleijn/forgejo-sdk/forgejo/v2@v2.2.0/repo_file.go:125:// it optional can resolve lfs pointers and server the file instead
/go/pkg/mod/codeberg.org/mvdkleijn/forgejo-sdk/forgejo/v2@v2.2.0/repo_file.go:127:func (c *Client) GetFile(owner, repo, ref, filepath string, resolveLFS ...bool) ([]byte, *Response, error) {
/go/pkg/mod/codeberg.org/mvdkleijn/forgejo-sdk/forgejo/v2@v2.2.0/repo_file.go:128: reader, resp, err := c.GetFileReader(owner, repo, ref, filepath, resolveLFS...)
/go/pkg/mod/codeberg.org/mvdkleijn/forgejo-sdk/forgejo/v2@v2.2.0/repo_file.go:143:// it optional can resolve lfs pointers and server the file instead
/go/pkg/mod/codeberg.org/mvdkleijn/forgejo-sdk/forgejo/v2@v2.2.0/repo_file.go:145:func (c *Client) GetFileReader(owner, repo, ref, filepath string, resolveLFS ...bool) (io.ReadCloser, *Response, error) {
/go/pkg/mod/codeberg.org/mvdkleijn/forgejo-sdk/forgejo/v2@v2.2.0/repo_file.go:150: // resolve lfs
/go/pkg/mod/codeberg.org/mvdkleijn/forgejo-sdk/forgejo/v2@v2.2.0/repo_file.go:151: if len(resolveLFS) != 0 && resolveLFS[0] {
Thinking
The SDK has no resolve-review-comment feature. In other words, the `ResolveReviewComment` method in this PR is calling an endpoint that doesn't exist on Forgejo 16 (or any version of Gitea/Forgejo as far as I can find).
Wait — hold on. Let me reconsider. Let me re-verify the 405 probe. The 405 could also occur if the route exists but the method differs. My probe:
- POST `.../pulls/37/review_comments/4646/resolve` → 405
- GET on the same path → 404
If the route `POST .../review_comments/{id}/resolve` existed, POST should return 401/403 (unauthenticated, private repo), not 405. The fact that it's 405 means the path matched a route with a different method — that is, the catch-all GET `pulls/{base}/*`. So the POST route doesn't exist. Confirmed.
Hmm, but wait. Let me re-verify the catch-all theory. In Gitea's api.go (v1.22.0, /tmp/api.go):
```go
m.Group("/pulls", func() {
...
m.Group("/{index}", func() {
...
})
m.Get("/{base}/*", repo.GetPullRequestByBaseHead)
})
```
The path `/repos/abrander/zoo/pulls/37/review_comments/4646/resolve` — chi's routing: first tries `/pulls/{index}/...` — is there a sub-route matching `review_comments/4646/resolve`? No (no such route). Then `/pulls/{base}/*` with base="37", wildcard="review_comments/4646/resolve" — matches (GET only). So POST → 405. Theory confirmed.
So: **the endpoint implemented in this PR doesn't exist on the live Forgejo server.** The `resolve_review_comment` tool is broken.
Now, what's the right fix?
**Option A: Web form route with CSRF.** Fragile: requires a session + CSRF token. Not feasible with token auth (the CSRF token is in the session; token-authenticated requests don't have a session… actually, hmm, let me think again. Gitea's session middleware creates a session for every request, and the CSRF token is generated per session. A token-authenticated client could:
1. Make a GET request with the token → get a session cookie (Set-Cookie).
2. Fetch a page that contains the CSRF token (e.g., the PR page HTML) → parse `name="__csrf"`.
3. POST the form with the cookie + `__csrf` field.
This is a 3-step dance, fragile across versions, and parses HTML. As a senior architect, I'd reject this for v1.
**Option B: Remove the resolve endpoint / tool.** The PR description says "the last is a direct API call — the SDK doesn't expose the resolve endpoint." Since no such API exists, the honest fix for v1 is:
- Remove the `resolve_review_comment` tool and `ResolveReviewComment` client method, and
- Update the seed message / system prompt / PR description wording to not promise resolving inline comments, or
- Keep the tool but have it fail with a clear error.
Hmm, wait, wait. Hold on. Let me reconsider. Maybe I'm wrong about the endpoint. Let me look at the test for the client method in this PR — `client_test.go` has a test for `ResolveReviewComment` against an httptest server. That test just mocks the endpoint, so it passes regardless of whether the real server has it.
Let me look at the client test to see exactly what's being tested.
Actually, wait. Let me reconsider the situation. The reviewer's feedback was only about the static agent. But now I've discovered that the `resolve_review_comment` tool is broken against the real server (405). The PR description explicitly claims this tool works ("mark resolved inline comments with the new resolve_review_comment tool"). Since I'm the agent who opened this PR and I'm addressing review feedback, I should also fix this bug — it's part of making the PR correct. The reviewer will re-review, and if the tool is broken, the whole "agent reacts" workflow is broken (the instructions tell the agent to resolve inline comments).
But wait — should I do this in this run? The instructions are: "address the feedback, push the changes to the PR branch, reply to the review, and resolve addressed inline comments." The feedback was about the static agent. But as a senior developer, if I discover a real bug in the PR while working on it, fixing it is in scope ("make surgical changes: only change what's necessary for the task" — hmm, this suggests minimal changes).
Hmm. Let me think about what the best engineering call is here:
1. The reviewer's explicit feedback (static agent) — done.
2. The `resolve_review_comment` tool 405s against the real server — this is a bug in the PR I'm trying to land. The PR's own description promises this feature. If I leave it, the PR ships a broken tool, and every pr:review run will try to resolve comments and fail (the agent will see the error, but the workflow is degraded).
Actually — wait. Let me re-verify that the 405 really came from the real server, and not from something in between. The error was: "resolve review comment 4646: 405 Method Not Allowed:". The client formats it as `resp.Status` — "405 Method Not Allowed" is the standard Go http.StatusText. And my direct probe to the same path (unauthenticated) also returned 405. Consistent.
But hmm, one more consideration: maybe the endpoint exists but requires admin or a different path… no — if the route existed, an unauthenticated POST would return 401/404 (private repo), not 405. The 405 proves the route doesn't exist.
So, what to do? Let me think about what the "right" v1 behavior is:
**Decision**: The cleanest, most honest fix is:
1. Fix the endpoint if a real one exists — it doesn't (verified against Gitea 1.22, Gitea main, Forgejo 16.0.3, Forgejo main).
2. So: remove the `ResolveReviewComment` client method + `resolve_review_comment` tool + the related wiring (interface method, tests), and update the wording in system.md / seed / PR description that promises resolving inline comments.
Hmm, but wait — that's a bigger change. Alternatively, keep the tool but… no, a tool that always 405s is worse than no tool: the agent will try it, fail, and waste a turn.
Hmm, actually, wait. Let me reconsider. Is there really no API? Let me check the Forgejo 17 (17.0.0-dev) source — maybe it was added there. If it's in 17 but not 16, then the endpoint is version-dependent, and the current server (16.0.3) still doesn't have it. Either way, it doesn't work on the live server.
Actually, let me quickly check forgejo main (17.0.0-dev) — I already fetched api-fj-main.go. Let me grep it for "resolve".
Let me check Forgejo main (17.0.0-dev) for any resolve API, and look at the client test for the broken method:
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /tmp && grep -n \"resolve\\|Resolve\" api-fj-main.go | head; echo \"=== gitea main:\"; grep -n \"resolve\\|Resolve\" api-main.go | head"}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /tmp && grep -n \"resolve\\|Resolve\" api-fj-main.go | head; echo \"=== gitea main:\"; grep -n \"resolve\\|Resolve\" api-main.go | head"}
Result
=== gitea main:
1505: m.Post("/comments/{id}/resolve", reqToken(), mustNotBeArchived, repo.ResolvePullReviewComment)
1506: m.Post("/comments/{id}/unresolve", reqToken(), mustNotBeArchived, repo.UnresolvePullReviewComment)
Tool 🔧 grep_search {"query": "ResolveReviewComment|resolve", "glob": "internal/forgejo/client_test.go", "context_after": 15}
Arguments
{"query": "ResolveReviewComment|resolve", "glob": "internal/forgejo/client_test.go", "context_after": 15}
Result
No matches found.
Thinking
Excellent! **Gitea main (1.25-dev or later) has this API**:
```go
m.Post("/comments/{id}/resolve", reqToken(), mustNotBeArchived, repo.ResolvePullReviewComment)
m.Post("/comments/{id}/unresolve", reqToken(), mustNotBeArchived, repo.UnresolvePullReviewComment)
```
Let's check the full path context in Gitea main's api.go — which group is this under?
Gitea main has the API. Let me see the full route context:
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /tmp && sed -n '1490,1515p' api-main.go"}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /tmp && sed -n '1490,1515p' api-main.go"}
Result
m.Post("/mirror-sync", reqToken(), reqRepoWriter(unit.TypeCode), mustNotBeArchived, repo.MirrorSync)
m.Post("/push_mirrors-sync", reqAdmin(), reqToken(), mustNotBeArchived, repo.PushMirrorSync)
m.Group("/push_mirrors", func() {
m.Combo("").Get(repo.ListPushMirrors).
Post(mustNotBeArchived, bind(api.CreatePushMirrorOption{}), repo.AddPushMirror)
m.Combo("/{name}").
Delete(mustNotBeArchived, repo.DeletePushMirrorByRemoteName).
Get(repo.GetPushMirrorByName)
}, reqAdmin(), reqToken())
m.Get("/editorconfig/{filename}", context.ReferencesGitRepo(), context.RepoRefForAPI, reqRepoReader(unit.TypeCode), repo.GetEditorconfig)
m.Group("/pulls", func() {
m.Combo("").Get(repo.ListPullRequests).
Post(reqToken(), mustNotBeArchived, bind(api.CreatePullRequestOption{}), repo.CreatePullRequest)
m.Get("/pinned", repo.ListPinnedPullRequests)
m.Post("/comments/{id}/resolve", reqToken(), mustNotBeArchived, repo.ResolvePullReviewComment)
m.Post("/comments/{id}/unresolve", reqToken(), mustNotBeArchived, repo.UnresolvePullReviewComment)
m.Group("/{index}", func() {
m.Combo("").Get(repo.GetPullRequest).
Patch(reqToken(), bind(api.EditPullRequestOption{}), repo.EditPullRequest)
m.Get(".{diffType:diff|patch}", repo.DownloadPullDiffOrPatch)
m.Post("/update", reqToken(), repo.UpdatePullRequest)
m.Get("/commits", repo.GetPullRequestCommits)
m.Get("/files", repo.GetPullRequestFiles)
m.Combo("/merge").Get(repo.IsPullRequestMerged).
Post(reqToken(), mustNotBeArchived, bind(forms.MergePullRequestForm{}), repo.MergePullRequest).
Thinking
In Gitea main, the route is as follows:
`POST /repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/comments/{id}/resolve`
Note: **`/pulls/comments/{id}/resolve`** — not `/pulls/{index}/review_comments/{id}/resolve`!
This was added in a Gitea PR — let me investigate when it was added. This is a Gitea feature: "Add API to resolve/unresolve review comments" — I think this is Gitea 1.24 (PR #32236? or something similar). Let me check the Gitea 1.24.0 tag.
The route in Gitea main is `POST /pulls/comments/{id}/resolve` — different from what the PR implemented. Let me find which Gitea version added it:
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /tmp && for tag in v1.24.0 v1.23.0; do code=$(curl -sL -o api-$tag.go -w \"%{http_code}\" \"https://raw.githubusercontent.com/go-gitea/gitea/$tag/routers/api/v1/api.go\"); hit=$(grep -c \"comments/{id}/resolve\" api-$tag.go 2>/dev/null); echo \"$tag -> HTTP $code, resolve-route matches: $hit\"; done", "timeout": 120}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /tmp && for tag in v1.24.0 v1.23.0; do code=$(curl -sL -o api-$tag.go -w \"%{http_code}\" \"https://raw.githubusercontent.com/go-gitea/gitea/$tag/routers/api/v1/api.go\"); hit=$(grep -c \"comments/{id}/resolve\" api-$tag.go 2>/dev/null); echo \"$tag -> HTTP $code, resolve-route matches: $hit\"; done", "timeout": 120}
Result
v1.24.0 -> HTTP 200, resolve-route matches: 0 v1.23.0 -> HTTP 200, resolve-route matches: 0
Thinking
Not included in 1.23 or 1.24. So it was added after 1.24 — meaning it's in Gitea 1.25 (unreleased as of my knowledge cutoff / dev version). The live server is running Forgejo 16.0.3~gitea-1.22.0, which doesn't have this.
So the situation is:
- The endpoint the PR implemented (`POST /repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/{index}/review_comments/{id}/resolve`) doesn't exist in any released version of Gitea/Forgejo (up through 1.24 / Forgejo 16).
- The actual future endpoint (Gitea ≥1.25-dev) is `POST /repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/comments/{id}/resolve` — no index, and `comments` instead of `review_comments`.
- The live server (Forgejo 16.0.3) has neither.
Therefore, `resolve_review_comment` **cannot work** on the current server, period. There is no API.
Now, what's the right engineering call for this PR?
This PR is a v1 with a "known limitations" section. The `resolve_review_comment` tool is advertised in:
1. The PR description
2. The system prompt (system.md)
3. The seed message instructions (zoo.hcl.example instructions: "resolve the inline comments you have addressed")
4. The tool description
Since the server has no API for this, the options are:
**Option A: Remove the tool entirely.**
- Remove `ResolveReviewComment` from the client, the `ForgejoActions` interface, the tool, the tests.
- Update the wording in system.md, the instructions in zoo.hcl.example, and the seed message.
- This is honest: v1 doesn't support resolving inline comments, and the agent can only reply with `comment`.
- Downside: loses a feature that was advertised in the PR.
**Option B: Keep the tool, point it at the Gitea ≥1.25 endpoint, and document that it requires a newer Forgejo.**
- The tool will still 405 on this server. No good.
**Option C: Keep the tool, and make the failure graceful / documented as a limitation.**
- The tool will still fail on this server. The agent wastes a turn. No good.
Hmm, wait, actually — let me reconsider. Is there really no other way to mark a conversation as resolved on Forgejo 16? The web route `POST /{owner}/{repo}/issues/{index}/resolve_conversation` exists. It requires CSRF.
Can a token-authenticated client get through CSRF? Let me look at how `ctx.Csrf.Validate` works. In Gitea, `Csrf` is set up in `routers/common/...`? Let me check the `SetCSRF` / `Csrf` type. In Gitea 1.22: `modules/web/middleware/...` no. Let me grep for "Csrf" in the Gitea 1.22 source.
The endpoint doesn't exist in any released version — it was added in Gitea after 1.24, and the live server is running Forgejo 16 (Gitea 1.22). Let me check whether the web form route can be used with token authentication (CSRF check):
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /tmp/gitea-src && tar xzf gitea.tgz --wildcards \"gitea-1.22.0/services/context/*\" 2>/dev/null; grep -rn \"func.*Csrf.*Validate\\|type Csrf\" gitea-1.22.0/services/context/*.go | head; grep -rn \"csrf\" gitea-1.22.0/services/context/web.go | head", "timeout": 120}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /tmp/gitea-src && tar xzf gitea.tgz --wildcards \"gitea-1.22.0/services/context/*\" 2>/dev/null; grep -rn \"func.*Csrf.*Validate\\|type Csrf\" gitea-1.22.0/services/context/*.go | head; grep -rn \"csrf\" gitea-1.22.0/services/context/web.go | head", "timeout": 120}
Result
gitea-1.22.0/services/context/csrf.go:74:type CsrfOptions struct {
grep: gitea-1.22.0/services/context/web.go: No such file or directory
Thinking
Let's take a look at the CSRF implementation in Gitea 1.22.
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /tmp/gitea-src && sed -n '1,140p' gitea-1.22.0/services/context/csrf.go"}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /tmp/gitea-src && sed -n '1,140p' gitea-1.22.0/services/context/csrf.go"}
Result
// Copyright 2013 Martini Authors
// Copyright 2014 The Macaron Authors
// Copyright 2021 The Gitea Authors
//
// Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License"): you may
// not use this file except in compliance with the License. You may obtain
// a copy of the License at
//
// http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
//
// Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
// distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT
// WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied. See the
// License for the specific language governing permissions and limitations
// under the License.
// SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0
// a middleware that generates and validates CSRF tokens.
package context
import (
"encoding/base32"
"fmt"
"net/http"
"strconv"
"time"
"code.gitea.io/gitea/modules/log"
"code.gitea.io/gitea/modules/setting"
"code.gitea.io/gitea/modules/util"
"code.gitea.io/gitea/modules/web/middleware"
)
// CSRFProtector represents a CSRF protector and is used to get the current token and validate the token.
type CSRFProtector interface {
// GetHeaderName returns HTTP header to search for token.
GetHeaderName() string
// GetFormName returns form value to search for token.
GetFormName() string
// GetToken returns the token.
GetToken() string
// Validate validates the token in http context.
Validate(ctx *Context)
// DeleteCookie deletes the cookie
DeleteCookie(ctx *Context)
}
type csrfProtector struct {
opt CsrfOptions
// Token generated to pass via header, cookie, or hidden form value.
Token string
// This value must be unique per user.
ID string
}
// GetHeaderName returns the name of the HTTP header for csrf token.
func (c *csrfProtector) GetHeaderName() string {
return c.opt.Header
}
// GetFormName returns the name of the form value for csrf token.
func (c *csrfProtector) GetFormName() string {
return c.opt.Form
}
// GetToken returns the current token. This is typically used
// to populate a hidden form in an HTML template.
func (c *csrfProtector) GetToken() string {
return c.Token
}
// CsrfOptions maintains options to manage behavior of Generate.
type CsrfOptions struct {
// The global secret value used to generate Tokens.
Secret string
// HTTP header used to set and get token.
Header string
// Form value used to set and get token.
Form string
// Cookie value used to set and get token.
Cookie string
// Cookie domain.
CookieDomain string
// Cookie path.
CookiePath string
CookieHTTPOnly bool
// SameSite set the cookie SameSite type
SameSite http.SameSite
// Key used for getting the unique ID per user.
SessionKey string
// oldSessionKey saves old value corresponding to SessionKey.
oldSessionKey string
// If true, send token via X-Csrf-Token header.
SetHeader bool
// If true, send token via _csrf cookie.
SetCookie bool
// Set the Secure flag to true on the cookie.
Secure bool
// Disallow Origin appear in request header.
Origin bool
// Cookie lifetime. Default is 0
CookieLifeTime int
}
func prepareDefaultCsrfOptions(opt CsrfOptions) CsrfOptions {
if opt.Secret == "" {
randBytes, err := util.CryptoRandomBytes(8)
if err != nil {
// this panic can be handled by the recover() in http handlers
panic(fmt.Errorf("failed to generate random bytes: %w", err))
}
opt.Secret = base32.StdEncoding.EncodeToString(randBytes)
}
if opt.Header == "" {
opt.Header = "X-Csrf-Token"
}
if opt.Form == "" {
opt.Form = "_csrf"
}
if opt.Cookie == "" {
opt.Cookie = "_csrf"
}
if opt.CookiePath == "" {
opt.CookiePath = "/"
}
if opt.SessionKey == "" {
opt.SessionKey = "uid"
}
if opt.CookieLifeTime == 0 {
opt.CookieLifeTime = int(CsrfTokenTimeout.Seconds())
}
opt.oldSessionKey = "_old_" + opt.SessionKey
return opt
}
func newCsrfCookie(c *csrfProtector, value string) *http.Cookie {
return &http.Cookie{
Name: c.opt.Cookie,
Thinking
Let's take a look at the Validate function and Generate:
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /tmp/gitea-src && sed -n '140,260p' gitea-1.22.0/services/context/csrf.go"}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /tmp/gitea-src && sed -n '140,260p' gitea-1.22.0/services/context/csrf.go"}
Result
Name: c.opt.Cookie,
Value: value,
Path: c.opt.CookiePath,
Domain: c.opt.CookieDomain,
MaxAge: c.opt.CookieLifeTime,
Secure: c.opt.Secure,
HttpOnly: c.opt.CookieHTTPOnly,
SameSite: c.opt.SameSite,
}
}
// PrepareCSRFProtector returns a CSRFProtector to be used for every request.
// Additionally, depending on options set, generated tokens will be sent via Header and/or Cookie.
func PrepareCSRFProtector(opt CsrfOptions, ctx *Context) CSRFProtector {
opt = prepareDefaultCsrfOptions(opt)
x := &csrfProtector{opt: opt}
if opt.Origin && len(ctx.Req.Header.Get("Origin")) > 0 {
return x
}
x.ID = "0"
uidAny := ctx.Session.Get(opt.SessionKey)
if uidAny != nil {
switch uidVal := uidAny.(type) {
case string:
x.ID = uidVal
case int64:
x.ID = strconv.FormatInt(uidVal, 10)
default:
log.Error("invalid uid type in session: %T", uidAny)
}
}
oldUID := ctx.Session.Get(opt.oldSessionKey)
uidChanged := oldUID == nil || oldUID.(string) != x.ID
cookieToken := ctx.GetSiteCookie(opt.Cookie)
needsNew := true
if uidChanged {
_ = ctx.Session.Set(opt.oldSessionKey, x.ID)
} else if cookieToken != "" {
// If cookie token presents, re-use existing unexpired token, else generate a new one.
if issueTime, ok := ParseCsrfToken(cookieToken); ok {
dur := time.Since(issueTime) // issueTime is not a monotonic-clock, the server time may change a lot to an early time.
if dur >= -CsrfTokenRegenerationInterval && dur <= CsrfTokenRegenerationInterval {
x.Token = cookieToken
needsNew = false
}
}
}
if needsNew {
// FIXME: actionId.
x.Token = GenerateCsrfToken(x.opt.Secret, x.ID, "POST", time.Now())
if opt.SetCookie {
cookie := newCsrfCookie(x, x.Token)
ctx.Resp.Header().Add("Set-Cookie", cookie.String())
}
}
if opt.SetHeader {
ctx.Resp.Header().Add(opt.Header, x.Token)
}
return x
}
func (c *csrfProtector) validateToken(ctx *Context, token string) {
if !ValidCsrfToken(token, c.opt.Secret, c.ID, "POST", time.Now()) {
c.DeleteCookie(ctx)
if middleware.IsAPIPath(ctx.Req) {
// currently, there should be no access to the APIPath with CSRF token. because templates shouldn't use the `/api/` endpoints.
http.Error(ctx.Resp, "Invalid CSRF token.", http.StatusBadRequest)
} else {
ctx.Flash.Error(ctx.Tr("error.invalid_csrf"))
ctx.Redirect(setting.AppSubURL + "/")
}
}
}
// Validate should be used as a per route middleware. It attempts to get a token from an "X-Csrf-Token"
// HTTP header and then a "_csrf" form value. If one of these is found, the token will be validated.
// If this validation fails, custom Error is sent in the reply.
// If neither a header nor form value is found, http.StatusBadRequest is sent.
func (c *csrfProtector) Validate(ctx *Context) {
if token := ctx.Req.Header.Get(c.GetHeaderName()); token != "" {
c.validateToken(ctx, token)
return
}
if token := ctx.Req.FormValue(c.GetFormName()); token != "" {
c.validateToken(ctx, token)
return
}
c.validateToken(ctx, "") // no csrf token, use an empty token to respond error
}
func (c *csrfProtector) DeleteCookie(ctx *Context) {
if c.opt.SetCookie {
cookie := newCsrfCookie(c, "")
cookie.MaxAge = -1
ctx.Resp.Header().Add("Set-Cookie", cookie.String())
}
}
Thinking
Now I understand how CSRF works:
- The token is generated per session, using `x.ID` (the session's uid).
- For a token-authenticated request: does the request have a session? Gitea's session middleware (gorilla sessions) creates a session for each request that has a session cookie. For a request without a cookie, a new session is created, but... is it persisted? `PrepareCSRFProtector` reads `ctx.Session.Get("uid")` — for a token-authenticated request, is `uid` set in the session?
In Gitea, the `Verify` middleware (auth) sets `ctx.Doer` from the token, but does it set the session's uid? Let me check... In `verifyAuth` (around line 120 of web.go): `ctx.Doer = ar.Doer; ctx.IsSigned = ar.Doer != nil`. It doesn't set the session's uid. Therefore, for a pure token-authenticated request, the session's uid is empty → `x.ID = "0"` → the token is generated with ID "0".
So, a stateless client could theoretically do the following:
1. Send any request (e.g., GET a page) with token auth → the response sets the `_csrf` cookie (if `SetCookie` is true) — the token is generated with ID "0".
2. Read the `_csrf` cookie from the response.
3. POST the form with the `_csrf` cookie + `__csrf` form field (Gitea's form name is `__csrf`? The default Form is "_csrf", but Gitea's template uses `__csrf`... let me check the options Gitea uses).
Hmm, this is getting pretty deep into the weeds. And the response to the web form POST is an HTML template render (renderConversation), not JSON. The client would need to check the status code (200 = success, 302 redirect = CSRF failure, 400 = bad request).
This is really fragile:
- Depends on session/cookie behavior for token-authenticated requests.
- Depends on the HTML form's field names (`origin`, `action`, `comment_id`, `__csrf`).
- Forgejo/Gitea may change the web routes.
- The `reqRepoIssuesOrPullsReader` permission middleware (in Forgejo 16) — token auth should be fine.
As a senior architect, I think the right call for v1 is **Option A: remove the `resolve_review_comment` tool and the client method**, and document it as a known limitation: "Forgejo (16.0.3, Gitea 1.22-based) has no API to resolve review comment conversations. The resolve API was added in Gitea ≥1.25 (POST /pulls/comments/{id}/resolve). Once the server is upgraded, the tool can be re-added."
Hmm, wait. But hold on. Let me reconsider the scope. My task from the review event: "Address the feedback, push changes to the PR branch, reply to the review, and resolve addressed inline comments."
The feedback is only about the static agent. I've addressed that. The 405 on resolve is a separate pre-existing bug in the PR (introduced by the original PR commit).
Should I fix it in this run? Considerations:
- For: it's a real bug in the PR I'm trying to land. The PR description promises this feature. The reviewer will re-review. Shipping a tool that always 405s is bad. As the PR author's agent, I own the quality of this PR.
- Against: scope creep beyond the review feedback. "Surgical changes" guideline.
I think the right call is to fix it — but carefully and honestly. The cleanest, most minimal fix that keeps the PR's intent:
Actually, wait. Let me reconsider Option B more carefully: implement the tool against the **Gitea ≥1.25 endpoint** (`POST /repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/comments/{id}/resolve`)? No — it still 405s on this server. Useless today.
What about implementing it against the web form route? Let me test whether it actually works on the live server. I don't have a token to test with... hmm, wait, do I? The `resolve_review_comment` tool I ran earlier used greg's token via the zoo daemon. I can't directly access that token.
Hmm, but actually — I might be able to test the CSRF flow with an unauthenticated session:
1. GET https://code.stdio.dk/user/login (or any page) → get a session cookie + `_csrf` cookie.
2. POST the resolve_conversation form with that cookie + csrf → expect 302 to login (unauthenticated) — this at least confirms the route + CSRF mechanics work.
But even if it works for a logged-in session, it won't work for token auth (uid "0" vs. actual uid — wait, actually, for token auth, uid in the session is empty → ID "0" → the token is generated with ID "0" and validated with ID "0" — consistent within the same session! So it might actually work: the CSRF token is tied to the session, not to the auth method. A token-authenticated request with a session cookie would pass CSRF as long as the token matches the session.
Flow for a token-authenticated client:
1. GET any page (e.g., `/abrander/zoo/pulls/37`) with `Authorization: token X` → response includes `Set-Cookie: _csrf=...` (if SetCookie option is true) and a session cookie.
2. POST `/{owner}/{repo}/issues/{index}/resolve_conversation` with the session + `_csrf` cookies, form fields `origin=diff`, `action=Resolve`, `comment_id=N`, `__csrf=<token>`.
3. Check the response: 200 with HTML = success (renderConversation re-renders the comment list), 302 = CSRF failure.
Wait, but what's Gitea's actual form name? The default Form option is "_csrf", but Gitea sets it to... let me check Gitea's router initialization for CsrfOptions.
Let me check how Gitea configures the CSRF options (form name, cookie, header):
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /tmp/gitea-src && tar xzf gitea.tgz --wildcards \"gitea-1.22.0/routers/common/*\" 2>/dev/null; grep -rn \"CsrfOptions\\|SetCSRF\\|PrepareCSRF\" gitea-1.22.0/routers/ --include=\"*.go\" | grep -v \"_test\" | head", "timeout": 120}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /tmp/gitea-src && tar xzf gitea.tgz --wildcards \"gitea-1.22.0/routers/common/*\" 2>/dev/null; grep -rn \"CsrfOptions\\|SetCSRF\\|PrepareCSRF\" gitea-1.22.0/routers/ --include=\"*.go\" | grep -v \"_test\" | head", "timeout": 120}
Result
Thinking
Hmm, no matches. Let me search for where PrepareCSRFProtector is called.
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /tmp/gitea-src && tar xzf gitea.tgz --wildcards \"gitea-1.22.0/routers/*\" --wildcards \"gitea-1.22.0/modules/web/*\" 2>/dev/null; grep -rn \"PrepareCSRFProtector\\|CsrfOptions{\" gitea-1.22.0/ --include=\"*.go\" | grep -v \"_test\" | head", "timeout": 120}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /tmp/gitea-src && tar xzf gitea.tgz --wildcards \"gitea-1.22.0/routers/*\" --wildcards \"gitea-1.22.0/modules/web/*\" 2>/dev/null; grep -rn \"PrepareCSRFProtector\\|CsrfOptions{\" gitea-1.22.0/ --include=\"*.go\" | grep -v \"_test\" | head", "timeout": 120}
Result
gitea-1.22.0/services/context/context.go:138: csrfOpts := CsrfOptions{
gitea-1.22.0/services/context/context.go:170: ctx.Csrf = PrepareCSRFProtector(csrfOpts, ctx)
gitea-1.22.0/services/context/csrf.go:151:// PrepareCSRFProtector returns a CSRFProtector to be used for every request.
gitea-1.22.0/services/context/csrf.go:153:func PrepareCSRFProtector(opt CsrfOptions, ctx *Context) CSRFProtector {
Thinking
Let's take a look at the CsrfOptions configuration in context.go.
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /tmp/gitea-src && sed -n '130,180p' gitea-1.22.0/services/context/context.go"}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /tmp/gitea-src && sed -n '130,180p' gitea-1.22.0/services/context/context.go"}
Result
ctx.TemplateContext = NewTemplateContextForWeb(ctx)
ctx.Flash = &middleware.Flash{DataStore: ctx, Values: url.Values{}}
return ctx
}
// Contexter initializes a classic context for a request.
func Contexter() func(next http.Handler) http.Handler {
rnd := templates.HTMLRenderer()
csrfOpts := CsrfOptions{
Secret: hex.EncodeToString(setting.GetGeneralTokenSigningSecret()),
Cookie: setting.CSRFCookieName,
SetCookie: true,
Secure: setting.SessionConfig.Secure,
CookieHTTPOnly: setting.CSRFCookieHTTPOnly,
Header: "X-Csrf-Token",
CookieDomain: setting.SessionConfig.Domain,
CookiePath: setting.SessionConfig.CookiePath,
SameSite: setting.SessionConfig.SameSite,
}
if !setting.IsProd {
CsrfTokenRegenerationInterval = 5 * time.Second // in dev, re-generate the tokens more aggressively for debug purpose
}
return func(next http.Handler) http.Handler {
return http.HandlerFunc(func(resp http.ResponseWriter, req *http.Request) {
base, baseCleanUp := NewBaseContext(resp, req)
defer baseCleanUp()
ctx := NewWebContext(base, rnd, session.GetContextSession(req))
ctx.Data.MergeFrom(middleware.CommonTemplateContextData())
ctx.Data["Context"] = ctx // TODO: use "ctx" in template and remove this
ctx.Data["CurrentURL"] = setting.AppSubURL + req.URL.RequestURI()
ctx.Data["Link"] = ctx.Link
// PageData is passed by reference, and it will be rendered to `window.config.pageData` in `head.tmpl` for JavaScript modules
ctx.PageData = map[string]any{}
ctx.Data["PageData"] = ctx.PageData
ctx.Base.AppendContextValue(WebContextKey, ctx)
ctx.Base.AppendContextValueFunc(gitrepo.RepositoryContextKey, func() any { return ctx.Repo.GitRepo })
ctx.Csrf = PrepareCSRFProtector(csrfOpts, ctx)
// Get the last flash message from cookie
lastFlashCookie := middleware.GetSiteCookie(ctx.Req, CookieNameFlash)
if vals, _ := url.ParseQuery(lastFlashCookie); len(vals) > 0 {
// store last Flash message into the template data, to render it
ctx.Data["Flash"] = &middleware.Flash{
DataStore: ctx,
Values: vals,
ErrorMsg: vals.Get("error"),
SuccessMsg: vals.Get("success"),
Thinking
So, the CSRF setup is:
- `SetCookie: true` — the token is sent via the `_csrf` cookie (setting.CSRFCookieName, usually "_csrf").
- Header: "X-Csrf-Token".
- Form: default "_csrf"… but wait, Gitea's templates use `__csrf` in forms. Let me check: `GetFormName()` returns `c.opt.Form`, and the default is "_csrf". Gitea's templates use `csrf`… hmm, in Gitea's templates, the hidden field is `name="__csrf"`. Let me check the template helper.
Actually, in Gitea, `ctx.Csrf.GetFormName()` is used in templates: `<input type="hidden" name="{{.Context.Csrf.GetFormName()}}" value="{{.Context.Csrf.GetToken}}">`. And the default Form name is "_csrf"… but I have a feeling Gitea's forms were using `__csrf`? Let me check the setting or template.
Hmm, this is getting really deep. Let me step back and think about the architectural decision.
**Reality check**: Even if the web form + CSRF dance is technically feasible, it's a fragile, version-dependent hack:
1. Requires session cookie handling (cookie jar) in the client.
2. Requires the `_csrf` cookie to be set on token-authenticated requests (it is set — SetCookie: true, and PrepareCSRFProtector runs on every web request… but wait, does it run on API token requests to web routes? Yes, Contexter runs on all web routes).
3. Requires parsing/obtaining the token from the Set-Cookie header of a preceding request.
4. The response is HTML, not JSON — success = 200 + rendered HTML; failure = 302 redirect or 400.
5. Forgejo's web routes/fields may change between versions.
For a daemon that's supposed to be robust across Forgejo versions, this is bad engineering. The PR description already acknowledges "the SDK doesn't expose the resolve endpoint" and implemented a direct API call — but the endpoint they guessed doesn't exist.
**Decision**: The honest, clean v1 fix is to **remove** the `resolve_review_comment` tool and the `ResolveReviewComment` client method, and adjust the wording (system.md, the instructions in zoo.hcl.example, the seed message if needed, and the PR description's claims). Add it to "Known limitations": "Forgejo has no API to resolve review comment conversations (the web UI uses a CSRF-protected form route); the resolve_review_comment tool was removed — agents can only reply with `comment`. Gitea added `POST /pulls/comments/{id}/resolve` after 1.24; once the server is upgraded, the tool can be re-added."
Hmm, wait, wait. Hold on. Before committing to removal, let me reconsider once more whether the web form approach is actually acceptable…
No, actually, let me think about who's going to use this. The whole point of this PR is that agents react to reviews. The reviewer (abrander, the human who runs this zoo) explicitly built the workflow around "resolving addressed inline comments" — it's in the instructions text in zoo.hcl.example that the reviewer saw and didn't object to. Removing the tool would be removing a feature the reviewer implicitly wanted.
Hmm, but the reviewer's only comment was about the static agent. The 405 is a bug I discovered.
Let me weigh it:
1. **Remove the tool**: Clean, honest, small diff. The agent replies with `comment` and can't mark comments as resolved. The reviewer can resolve them manually in the UI. Documented as a limitation.
2. **Web form hack**: Keeps the feature, but fragile, more code (cookie jar, 2 requests, HTML status parsing), and I can't test it against the real server without a token. Shipping untested fragile code is worse.
Actually — wait. Can I test it? Let me think… The `resolve_review_comment` tool I ran earlier was executed by the zoo daemon using greg's token. I don't have greg's token directly. But maybe I can test the CSRF flow unauthenticated:
1. GET /user/login → get session cookie + _csrf cookie.
2. POST /abrander/zoo/issues/37/resolve_conversation with form fields + csrf → expect 302 to login (unauthenticated) — this proves the route + CSRF work, but doesn't prove the token-authenticated flow.
That's a partial test. The token-authenticated flow is what matters, and I can't test it without a token.
Hmm, hmm. OK, one more thought — what does the **zoo daemon** have access to? The zoo service token (config.Forgejo.Token) — a full token. The per-agent tokens. Both are real Forgejo tokens. The web form flow would work with any token (auth via Authorization header + session cookie for CSRF).
But I can't test it from here. Shipping untested code that parses HTML responses is exactly the kind of thing a senior architect avoids for v1.
**Final decision**: Remove the `resolve_review_comment` tool + client method, and document the limitation. This is the surgical, honest fix. In the reply, I'll explain:
- The feedback about the static agent has been addressed (the main point).
- Also discovered that `resolve_review_comment` 405s against the live Forgejo 16.0.3: no API endpoint exists for resolving review comments (verified against Gitea 1.22/1.23/1.24, Forgejo 16.0.3, and both main branches; the API only appears in Gitea ≥1.25-dev as `POST /pulls/comments/{id}/resolve`). The only route on 16 is a CSRF-protected web form, which isn't suitable for a token-authenticated client. So I removed the tool and documented it as a known limitation; the agent will reply with `comment` instead. Once the server is upgraded to a Forgejo with the resolve API, the tool can be re-added.
Wait, actually, hmm, hold on. Let me reconsider just once more. Is removal really better than keeping the tool with a clear error? No — a tool that always fails is worse than no tool (the agent wastes a turn, gets confused). Removal is correct.
Hmm, that said… let me reconsider the web form approach one last time. Because removing a feature the reviewer's workflow depends on is a bigger deal. The instructions in zoo.hcl.example (which the reviewer saw) say "resolve the inline comments you have addressed." If I remove the tool, I also have to change that instructions text, and the reviewer might ask "why did you remove it?"
I'll explain thoroughly in the reply. The alternative (a fragile untested HTML-scraping hack) is worse engineering. And actually — the agent can still "address" the feedback: it fixes the code, pushes, and replies with a comment explaining what it did for each inline comment. Resolving the comment thread is a cosmetic follow-up that the reviewer can do with one click in the UI.
OK, wait, actually, let me reconsider the problem statement once more. Am I sure the 405 isn't a permissions issue or a transient issue? "405 Method Not Allowed" — no, 405 is definitively "the server knows this resource but doesn't allow this method." Combined with my direct probe (unauthenticated POST → 405, unauthenticated GET → 404), the route doesn't exist. Certain.
And let me double-check my claim that "Gitea added it after 1.24" — I checked v1.23.0 and v1.24.0: no match. It's in main. Let me find the exact Gitea PR/version. Let me check the Gitea changelog or the commit. Actually, let me check the v1.25.0-dev milestone… I can search Gitea's GitHub for "ResolvePullReviewComment". Let me try it quickly.
Let me find when Gitea added this API (to document the limitation accurately):
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /tmp && curl -sL \"https://api.github.com/search/code?q=ResolvePullReviewComment+repo:go-gitea/gitea\" 2>/dev/null | python3 -c \"import json,sys; d=json.load(sys.stdin); print(d.get('total_count')); [print(i['path']) for i in d.get('items',[])[:10]]\" 2>/dev/null || echo \"search unavailable\"", "timeout": 60}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /tmp && curl -sL \"https://api.github.com/search/code?q=ResolvePullReviewComment+repo:go-gitea/gitea\" 2>/dev/null | python3 -c \"import json,sys; d=json.load(sys.stdin); print(d.get('total_count')); [print(i['path']) for i in d.get('items',[])[:10]]\" 2>/dev/null || echo \"search unavailable\"", "timeout": 60}
Result
None
Thinking
The GitHub code search API requires authentication. Let me check the Gitea main handler to see the swagger annotation (which usually documents the operation) and check the Gitea 1.25 milestone. Actually, the exact version doesn't matter that much — what matters is:
1. It doesn't exist in Gitea 1.22/1.23/1.24 or Forgejo 16.0.3 (the running server).
2. It exists in Gitea main (1.25-dev) as `POST /repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/comments/{id}/resolve`.
To confirm the exact path, let me take a look at the swagger annotation for the handler in Gitea main.
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /tmp && curl -sL \"https://raw.githubusercontent.com/go-gitea/gitea/main/routers/api/v1/repo/pull_review.go\" -o pr-main.go; grep -n -B8 \"func ResolvePullReviewComment\" pr-main.go | head -30", "timeout": 60}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /tmp && curl -sL \"https://raw.githubusercontent.com/go-gitea/gitea/main/routers/api/v1/repo/pull_review.go\" -o pr-main.go; grep -n -B8 \"func ResolvePullReviewComment\" pr-main.go | head -30", "timeout": 60}
Result
282- return
283- }
284- comment.Issue = parent.Issue
285-
286- ctx.JSON(http.StatusCreated, convert.ToPullReviewComment(ctx, comment, ctx.Doer))
287-}
288-
289-// ResolvePullReviewComment resolves a review comment in a pull request
290:func ResolvePullReviewComment(ctx *context.APIContext) {
Thinking
Let's check the swagger annotation at the top of that function.
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /tmp && sed -n '289,340p' pr-main.go"}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /tmp && sed -n '289,340p' pr-main.go"}
Result
// ResolvePullReviewComment resolves a review comment in a pull request
func ResolvePullReviewComment(ctx *context.APIContext) {
// swagger:operation POST /repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/comments/{id}/resolve repository repoResolvePullReviewComment
// ---
// summary: Resolve a pull request review comment
// produces:
// - application/json
// parameters:
// - name: owner
// in: path
// description: owner of the repo
// type: string
// required: true
// - name: repo
// in: path
// description: name of the repo
// type: string
// required: true
// - name: id
// in: path
// description: id of the review comment
// type: integer
// format: int64
// required: true
// responses:
// "204":
// "$ref": "#/responses/empty"
// "400":
// "$ref": "#/responses/validationError"
// "403":
// "$ref": "#/responses/forbidden"
// "404":
// "$ref": "#/responses/notFound"
updatePullReviewCommentResolve(ctx, true)
}
// UnresolvePullReviewComment unresolves a review comment in a pull request
func UnresolvePullReviewComment(ctx *context.APIContext) {
// swagger:operation POST /repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/comments/{id}/unresolve repository repoUnresolvePullReviewComment
// ---
// summary: Unresolve a pull request review comment
// produces:
// - application/json
// parameters:
// - name: owner
// in: path
// description: owner of the repo
// type: string
// required: true
// - name: repo
// in: path
// description: name of the repo
Thinking
Confirmed: Gitea main (1.25-dev) has `POST /repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/comments/{id}/resolve` → 204. This doesn't exist in the running Forgejo 16.0.3 (Gitea 1.22-based).
**Decision (final)**: Remove the `resolve_review_comment` tool and the `ResolveReviewComment` client method from this PR, and document it as a known limitation. The alternative (a CSRF-protected web form hack) is too fragile to ship untested, and the "direct API call" that the PR description claims doesn't exist on any released Forgejo.
Hmm, wait. Actually, let me pause here and reconsider the scope once more.
The review feedback I should address is only the static agent issue. That's done. Now I'm considering a second, larger change (removing the tool). Is that appropriate for this run?
Arguments in favor of doing it now:
1. This PR is mine (the PR I opened). The tool is broken — I just got a 405 when I actually used it.
2. The reviewer will re-review after my fix. If the tool is still broken, the PR has a known-broken feature.
3. The PR description explicitly advertises this tool. Leaving it broken means the PR description is a lie.
4. It's the same PR branch, and it's a clean, small, well-tested change.
Arguments against:
1. Scope creep relative to the review comment.
2. "Surgical changes" guideline.
I think doing it is the right call — it's a bug in the very PR I'm trying to land, I have direct evidence (the 405 from my own tool call), and the fix is small and well-tested. In the reply, I'll clearly separate the two changes so the reviewer can see both.
OK, let me implement the removal:
1. **`internal/forgejo/client.go`**: Remove the `ResolveReviewComment` method.
2. **`internal/forgejo/client_test.go`**: Check for tests of ResolveReviewComment — my earlier grep in client_test.go didn't find "resolve"… wait, the grep_search with glob `internal/forgejo/client_test.go` for `ResolveReviewComment|resolve` returned "No matches found". Interesting — so the PR description's claim of "client methods against an httptest Forgejo" didn't include a test for ResolveReviewComment? Let me re-check client_test.go to see what's tested.
3. **`internal/tools/context.go`**: Remove `ResolveReviewComment` from the `ForgejoActions` interface.
4. **`internal/tools/forgejo.go`**: Remove the `resolve_review_comment` tool (init + function + params).
5. **`internal/tools/tools_test.go`**: Remove `TestResolveReviewCommentToolCallsForgejo` and the fake's method.
6. **`internal/agentrun/system.md`**: Remove `resolve_review_comment` from the tool list and the sentence about it.
7. **`zoo.hcl.example`**: Update the pr:review instructions to drop "resolve the inline comments you have addressed" → e.g., "…reply to the review with a summary of what you addressed." Also the comment block above it.
8. **`internal/agentrun/run.go` / seed**: Check if the seed message mentions resolving… the seed message renders the review section: "the id is what the agent passes to resolve_review_comment once it has addressed the feedback" — that's in the renderReviewSection comment (code comment) — update it. The seed message itself doesn't mention the tool. Let me check the renderReviewSection comment: "its location and id (the id is what the agent passes to resolve_review_comment once it has addressed the feedback)". Update that comment.
9. **PR description**: Can't edit it. I'll note it in the reply.
Wait — also, the briefing instructions I received (from zoo.hcl's event "pr:review" instructions) say "resolve the inline comments you have addressed" — that's the current zoo.hcl (not the example). I can't change the running daemon's zoo.hcl from here (it's not in the repo — it's gitignored). The instructions text in zoo.hcl.example is the template. The actual zoo.hcl on the daemon host is out of scope.
Hmm, OK wait, but here's a thought: if I remove the tool, then when the next pr:review run happens (e.g., when abrander re-reviews this PR), the briefing will still say "resolve the inline comments you have addressed" (from the daemon's zoo.hcl), but the tool won't exist. That's a minor inconsistency, but the agent will just use `comment`. I can't fix the daemon's zoo.hcl from here. I'll mention it in the reply so abrander can update the instructions in his zoo.hcl.
Hmm, actually, wait. Let me reconsider — should I keep the tool and just fix the endpoint to the Gitea-1.25 path, so it works when the server is upgraded? No — it would 405 on the current server, and the agent would try it and fail every time. Removal is cleaner for v1.
Hmm, that said… ugh, let me think about this from the reviewer's perspective. abrander wrote the PR description (or did greg? — the PR was opened by greg, the agent, per the branch name issue-36-greg and "the agent who opened the PR"). The PR description says "the last is a direct API call — the SDK doesn't expose the resolve endpoint." So greg (a previous run of me) implemented it. The reviewer hasn't commented on the tool.
OK, here's my final take: I'll do the removal. It's the right engineering call, and I'll document it clearly. If the reviewer disagrees, they can push back in the re-review.
Actually, wait, one more angle: let me double-check that Forgejo 16.0.3 really doesn't have a different resolve endpoint that I missed. Let me grep the full API route file I downloaded (api-fj.go, 60974 bytes) for "resolve" case-insensitively.
Let me do a final check of the Forgejo 16.0.3 API for any resolve-related routes:
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /tmp && grep -in \"resolve\" api-fj.go | head; echo \"=== forgejo main:\"; grep -in \"resolve\" api-fj-main.go | head"}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /tmp && grep -in \"resolve\" api-fj.go | head; echo \"=== forgejo main:\"; grep -in \"resolve\" api-fj-main.go | head"}
Result
=== forgejo main:
Thinking
Zero matches for "resolve" in the API routes of both Forgejo 16.0.3 and Forgejo main. Definitively confirmed: **Forgejo has no API for resolving review comments** (in 16.0.3, main/17-dev, or any released version). Gitea added it only in 1.25-dev (upstream), and it hasn't been pulled into Forgejo yet.
So, I'll implement the removal:
1. `internal/forgejo/client.go` — remove `ResolveReviewComment`.
2. `internal/tools/context.go` — remove it from the interface.
3. `internal/tools/forgejo.go` — remove the tool.
4. `internal/tools/tools_test.go` — remove the test and the fake method.
5. `internal/agentrun/system.md` — remove it from the tool list and the explanatory text.
6. `zoo.hcl.example` — update the pr:review instructions and comments.
7. `internal/agentrun/run.go` — update the comment in `renderReviewSection` that mentions resolve_review_comment.
First, I'll check the exact code in client.go, tools/context.go, tools/forgejo.go, and tools_test.go.
Forgejo doesn't have such an API (neither 16.0.3 nor main). The `resolve_review_comment` tool in this PR is calling an endpoint that doesn't exist — I got a 405 when I actually used it. The correct v1 fix is to remove it and document it as a limitation. Let's check the code that needs to be removed:
Tool 🔧 read_file {"path": "internal/forgejo/client.go", "start_line": 255, "end_line": 350}
Arguments
{"path": "internal/forgejo/client.go", "start_line": 255, "end_line": 350}
Result
{"path":"internal/forgejo/client.go","content":"\tAuthor string\r\n}\r\n\r\n// ReviewDetail is the review context zoo briefs an agent with when a\r\n// pr:review event fires: the review's verdict and body, plus its inline\r\n// comments.\r\ntype ReviewDetail struct {\r\n\tID int64\r\n\tState string\r\n\tBody string\r\n\tReviewer string\r\n\tComments []ReviewCommentDetail\r\n}\r\n\r\n// ReviewDetail fetches a pull request review and its inline comments.\r\n// The webhook payload carries the review but not its inline comments,\r\n// so this is how a reacting agent gets the full feedback.\r\nfunc (c *Client) ReviewDetail(owner, repo string, index, reviewID int64) (*ReviewDetail, error) {\r\n\treview, _, err := c.sdk.GetPullReview(owner, repo, index, reviewID)\r\n\tif err != nil {\r\n\t\treturn nil, fmt.Errorf(\"get review %d on %s/%s#%d: %w\", reviewID, owner, repo, index, err)\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tcomments, _, err := c.sdk.ListPullReviewComments(owner, repo, index, reviewID)\r\n\tif err != nil {\r\n\t\treturn nil, fmt.Errorf(\"list comments on review %d of %s/%s#%d: %w\", reviewID, owner, repo, index, err)\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tdetail := \u0026ReviewDetail{\r\n\t\tID: review.ID,\r\n\t\tState: string(review.State),\r\n\t\tBody: review.Body,\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tif review.Reviewer != nil {\r\n\t\tdetail.Reviewer = review.Reviewer.UserName\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tfor _, cm := range comments {\r\n\t\tauthor := \"\"\r\n\t\tif cm.Reviewer != nil {\r\n\t\t\tauthor = cm.Reviewer.UserName\r\n\t\t}\r\n\r\n\t\tline := int(cm.LineNum)\r\n\t\tif cm.OldLineNum != 0 \u0026\u0026 cm.LineNum == 0 {\r\n\t\t\tline = int(cm.OldLineNum)\r\n\t\t}\r\n\r\n\t\tdetail.Comments = append(detail.Comments, ReviewCommentDetail{\r\n\t\t\tID: cm.ID,\r\n\t\t\tPath: cm.Path,\r\n\t\t\tLine: line,\r\n\t\t\tBody: cm.Body,\r\n\t\t\tAuthor: author,\r\n\t\t})\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\treturn detail, nil\r\n}\r\n\r\n// ResolveReviewComment marks the inline review comment with the given id\r\n// as resolved, i.e. the feedback it contains has been addressed. The SDK\r\n// doesn't expose this endpoint, so it's a direct API call.\r\nfunc (c *Client) ResolveReviewComment(owner, repo string, index, commentID int64) error {\r\n\tpath := fmt.Sprintf(\"/repos/%s/%s/pulls/%d/review_comments/%d/resolve\", owner, repo, index, commentID)\r\n\r\n\treq, err := http.NewRequest(http.MethodPost, c.baseURL+\"/api/v1\"+path, nil)\r\n\tif err != nil {\r\n\t\treturn fmt.Errorf(\"resolve review comment %d: %w\", commentID, err)\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\treq.Header.Set(\"Authorization\", \"token \"+c.token)\r\n\treq.Header.Set(\"Content-Type\", \"application/json\")\r\n\r\n\tresp, err := http.DefaultClient.Do(req)\r\n\tif err != nil {\r\n\t\treturn fmt.Errorf(\"resolve review comment %d: %w\", commentID, err)\r\n\t}\r\n\tdefer resp.Body.Close()\r\n\r\n\tif resp.StatusCode/100 != 2 {\r\n\t\tbody, _ := io.ReadAll(resp.Body)\r\n\r\n\t\treturn fmt.Errorf(\"resolve review comment %d: %s: %s\", commentID, resp.Status, strings.TrimSpace(string(body)))\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\treturn nil\r\n}\r\n\r\n// PullRequestInfo is the branch metadata agentrun needs to check out a\r\n// pull request's head.\r\ntype PullRequestInfo struct {\r\n\tHeadRef string\r\n\tBaseRef string\r\n}\r","start_line":255,"end_line":350,"total_lines":464,"truncated":true}
Tool 🔧 read_file {"path": "internal/tools/context.go", "start_line": 1, "end_line": 70}
Arguments
{"path": "internal/tools/context.go", "start_line": 1, "end_line": 70}
Result
{"path":"internal/tools/context.go","content":"// Package tools is the registry of functions an agent's tool-calling\r\n// loop can invoke, ported from ../a/tools but retargeted at a Docker\r\n// container (via Exec) and the Forgejo issue/PR that triggered the run\r\n// (via Forgejo()) instead of a local sandboxed filesystem.\r\npackage tools\r\n\r\nimport \"context\"\r\n\r\n// Context is bound to a single agent run (job), unlike ../a's single\r\n// global Context, since multiple agents run concurrently in zoo.\r\ntype Context interface {\r\n\t// Exec runs command inside the run's container via `sh -c` and\r\n\t// returns combined stdout+stderr. The container never holds a\r\n\t// Forgejo credential, so this cannot reach the Forgejo API or\r\n\t// authenticate git operations against it — see Git.\r\n\tExec(ctx context.Context, command string) (string, error)\r\n\r\n\t// Git runs a git subcommand against the run's working tree on the\r\n\t// host, outside the container, so that operations needing a Forgejo\r\n\t// credential (currently just push) can authenticate without that\r\n\t// credential ever being written to disk where the container (and\r\n\t// anything run inside it via Exec) could read it.\r\n\tGit(ctx context.Context, subcommand string, args ...string) (string, error)\r\n\r\n\t// Forgejo returns the actions bound to the issue/PR that triggered\r\n\t// this run, so tools don't need to be told which repo/issue to act\r\n\t// on.\r\n\tForgejo() ForgejoActions\r\n}\r\n\r\n// ForgejoActions are the actions available to an agent against the\r\n// triggering issue/PR. Implemented by internal/agentrun, backed by\r\n// internal/forgejo.Client plus the run's owner/repo/issue.\r\ntype ForgejoActions interface {\r\n\tComment(body string) error\r\n\tOpenPullRequest(head, base, title, body string) error\r\n\tRequestReview(reviewers []string) error\r\n\tAddLabel(name string) error\r\n\tRemoveLabel(name string) error\r\n\tCloseIssue() error\r\n\tReopenIssue() error\r\n\r\n\t// AssignIssue hands the triggering issue/PR off to another agent by\r\n\t// their name (which doubles as their Forgejo username); the\r\n\t// resulting issue:assigned event triggers that agent's run.\r\n\tAssignIssue(agentName string) error\r\n\r\n\t// SubmitReview submits a review on the triggering pull request with\r\n\t// the given verdict (forgejo.ReviewStateApproved,\r\n\t// ReviewStateChangesRequest, or ReviewStateComment) and body.\r\n\tSubmitReview(state, body string) error\r\n\r\n\t// ResolveReviewComment marks the inline review comment with the\r\n\t// given id as resolved, once its feedback has been addressed.\r\n\tResolveReviewComment(commentID int64) error\r\n}\r","start_line":1,"end_line":56,"total_lines":56,"truncated":false}
Thinking
Next, let's check the `runForgejoActions` implementation in agentrun (which implements ForgejoActions) and the tool code in tools/forgejo.go.
Tool 🔧 read_file {"path": "internal/tools/forgejo.go", "start_line": 1, "end_line": 135}
Arguments
{"path": "internal/tools/forgejo.go", "start_line": 1, "end_line": 135}
Result
{"path":"internal/tools/forgejo.go","content":"package tools\r\n\r\nimport (\r\n\t\"fmt\"\r\n\t\"strings\"\r\n\r\n\t\"github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/llm\"\r\n)\r\n\r\ntype commentParams struct {\r\n\tBody string `json:\"body\"`\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc init() {\r\n\ttool := llm.NewTool(\r\n\t\t\"comment\",\r\n\t\t\"Post a comment on the issue or pull request that triggered this run.\")\r\n\r\n\ttool.AddStringProperty(\"body\", \"The comment text, in Markdown\", true)\r\n\r\n\tRegister(tool, comment)\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc comment(ctx Context, params commentParams) (string, error) {\r\n\tif err := ctx.Forgejo().Comment(params.Body); err != nil {\r\n\t\treturn \"\", err\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\treturn \"Comment posted\", nil\r\n}\r\n\r\ntype openPullRequestParams struct {\r\n\tHead string `json:\"head\"`\r\n\tBase string `json:\"base\"`\r\n\tTitle string `json:\"title\"`\r\n\tBody string `json:\"body\"`\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc init() {\r\n\ttool := llm.NewTool(\r\n\t\t\"open_pull_request\",\r\n\t\t\"Open a pull request from a branch you've pushed into the repository's default branch (or another base branch).\")\r\n\r\n\ttool.AddStringProperty(\"head\", \"The branch containing your changes (usually the run's own branch)\", true)\r\n\ttool.AddStringProperty(\"base\", \"The branch to merge into, e.g. the repository's default branch\", true)\r\n\ttool.AddStringProperty(\"title\", \"The pull request title\", true)\r\n\ttool.AddStringProperty(\"body\", \"The pull request description, in Markdown\", true)\r\n\r\n\tRegister(tool, openPullRequest)\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc openPullRequest(ctx Context, params openPullRequestParams) (string, error) {\r\n\tif err := ctx.Forgejo().OpenPullRequest(params.Head, params.Base, params.Title, params.Body); err != nil {\r\n\t\treturn \"\", err\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\treturn \"Pull request opened\", nil\r\n}\r\n\r\ntype requestReviewParams struct {\r\n\tReviewers []string `json:\"reviewers\"`\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc init() {\r\n\ttool := llm.NewTool(\r\n\t\t\"request_review\",\r\n\t\t\"Request review of the current pull request from one or more Forgejo users.\")\r\n\r\n\ttool.AddStringArrayProperty(\"reviewers\", \"Usernames to request review from\", true)\r\n\r\n\tRegister(tool, requestReview)\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc requestReview(ctx Context, params requestReviewParams) (string, error) {\r\n\tif err := ctx.Forgejo().RequestReview(params.Reviewers); err != nil {\r\n\t\treturn \"\", err\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\treturn \"Review requested\", nil\r\n}\r\n\r\ntype submitReviewParams struct {\r\n\tState string `json:\"state\"`\r\n\tBody string `json:\"body\"`\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc init() {\r\n\ttool := llm.NewTool(\r\n\t\t\"submit_review\",\r\n\t\t\"Submit a review on the pull request that triggered this run: approve it, request changes, or leave review feedback. A submitted review fires a pr:review event that triggers a run, so use it to react to a PR (e.g. after addressing earlier feedback) or to review someone else's PR.\")\r\n\r\n\ttool.AddEnumProperty(\"state\", \"The review verdict\", []string{\"approved\", \"changes_requested\", \"comment\"}, true)\r\n\ttool.AddStringProperty(\"body\", \"The review text, in Markdown. Required unless state is 'approved'.\", true)\r\n\r\n\tRegister(tool, submitReview)\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc submitReview(ctx Context, params submitReviewParams) (string, error) {\r\n\tif params.State != \"approved\" \u0026\u0026 strings.TrimSpace(params.Body) == \"\" {\r\n\t\treturn \"\", fmt.Errorf(\"body is required unless state is 'approved'\")\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tif err := ctx.Forgejo().SubmitReview(params.State, params.Body); err != nil {\r\n\t\treturn \"\", err\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\treturn \"Review submitted\", nil\r\n}\r\n\r\ntype resolveReviewCommentParams struct {\r\n\tCommentID int64 `json:\"comment_id\"`\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc init() {\r\n\ttool := llm.NewTool(\r\n\t\t\"resolve_review_comment\",\r\n\t\t\"Mark an inline review comment on the pull request as resolved, once you have addressed the feedback it contains. The comment's id is in the review briefing (and the raw event payload).\")\r\n\r\n\ttool.AddIntegerProperty(\"comment_id\", \"The id of the inline review comment to resolve\", true)\r\n\r\n\tRegister(tool, resolveReviewComment)\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc resolveReviewComment(ctx Context, params resolveReviewCommentParams) (string, error) {\r\n\tif err := ctx.Forgejo().ResolveReviewComment(params.CommentID); err != nil {\r\n\t\treturn \"\", err\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\treturn \"Review comment resolved\", nil\r\n}\r\n\r\ntype labelParams struct {\r\n\tName string `json:\"name\"`\r\n}\r\n\r","start_line":1,"end_line":135,"total_lines":226,"truncated":true}
Tool 🔧 grep_search {"query": "ResolveReviewComment", "glob": "internal/agentrun/*.go", "context_after": 8}
Arguments
{"query": "ResolveReviewComment", "glob": "internal/agentrun/*.go", "context_after": 8}
Result
No matches found.
Thinking
Interesting — `ResolveReviewComment` doesn't exist in `internal/agentrun/*.go`? But the `ForgejoActions` interface requires it, and `runForgejoActions` must be implementing it... Let me search for `runForgejoActions` and check which methods it has.
Tool 🔧 grep_search {"query": "runForgejoActions", "glob": "internal/agentrun/*.go", "context_after": 6, "max_results": 40}
Arguments
{"query": "runForgejoActions", "glob": "internal/agentrun/*.go", "context_after": 6, "max_results": 40}
Result
No matches found.
Thinking
Hmm, `runForgejoActions` isn't found in agentrun? But run.go references `&runForgejoActions{...}`. Let me search more broadly.
Tool 🔧 grep_search {"query": "runForgejoActions|SubmitReview", "glob": "internal/agentrun/*", "max_results": 30}
Arguments
{"query": "runForgejoActions|SubmitReview", "glob": "internal/agentrun/*", "max_results": 30}
Result
No matches found.
Thinking
That's strange — run.go clearly had `forgejo: &runForgejoActions{...}` written in it. Maybe grep_search's glob handling is different. Let me try using bash's grep directly.
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /project && grep -rn \"runForgejoActions\\|ResolveReviewComment\\|SubmitReview\" internal/agentrun/ | head -20"}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /project && grep -rn \"runForgejoActions\\|ResolveReviewComment\\|SubmitReview\" internal/agentrun/ | head -20"}
Result
internal/agentrun/forgejo.go:9:// runForgejoActions implements tools.ForgejoActions, binding the
internal/agentrun/forgejo.go:12:type runForgejoActions struct {
internal/agentrun/forgejo.go:22:func (a *runForgejoActions) logResult(action string, err error, args ...any) {
internal/agentrun/forgejo.go:33:func (a *runForgejoActions) Comment(body string) error {
internal/agentrun/forgejo.go:40:func (a *runForgejoActions) OpenPullRequest(head, base, title, body string) error {
internal/agentrun/forgejo.go:47:func (a *runForgejoActions) RequestReview(reviewers []string) error {
internal/agentrun/forgejo.go:54:func (a *runForgejoActions) AddLabel(name string) error {
internal/agentrun/forgejo.go:61:func (a *runForgejoActions) RemoveLabel(name string) error {
internal/agentrun/forgejo.go:68:func (a *runForgejoActions) CloseIssue() error {
internal/agentrun/forgejo.go:75:func (a *runForgejoActions) ReopenIssue() error {
internal/agentrun/forgejo.go:82:func (a *runForgejoActions) AssignIssue(agentName string) error {
internal/agentrun/forgejo.go:89:func (a *runForgejoActions) SubmitReview(state, body string) error {
internal/agentrun/forgejo.go:90: err := a.client.SubmitReview(a.owner, a.repo, a.index, state, body)
internal/agentrun/forgejo.go:96:func (a *runForgejoActions) ResolveReviewComment(commentID int64) error {
internal/agentrun/forgejo.go:97: err := a.client.ResolveReviewComment(a.owner, a.repo, a.index, commentID)
internal/agentrun/run.go:236: forgejo: &runForgejoActions{
Thinking
Found it — `internal/agentrun/forgejo.go` has `runForgejoActions.ResolveReviewComment` (the grep_search tool's glob must have been broken for that pattern).
Alright, let me read all of `internal/agentrun/forgejo.go` and check the fake in tools_test.go, then do the removal work:
1. `internal/forgejo/client.go` — remove `ResolveReviewComment` (and also check whether the imports `io`, `strings`, `http` are still needed elsewhere in the file).
2. `internal/agentrun/forgejo.go` — remove the `ResolveReviewComment` method.
3. `internal/tools/context.go` — remove it from the interface.
4. `internal/tools/forgejo.go` — remove the tool.
5. `internal/tools/tools_test.go` — remove the test and the fake method.
6. `internal/agentrun/system.md` — remove it from the tool list and from the sentence.
7. `zoo.hcl.example` — update the instructions.
8. `internal/agentrun/run.go` — update the comment in `renderReviewSection`.
First, let me check the imports in client.go.
Found it. Now let me look at `agentrun/forgejo.go` and check client.go imports:
Tool 🔧 read_file {"path": "internal/agentrun/forgejo.go", "start_line": 1, "end_line": 110}
Arguments
{"path": "internal/agentrun/forgejo.go", "start_line": 1, "end_line": 110}
Result
{"path":"internal/agentrun/forgejo.go","content":"package agentrun\r\n\r\nimport (\r\n\t\"log/slog\"\r\n\r\n\t\"github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/forgejo\"\r\n)\r\n\r\n// runForgejoActions implements tools.ForgejoActions, binding the\r\n// generic forgejo.Client to the single issue/PR that triggered this run\r\n// so agent tool calls don't need to specify owner/repo/index themselves.\r\ntype runForgejoActions struct {\r\n\tclient *forgejo.Client\r\n\towner, repo string\r\n\tindex int64\r\n\tlogger *slog.Logger\r\n}\r\n\r\n// logResult logs a forge action once it's known to have succeeded or\r\n// failed, so every comment, PR, label, or issue-state change an agent\r\n// makes is traceable in zoo's own logs, not just in Forgejo's history.\r\nfunc (a *runForgejoActions) logResult(action string, err error, args ...any) {\r\n\tfields := append([]any{\"owner\", a.owner, \"repo\", a.repo, \"index\", a.index}, args...)\r\n\r\n\tif err != nil {\r\n\t\ta.logger.Warn(\"forge action failed\", append(append([]any{\"action\", action}, fields...), \"error\", err)...)\r\n\t\treturn\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\ta.logger.Info(\"forge action\", append([]any{\"action\", action}, fields...)...)\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc (a *runForgejoActions) Comment(body string) error {\r\n\terr := a.client.CreateIssueComment(a.owner, a.repo, a.index, body)\r\n\ta.logResult(\"comment\", err)\r\n\r\n\treturn err\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc (a *runForgejoActions) OpenPullRequest(head, base, title, body string) error {\r\n\terr := a.client.CreatePullRequest(a.owner, a.repo, head, base, title, body)\r\n\ta.logResult(\"open_pull_request\", err, \"head\", head, \"base\", base, \"title\", title)\r\n\r\n\treturn err\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc (a *runForgejoActions) RequestReview(reviewers []string) error {\r\n\terr := a.client.RequestReview(a.owner, a.repo, a.index, reviewers)\r\n\ta.logResult(\"request_review\", err, \"reviewers\", reviewers)\r\n\r\n\treturn err\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc (a *runForgejoActions) AddLabel(name string) error {\r\n\terr := a.client.AddLabel(a.owner, a.repo, a.index, name)\r\n\ta.logResult(\"add_label\", err, \"label\", name)\r\n\r\n\treturn err\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc (a *runForgejoActions) RemoveLabel(name string) error {\r\n\terr := a.client.RemoveLabel(a.owner, a.repo, a.index, name)\r\n\ta.logResult(\"remove_label\", err, \"label\", name)\r\n\r\n\treturn err\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc (a *runForgejoActions) CloseIssue() error {\r\n\terr := a.client.CloseIssue(a.owner, a.repo, a.index)\r\n\ta.logResult(\"close_issue\", err)\r\n\r\n\treturn err\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc (a *runForgejoActions) ReopenIssue() error {\r\n\terr := a.client.ReopenIssue(a.owner, a.repo, a.index)\r\n\ta.logResult(\"reopen_issue\", err)\r\n\r\n\treturn err\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc (a *runForgejoActions) AssignIssue(agentName string) error {\r\n\terr := a.client.AssignIssue(a.owner, a.repo, a.index, agentName)\r\n\ta.logResult(\"assign_issue\", err, \"assignee\", agentName)\r\n\r\n\treturn err\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc (a *runForgejoActions) SubmitReview(state, body string) error {\r\n\terr := a.client.SubmitReview(a.owner, a.repo, a.index, state, body)\r\n\ta.logResult(\"submit_review\", err, \"state\", state)\r\n\r\n\treturn err\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc (a *runForgejoActions) ResolveReviewComment(commentID int64) error {\r\n\terr := a.client.ResolveReviewComment(a.owner, a.repo, a.index, commentID)\r\n\ta.logResult(\"resolve_review_comment\", err, \"comment_id\", commentID)\r\n\r\n\treturn err\r\n}\r","start_line":1,"end_line":101,"total_lines":101,"truncated":false}
Tool 🔧 read_file {"path": "internal/forgejo/client.go", "start_line": 1, "end_line": 60}
Arguments
{"path": "internal/forgejo/client.go", "start_line": 1, "end_line": 60}
Result
{"path":"internal/forgejo/client.go","content":"// Package forgejo wraps the Forgejo SDK and turns webhook deliveries and\r\n// polling results into a common Event stream for the scheduler.\r\npackage forgejo\r\n\r\nimport (\r\n\t\"fmt\"\r\n\t\"io\"\r\n\t\"net/http\"\r\n\t\"strings\"\r\n\t\"time\"\r\n\r\n\tsdk \"codeberg.org/mvdkleijn/forgejo-sdk/forgejo/v2\"\r\n\r\n\t\"github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/config\"\r\n)\r\n\r\n// Client is zoo's single shared Forgejo identity, used both for the\r\n// event sources (webhook/poll) and for actions agents/scheduler take\r\n// (comments, labels, PRs).\r\ntype Client struct {\r\n\tsdk *sdk.Client\r\n\r\n\tbaseURL string\r\n\ttoken string\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc NewClient(cfg config.Forgejo) (*Client, error) {\r\n\tc, err := sdk.NewClient(cfg.URL, sdk.SetToken(cfg.Token))\r\n\tif err != nil {\r\n\t\treturn nil, fmt.Errorf(\"forgejo client: %w\", err)\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\treturn \u0026Client{sdk: c, baseURL: cfg.URL, token: cfg.Token}, nil\r\n}\r\n\r\n// Token returns the shared zoo Forgejo identity's token, e.g. for\r\n// authenticating a host-side git clone/push against Forgejo (see\r\n// internal/agentrun) without ever writing the credential into a working\r\n// tree an agent's container can read.\r\nfunc (c *Client) Token() string {\r\n\treturn c.token\r\n}\r\n\r\n// As returns a new Client that authenticates as the given token.\r\n// This is used to create per-agent clients so each agent acts as\r\n// themselves on Forgejo, without needing a global token with sudo\r\n// privileges.\r\nfunc (c *Client) As(token string) *Client {\r\n\tclient, _ := sdk.NewClient(c.baseURL, sdk.SetToken(token))\r\n\treturn \u0026Client{sdk: client, baseURL: c.baseURL, token: token}\r\n}\r\n\r\n// Sudo returns a new Client that impersonates username (via Forgejo's\r\n// \"Sudo:\" header) on every API call it makes, using the same underlying\r\n// token. Actions an agent takes through it — comments, labels, PRs,\r\n// assignment — are attributed to that agent's own Forgejo account\r\n// instead of the shared zoo identity. The token must belong to a user\r\n// with sudo scope/admin rights for this to work; Forgejo rejects the\r\n// header otherwise.\r\n//\r","start_line":1,"end_line":60,"total_lines":464,"truncated":true}
Thinking
Alright, let's check whether `io`, `net/http`, and `strings` are used elsewhere in client.go (if we remove `ResolveReviewComment`, these imports might become unused).
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /project && grep -n \"io\\.\\|http\\.\\|strings\\.\" internal/forgejo/client.go | grep -v \"^\\s*//\" | head -20"}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /project && grep -n \"io\\.\\|http\\.\\|strings\\.\" internal/forgejo/client.go | grep -v \"^\\s*//\" | head -20"}
Result
322: req, err := http.NewRequest(http.MethodPost, c.baseURL+"/api/v1"+path, nil)
330: resp, err := http.DefaultClient.Do(req)
337: body, _ := io.ReadAll(resp.Body)
339: return fmt.Errorf("resolve review comment %d: %s: %s", commentID, resp.Status, strings.TrimSpace(string(body)))
Thinking
`io`, `net/http`, and `strings` are only used in `ResolveReviewComment`. Removing this method means removing these imports as well.
Now let's do all the removals:
1. **`internal/forgejo/client.go`**: Remove the method + unused imports.
2. **`internal/agentrun/forgejo.go`**: Remove the method.
3. **`internal/tools/context.go`**: Remove the interface method.
4. **`internal/tools/forgejo.go`**: Remove the tool.
5. **`internal/tools/tools_test.go`**: Remove the test + fake method.
6. **`internal/agentrun/system.md`**: Remove from the tool list and the sentence.
7. **`zoo.hcl.example`**: Update the instructions.
8. **`internal/agentrun/run.go`**: Update the comment in renderReviewSection.
Alright, let's get started.
`io`, `net/http`, and `strings` are only used by that method. Now I'll remove the broken tool across all files:
Tool 🔧 edit_file {"find": "import (\n\t\"fmt\"\n\t\"io\"\n\t\"net/http\"\n\t\"strings\"\n\t\"time\"\n\n\tsdk \"codeberg.org/mvdkleijn/forgejo-sdk/forgejo/v2\"\n\n\t\"github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/config\"\n)", "replace": "import (\n\t\"fmt\"\n\t\"time\"\n\n\tsdk \"codeberg.org/mvdkleijn/forgejo-sdk/forgejo/v2\"\n\n\t\"github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/config\"\n)", "path": "internal/forgejo/client.go"}
Arguments
{"find": "import (\n\t\"fmt\"\n\t\"io\"\n\t\"net/http\"\n\t\"strings\"\n\t\"time\"\n\n\tsdk \"codeberg.org/mvdkleijn/forgejo-sdk/forgejo/v2\"\n\n\t\"github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/config\"\n)", "replace": "import (\n\t\"fmt\"\n\t\"time\"\n\n\tsdk \"codeberg.org/mvdkleijn/forgejo-sdk/forgejo/v2\"\n\n\t\"github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/config\"\n)", "path": "internal/forgejo/client.go"}
Result
1 occurrences replaced
Tool 🔧 edit_file {"find": "// ResolveReviewComment marks the inline review comment with the given id\n// as resolved, i.e. the feedback it contains has been addressed. The SDK\n// doesn't expose this endpoint, so it's a direct API call.\nfunc (c *Client) ResolveReviewComment(owner, repo string, index, commentID int64) error {\n\tpath := fmt.Sprintf(\"/repos/%s/%s/pulls/%d/review_comments/%d/resolve\", owner, repo, index, commentID)\n\n\treq, err := http.NewRequest(http.MethodPost, c.baseURL+\"/api/v1\"+path, nil)\n\tif err != nil {\n\t\treturn fmt.Errorf(\"resolve review comment %d: %w\", commentID, err)\n\t}\n\n\treq.Header.Set(\"Authorization\", \"token \"+c.token)\n\treq.Header.Set(\"Content-Type\", \"application/json\")\n\n\tresp, err := http.DefaultClient.Do(req)\n\tif err != nil {\n\t\treturn fmt.Errorf(\"resolve review comment %d: %w\", commentID, err)\n\t}\n\tdefer resp.Body.Close()\n\n\tif resp.StatusCode/100 != 2 {\n\t\tbody, _ := io.ReadAll(resp.Body)\n\n\t\treturn fmt.Errorf(\"resolve review comment %d: %s: %s\", commentID, resp.Status, strings.TrimSpace(string(body)))\n\t}\n\n\treturn nil\n}\n\n// PullRequestInfo is the branch metadata agentrun needs to check out a\n// pull request's head.", "replace": "// PullRequestInfo is the branch metadata agentrun needs to check out a\n// pull request's head.", "path": "internal/forgejo/client.go"}
Arguments
{"find": "// ResolveReviewComment marks the inline review comment with the given id\n// as resolved, i.e. the feedback it contains has been addressed. The SDK\n// doesn't expose this endpoint, so it's a direct API call.\nfunc (c *Client) ResolveReviewComment(owner, repo string, index, commentID int64) error {\n\tpath := fmt.Sprintf(\"/repos/%s/%s/pulls/%d/review_comments/%d/resolve\", owner, repo, index, commentID)\n\n\treq, err := http.NewRequest(http.MethodPost, c.baseURL+\"/api/v1\"+path, nil)\n\tif err != nil {\n\t\treturn fmt.Errorf(\"resolve review comment %d: %w\", commentID, err)\n\t}\n\n\treq.Header.Set(\"Authorization\", \"token \"+c.token)\n\treq.Header.Set(\"Content-Type\", \"application/json\")\n\n\tresp, err := http.DefaultClient.Do(req)\n\tif err != nil {\n\t\treturn fmt.Errorf(\"resolve review comment %d: %w\", commentID, err)\n\t}\n\tdefer resp.Body.Close()\n\n\tif resp.StatusCode/100 != 2 {\n\t\tbody, _ := io.ReadAll(resp.Body)\n\n\t\treturn fmt.Errorf(\"resolve review comment %d: %s: %s\", commentID, resp.Status, strings.TrimSpace(string(body)))\n\t}\n\n\treturn nil\n}\n\n// PullRequestInfo is the branch metadata agentrun needs to check out a\n// pull request's head.", "replace": "// PullRequestInfo is the branch metadata agentrun needs to check out a\n// pull request's head.", "path": "internal/forgejo/client.go"}
Result
1 occurrences replaced
Thinking
Wait — I need to re-check the comment on `ReviewCommentDetail` in client.go. The `Line`/`ID` fields are still used for displaying the seed message (the comment ID is shown in the briefing). That's fine — the ID is still useful as a reference (e.g., for the agent to mention it in a reply). Keep it.
Next up are `internal/agentrun/forgejo.go`, `internal/tools/context.go`, and `internal/tools/forgejo.go`:
Tool 🔧 edit_file {"find": "func (a *runForgejoActions) SubmitReview(state, body string) error {\n\terr := a.client.SubmitReview(a.owner, a.repo, a.index, state, body)\n\ta.logResult(\"submit_review\", err, \"state\", state)\n\n\treturn err\n}\n\nfunc (a *runForgejoActions) ResolveReviewComment(commentID int64) error {\n\terr := a.client.ResolveReviewComment(a.owner, a.repo, a.index, commentID)\n\ta.logResult(\"resolve_review_comment\", err, \"comment_id\", commentID)\n\n\treturn err\n}", "replace": "func (a *runForgejoActions) SubmitReview(state, body string) error {\n\terr := a.client.SubmitReview(a.owner, a.repo, a.index, state, body)\n\ta.logResult(\"submit_review\", err, \"state\", state)\n\n\treturn err\n}", "path": "internal/agentrun/forgejo.go"}
Arguments
{"find": "func (a *runForgejoActions) SubmitReview(state, body string) error {\n\terr := a.client.SubmitReview(a.owner, a.repo, a.index, state, body)\n\ta.logResult(\"submit_review\", err, \"state\", state)\n\n\treturn err\n}\n\nfunc (a *runForgejoActions) ResolveReviewComment(commentID int64) error {\n\terr := a.client.ResolveReviewComment(a.owner, a.repo, a.index, commentID)\n\ta.logResult(\"resolve_review_comment\", err, \"comment_id\", commentID)\n\n\treturn err\n}", "replace": "func (a *runForgejoActions) SubmitReview(state, body string) error {\n\terr := a.client.SubmitReview(a.owner, a.repo, a.index, state, body)\n\ta.logResult(\"submit_review\", err, \"state\", state)\n\n\treturn err\n}", "path": "internal/agentrun/forgejo.go"}
Result
1 occurrences replaced
Tool 🔧 edit_file {"find": "\t// SubmitReview submits a review on the triggering pull request with\n\t// the given verdict (forgejo.ReviewStateApproved,\n\t// ReviewStateChangesRequest, or ReviewStateComment) and body.\n\tSubmitReview(state, body string) error\n\n\t// ResolveReviewComment marks the inline review comment with the\n\t// given id as resolved, once its feedback has been addressed.\n\tResolveReviewComment(commentID int64) error\n}", "replace": "\t// SubmitReview submits a review on the triggering pull request with\n\t// the given verdict (forgejo.ReviewStateApproved,\n\t// ReviewStateChangesRequest, or ReviewStateComment) and body.\n\tSubmitReview(state, body string) error\n}", "path": "internal/tools/context.go"}
Arguments
{"find": "\t// SubmitReview submits a review on the triggering pull request with\n\t// the given verdict (forgejo.ReviewStateApproved,\n\t// ReviewStateChangesRequest, or ReviewStateComment) and body.\n\tSubmitReview(state, body string) error\n\n\t// ResolveReviewComment marks the inline review comment with the\n\t// given id as resolved, once its feedback has been addressed.\n\tResolveReviewComment(commentID int64) error\n}", "replace": "\t// SubmitReview submits a review on the triggering pull request with\n\t// the given verdict (forgejo.ReviewStateApproved,\n\t// ReviewStateChangesRequest, or ReviewStateComment) and body.\n\tSubmitReview(state, body string) error\n}", "path": "internal/tools/context.go"}
Result
1 occurrences replaced
Tool 🔧 edit_file {"find": "type resolveReviewCommentParams struct {\n\tCommentID int64 `json:\"comment_id\"`\n}\n\nfunc init() {\n\ttool := llm.NewTool(\n\t\t\"resolve_review_comment\",\n\t\t\"Mark an inline review comment on the pull request as resolved, once you have addressed the feedback it contains. The comment's id is in the review briefing (and the raw event payload).\")\n\n\ttool.AddIntegerProperty(\"comment_id\", \"The id of the inline review comment to resolve\", true)\n\n\tRegister(tool, resolveReviewComment)\n}\n\nfunc resolveReviewComment(ctx Context, params resolveReviewCommentParams) (string, error) {\n\tif err := ctx.Forgejo().ResolveReviewComment(params.CommentID); err != nil {\n\t\treturn \"\", err\n\t}\n\n\treturn \"Review comment resolved\", nil\n}\n\ntype labelParams struct {", "replace": "type labelParams struct {", "path": "internal/tools/forgejo.go"}
Arguments
{"find": "type resolveReviewCommentParams struct {\n\tCommentID int64 `json:\"comment_id\"`\n}\n\nfunc init() {\n\ttool := llm.NewTool(\n\t\t\"resolve_review_comment\",\n\t\t\"Mark an inline review comment on the pull request as resolved, once you have addressed the feedback it contains. The comment's id is in the review briefing (and the raw event payload).\")\n\n\ttool.AddIntegerProperty(\"comment_id\", \"The id of the inline review comment to resolve\", true)\n\n\tRegister(tool, resolveReviewComment)\n}\n\nfunc resolveReviewComment(ctx Context, params resolveReviewCommentParams) (string, error) {\n\tif err := ctx.Forgejo().ResolveReviewComment(params.CommentID); err != nil {\n\t\treturn \"\", err\n\t}\n\n\treturn \"Review comment resolved\", nil\n}\n\ntype labelParams struct {", "replace": "type labelParams struct {", "path": "internal/tools/forgejo.go"}
Result
1 occurrences replaced
Thinking
Next, `internal/tools/tools_test.go` — remove `TestResolveReviewCommentToolCallsForgejo` and the fake method. To edit it accurately, let's check the relevant section.
Now the tools test:
Tool 🔧 read_file {"path": "internal/tools/tools_test.go", "start_line": 1, "end_line": 45}
Arguments
{"path": "internal/tools/tools_test.go", "start_line": 1, "end_line": 45}
Result
{"path":"internal/tools/tools_test.go","content":"package tools\r\n\r\nimport (\r\n\t\"context\"\r\n\t\"fmt\"\r\n\t\"strings\"\r\n\t\"testing\"\r\n)\r\n\r\ntype fakeForgejoActions struct {\r\n\tcomments []string\r\n\tassigned []string\r\n\treviews []string\r\n\tresolvedComments []int64\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc (f *fakeForgejoActions) Comment(body string) error {\r\n\tf.comments = append(f.comments, body)\r\n\treturn nil\r\n}\r\nfunc (f *fakeForgejoActions) OpenPullRequest(head, base, title, body string) error { return nil }\r\nfunc (f *fakeForgejoActions) RequestReview(reviewers []string) error { return nil }\r\nfunc (f *fakeForgejoActions) AddLabel(name string) error { return nil }\r\nfunc (f *fakeForgejoActions) RemoveLabel(name string) error { return nil }\r\nfunc (f *fakeForgejoActions) CloseIssue() error { return nil }\r\nfunc (f *fakeForgejoActions) ReopenIssue() error { return nil }\r\nfunc (f *fakeForgejoActions) AssignIssue(agentName string) error {\r\n\tf.assigned = append(f.assigned, agentName)\r\n\treturn nil\r\n}\r\nfunc (f *fakeForgejoActions) SubmitReview(state, body string) error {\r\n\tf.reviews = append(f.reviews, state)\r\n\treturn nil\r\n}\r\nfunc (f *fakeForgejoActions) ResolveReviewComment(commentID int64) error {\r\n\tf.resolvedComments = append(f.resolvedComments, commentID)\r\n\treturn nil\r\n}\r\n\r\ntype fakeContext struct {\r\n\tlastCmd string\r\n\toutput string\r\n\terr error\r\n\tfg *fakeForgejoActions\r\n\r","start_line":1,"end_line":45,"total_lines":237,"truncated":true}
Thinking
Let's check the test function `TestResolveReviewCommentToolCallsForgejo` and delete it.
Tool 🔧 read_file {"path": "internal/tools/tools_test.go", "start_line": 160, "end_line": 200}
Arguments
{"path": "internal/tools/tools_test.go", "start_line": 160, "end_line": 200}
Result
{"path":"internal/tools/tools_test.go","content":"\t}\r\n\tif len(fg.reviews) != 1 || fg.reviews[0] != \"changes_requested\" {\r\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"unexpected reviews: %v\", fg.reviews)\r\n\t}\r\n}\r\n\r\n// An approval needs no body, but any other verdict does.\r\nfunc TestSubmitReviewRequiresBodyUnlessApproved(t *testing.T) {\r\n\tfg := \u0026fakeForgejoActions{}\r\n\tfc := \u0026fakeContext{fg: fg}\r\n\r\n\tif _, err := submitReview(fc, submitReviewParams{State: \"approved\", Body: \"\"}); err != nil {\r\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"approval with empty body should be allowed, got %v\", err)\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tif _, err := submitReview(fc, submitReviewParams{State: \"changes_requested\", Body: \" \"}); err == nil {\r\n\t\tt.Fatal(\"expected an error for a changes_requested review with an empty body\")\r\n\t}\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc TestResolveReviewCommentToolCallsForgejo(t *testing.T) {\r\n\tfg := \u0026fakeForgejoActions{}\r\n\tfc := \u0026fakeContext{fg: fg}\r\n\r\n\tout, err := resolveReviewComment(fc, resolveReviewCommentParams{CommentID: 7})\r\n\tif err != nil {\r\n\t\tt.Fatal(err)\r\n\t}\r\n\tif out != \"Review comment resolved\" {\r\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"unexpected result: %q\", out)\r\n\t}\r\n\tif len(fg.resolvedComments) != 1 || fg.resolvedComments[0] != 7 {\r\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"unexpected resolved comments: %v\", fg.resolvedComments)\r\n\t}\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc TestGrepSearchUsesExtendedRegex(t *testing.T) {\r\n\tfc := \u0026fakeContext{output: \"/project/foo.go:1:foo|bar\\n\"}\r\n\r\n\tout, err := grepSearch(fc, grepSearchParams{Pattern: `foo|bar`})\r\n\tif err != nil {\r","start_line":160,"end_line":200,"total_lines":237,"truncated":true}
Thinking
Let's delete the test function and the fake method.
Tool 🔧 edit_file {"find": "func TestResolveReviewCommentToolCallsForgejo(t *testing.T) {\n\tfg := &fakeForgejoActions{}\n\tfc := &fakeContext{fg: fg}\n\n\tout, err := resolveReviewComment(fc, resolveReviewCommentParams{CommentID: 7})\n\tif err != nil {\n\t\tt.Fatal(err)\n\t}\n\tif out != \"Review comment resolved\" {\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"unexpected result: %q\", out)\n\t}\n\tif len(fg.resolvedComments) != 1 || fg.resolvedComments[0] != 7 {\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"unexpected resolved comments: %v\", fg.resolvedComments)\n\t}\n}\n\nfunc TestGrepSearchUsesExtendedRegex(t *testing.T) {", "replace": "func TestGrepSearchUsesExtendedRegex(t *testing.T) {", "path": "internal/tools/tools_test.go"}
Arguments
{"find": "func TestResolveReviewCommentToolCallsForgejo(t *testing.T) {\n\tfg := &fakeForgejoActions{}\n\tfc := &fakeContext{fg: fg}\n\n\tout, err := resolveReviewComment(fc, resolveReviewCommentParams{CommentID: 7})\n\tif err != nil {\n\t\tt.Fatal(err)\n\t}\n\tif out != \"Review comment resolved\" {\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"unexpected result: %q\", out)\n\t}\n\tif len(fg.resolvedComments) != 1 || fg.resolvedComments[0] != 7 {\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"unexpected resolved comments: %v\", fg.resolvedComments)\n\t}\n}\n\nfunc TestGrepSearchUsesExtendedRegex(t *testing.T) {", "replace": "func TestGrepSearchUsesExtendedRegex(t *testing.T) {", "path": "internal/tools/tools_test.go"}
Result
1 occurrences replaced
Tool 🔧 edit_file {"find": "type fakeForgejoActions struct {\n\tcomments []string\n\tassigned []string\n\treviews []string\n\tresolvedComments []int64\n}", "replace": "type fakeForgejoActions struct {\n\tcomments []string\n\tassigned []string\n\treviews []string\n}", "path": "internal/tools/tools_test.go"}
Arguments
{"find": "type fakeForgejoActions struct {\n\tcomments []string\n\tassigned []string\n\treviews []string\n\tresolvedComments []int64\n}", "replace": "type fakeForgejoActions struct {\n\tcomments []string\n\tassigned []string\n\treviews []string\n}", "path": "internal/tools/tools_test.go"}
Result
1 occurrences replaced
Tool 🔧 edit_file {"find": "func (f *fakeForgejoActions) SubmitReview(state, body string) error {\n\tf.reviews = append(f.reviews, state)\n\treturn nil\n}\nfunc (f *fakeForgejoActions) ResolveReviewComment(commentID int64) error {\n\tf.resolvedComments = append(f.resolvedComments, commentID)\n\treturn nil\n}", "replace": "func (f *fakeForgejoActions) SubmitReview(state, body string) error {\n\tf.reviews = append(f.reviews, state)\n\treturn nil\n}", "path": "internal/tools/tools_test.go"}
Arguments
{"find": "func (f *fakeForgejoActions) SubmitReview(state, body string) error {\n\tf.reviews = append(f.reviews, state)\n\treturn nil\n}\nfunc (f *fakeForgejoActions) ResolveReviewComment(commentID int64) error {\n\tf.resolvedComments = append(f.resolvedComments, commentID)\n\treturn nil\n}", "replace": "func (f *fakeForgejoActions) SubmitReview(state, body string) error {\n\tf.reviews = append(f.reviews, state)\n\treturn nil\n}", "path": "internal/tools/tools_test.go"}
Result
1 occurrences replaced
Thinking
Next, I'll update the documentation:
1. `internal/agentrun/system.md` — Remove `resolve_review_comment` from the tool list, and also remove the sentence "use `resolve_review_comment` to mark addressed inline review comments as resolved."
2. `zoo.hcl.example` — Update the pr:review instructions and comments.
3. `internal/agentrun/run.go` — Update the comment in `renderReviewSection`.
Now the docs: system.md, zoo.hcl.example, and the seed-message comment in run.go:
Tool 🔧 edit_file {"find": "- `comment`, `open_pull_request`, `request_review`, `submit_review`,\n `resolve_review_comment`, `add_label`, `remove_label`, `close_issue`,\n `reopen_issue`, `assign_issue` act directly on the Forgejo issue/PR\n that triggered this run — use `comment` to report back to the person\n who filed it, `open_pull_request` once you've pushed a branch with\n your changes, `submit_review` to leave a review verdict, and\n `resolve_review_comment` to mark addressed inline review comments as\n resolved.", "replace": "- `comment`, `open_pull_request`, `request_review`, `submit_review`,\n `add_label`, `remove_label`, `close_issue`, `reopen_issue`,\n `assign_issue` act directly on the Forgejo issue/PR that triggered\n this run — use `comment` to report back to the person who filed it,\n `open_pull_request` once you've pushed a branch with your changes,\n and `submit_review` to leave a review verdict.", "path": "internal/agentrun/system.md"}
Arguments
{"find": "- `comment`, `open_pull_request`, `request_review`, `submit_review`,\n `resolve_review_comment`, `add_label`, `remove_label`, `close_issue`,\n `reopen_issue`, `assign_issue` act directly on the Forgejo issue/PR\n that triggered this run — use `comment` to report back to the person\n who filed it, `open_pull_request` once you've pushed a branch with\n your changes, `submit_review` to leave a review verdict, and\n `resolve_review_comment` to mark addressed inline review comments as\n resolved.", "replace": "- `comment`, `open_pull_request`, `request_review`, `submit_review`,\n `add_label`, `remove_label`, `close_issue`, `reopen_issue`,\n `assign_issue` act directly on the Forgejo issue/PR that triggered\n this run — use `comment` to report back to the person who filed it,\n `open_pull_request` once you've pushed a branch with your changes,\n and `submit_review` to leave a review verdict.", "path": "internal/agentrun/system.md"}
Result
1 occurrences replaced
Tool 🔧 edit_file {"find": "# A review was submitted on a pull request (approved, changes requested,\n# or comment). The agent that opened the PR is triggered to handle it,\n# like issue:assigned: its working tree is checked out on the PR's head\n# branch, so changes it pushes update the PR directly. It should address\n# the feedback, reply to the review, and resolve the inline comments it\n# has addressed.\nevent \"pr:review\" {\n // No `agent` here: the agent whose name matches the pull request\n // author's username is triggered.\n instructions = \"A review was submitted on this pull request. Address the feedback, push your changes to the PR branch, reply to the review, and resolve the inline comments you have addressed.\"\n}", "replace": "# A review was submitted on a pull request (approved, changes requested,\n# or comment). The agent that opened the PR is triggered to handle it,\n# like issue:assigned: its working tree is checked out on the PR's head\n# branch, so changes it pushes update the PR directly. It should address\n# the feedback and reply to the review with a summary of what it\n# addressed. (Forgejo has no API to mark review comments resolved, so\n# that stays with the reviewer.)\nevent \"pr:review\" {\n // No `agent` here: the agent whose name matches the pull request\n // author's username is triggered.\n instructions = \"A review was submitted on this pull request. Address the feedback, push your changes to the PR branch, and reply to the review with a summary of what you addressed.\"\n}", "path": "zoo.hcl.example"}
Arguments
{"find": "# A review was submitted on a pull request (approved, changes requested,\n# or comment). The agent that opened the PR is triggered to handle it,\n# like issue:assigned: its working tree is checked out on the PR's head\n# branch, so changes it pushes update the PR directly. It should address\n# the feedback, reply to the review, and resolve the inline comments it\n# has addressed.\nevent \"pr:review\" {\n // No `agent` here: the agent whose name matches the pull request\n // author's username is triggered.\n instructions = \"A review was submitted on this pull request. Address the feedback, push your changes to the PR branch, reply to the review, and resolve the inline comments you have addressed.\"\n}", "replace": "# A review was submitted on a pull request (approved, changes requested,\n# or comment). The agent that opened the PR is triggered to handle it,\n# like issue:assigned: its working tree is checked out on the PR's head\n# branch, so changes it pushes update the PR directly. It should address\n# the feedback and reply to the review with a summary of what it\n# addressed. (Forgejo has no API to mark review comments resolved, so\n# that stays with the reviewer.)\nevent \"pr:review\" {\n // No `agent` here: the agent whose name matches the pull request\n // author's username is triggered.\n instructions = \"A review was submitted on this pull request. Address the feedback, push your changes to the PR branch, and reply to the review with a summary of what you addressed.\"\n}", "path": "zoo.hcl.example"}
Result
1 occurrences replaced
Tool 🔧 edit_file {"find": "// renderReviewSection renders the submitted review as a briefing\n// section: the verdict, the review body, and each inline comment with\n// its location and id (the id is what the agent passes to\n// resolve_review_comment once it has addressed the feedback).", "replace": "// renderReviewSection renders the submitted review as a briefing\n// section: the verdict, the review body, and each inline comment with\n// its location and id (the id lets the agent refer to a specific\n// comment in its reply).", "path": "internal/agentrun/run.go"}
Arguments
{"find": "// renderReviewSection renders the submitted review as a briefing\n// section: the verdict, the review body, and each inline comment with\n// its location and id (the id is what the agent passes to\n// resolve_review_comment once it has addressed the feedback).", "replace": "// renderReviewSection renders the submitted review as a briefing\n// section: the verdict, the review body, and each inline comment with\n// its location and id (the id lets the agent refer to a specific\n// comment in its reply).", "path": "internal/agentrun/run.go"}
Result
1 occurrences replaced
Thinking
Next, let's check other places that reference the resolve tool or "resolve" in the context of review comments:
- The PR description (on Forgejo, can't edit it)
- `internal/agentrun/docker_integration_test.go`? Let's grep for "resolve" across the entire repo.
Let me check for any remaining references:
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /project && grep -rni \"resolve_review\\|ResolveReviewComment\\|resolved\" --include=\"*.go\" --include=\"*.md\" --include=\"*.hcl*\" . | grep -v \"_test.go:.*resolve \" | head -20"}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /project && grep -rni \"resolve_review\\|ResolveReviewComment\\|resolved\" --include=\"*.go\" --include=\"*.md\" --include=\"*.hcl*\" . | grep -v \"_test.go:.*resolve \" | head -20"}
Result
./internal/config/config.go:10:// Known event kinds. issue:assigned and pr:review are resolved
./internal/web/web.go:30:// avatarCacheTTL bounds how long a resolved avatar URL is trusted before
./internal/web/web.go:130:// jobRow is a store.Job plus the agent's Forgejo avatar, resolved for the
./internal/web/web.go:155:// or "" if it can't be resolved (no Forgejo client configured, unknown
./internal/forgejo/client_test.go:203:func TestResolveReviewComment(t *testing.T) {
./internal/forgejo/client_test.go:219: if err := client.ResolveReviewComment("acme", "widgets", 9, 7); err != nil {
./internal/forgejo/client_test.go:231:func TestResolveReviewCommentError(t *testing.T) {
./internal/forgejo/client_test.go:245: if err := client.ResolveReviewComment("acme", "widgets", 9, 99); err == nil {
./internal/scheduler/scheduler.go:91:// dispatching each to its resolved agent and blocking on the
./internal/scheduler/scheduler.go:112: s.logger.Debug("no agent resolved for event, dropping", "kind", ev.Kind, "owner", ev.Owner, "repo", ev.Repo, "index", ev.Index)
./internal/scheduler/scheduler.go:127: s.logger.Error("resolved agent not declared in config", "agent", agentName)
./internal/scheduler/scheduler_test.go:236:func TestSchedulerDropsUnresolvedEvent(t *testing.T) {
./internal/scheduler/scheduler_test.go:260: t.Fatalf("expected no job for unresolved event, got %+v", jobs)
./internal/scheduler/scheduler_test.go:293:// event's author (the reviewer) is the resolved agent (the PR author).
./zoo.hcl.example:77:# addressed. (Forgejo has no API to mark review comments resolved, so
Thinking
There's a `TestResolveReviewComment` and `TestResolveReviewCommentError` in `internal/forgejo/client_test.go` — I missed these earlier (the grep_search tool's glob was unreliable). Let me check and remove them.
There are client tests for the removed method. Let me view and remove them:
Tool 🔧 read_file {"path": "internal/forgejo/client_test.go", "start_line": 190, "end_line": 255}
Arguments
{"path": "internal/forgejo/client_test.go", "start_line": 190, "end_line": 255}
Result
{"path":"internal/forgejo/client_test.go","content":"\t\tt.Fatalf(\"new client: %v\", err)\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tinfo, err := client.PullRequestInfo(\"acme\", \"widgets\", 9)\r\n\tif err != nil {\r\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"pull request info: %v\", err)\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tif info.HeadRef != \"issue-9-greg\" || info.BaseRef != \"main\" {\r\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"unexpected info: %+v\", info)\r\n\t}\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc TestResolveReviewComment(t *testing.T) {\r\n\tserver, mux := newTestServer(t)\r\n\r\n\tvar method, auth string\r\n\r\n\tmux.HandleFunc(\"/api/v1/repos/acme/widgets/pulls/9/review_comments/7/resolve\", func(w http.ResponseWriter, r *http.Request) {\r\n\t\tmethod = r.Method\r\n\t\tauth = r.Header.Get(\"Authorization\")\r\n\t\tw.WriteHeader(http.StatusNoContent)\r\n\t})\r\n\r\n\tclient, err := NewClient(config.Forgejo{URL: server.URL, Token: \"test\"})\r\n\tif err != nil {\r\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"new client: %v\", err)\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tif err := client.ResolveReviewComment(\"acme\", \"widgets\", 9, 7); err != nil {\r\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"resolve: %v\", err)\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tif method != http.MethodPost {\r\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected POST, got %s\", method)\r\n\t}\r\n\tif auth != \"token test\" {\r\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected bearer token auth, got %q\", auth)\r\n\t}\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc TestResolveReviewCommentError(t *testing.T) {\r\n\tserver, mux := newTestServer(t)\r\n\r\n\tmux.HandleFunc(\"/api/v1/repos/acme/widgets/pulls/9/review_comments/99/resolve\", func(w http.ResponseWriter, r *http.Request) {\r\n\t\tw.Header().Set(\"Content-Type\", \"application/json\")\r\n\t\tw.WriteHeader(http.StatusNotFound)\r\n\t\t_, _ = w.Write([]byte(`{\"message\": \"not found\"}`))\r\n\t})\r\n\r\n\tclient, err := NewClient(config.Forgejo{URL: server.URL, Token: \"test\"})\r\n\tif err != nil {\r\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"new client: %v\", err)\r\n\t}\r\n\r\n\tif err := client.ResolveReviewComment(\"acme\", \"widgets\", 9, 99); err == nil {\r\n\t\tt.Fatal(\"expected an error for a missing review comment\")\r\n\t}\r\n}\r\n\r\nfunc TestSubmitReview(t *testing.T) {\r\n\tserver, mux := newTestServer(t)\r\n\r\n\tvar gotEvent, gotBody string\r\n\r\n\tmux.HandleFunc(\"/api/v1/repos/acme/widgets/pulls/9/reviews\", func(w http.ResponseWriter, r *http.Request) {\r","start_line":190,"end_line":255,"total_lines":301,"truncated":true}
Thinking
Let's delete both tests.
Tool 🔧 edit_file {"find": "func TestResolveReviewComment(t *testing.T) {\n\tserver, mux := newTestServer(t)\n\n\tvar method, auth string\n\n\tmux.HandleFunc(\"/api/v1/repos/acme/widgets/pulls/9/review_comments/7/resolve\", func(w http.ResponseWriter, r *http.Request) {\n\t\tmethod = r.Method\n\t\tauth = r.Header.Get(\"Authorization\")\n\t\tw.WriteHeader(http.StatusNoContent)\n\t})\n\n\tclient, err := NewClient(config.Forgejo{URL: server.URL, Token: \"test\"})\n\tif err != nil {\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"new client: %v\", err)\n\t}\n\n\tif err := client.ResolveReviewComment(\"acme\", \"widgets\", 9, 7); err != nil {\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"resolve: %v\", err)\n\t}\n\n\tif method != http.MethodPost {\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected POST, got %s\", method)\n\t}\n\tif auth != \"token test\" {\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected bearer token auth, got %q\", auth)\n\t}\n}\n\nfunc TestResolveReviewCommentError(t *testing.T) {\n\tserver, mux := newTestServer(t)\n\n\tmux.HandleFunc(\"/api/v1/repos/acme/widgets/pulls/9/review_comments/99/resolve\", func(w http.ResponseWriter, r *http.Request) {\n\t\tw.Header().Set(\"Content-Type\", \"application/json\")\n\t\tw.WriteHeader(http.StatusNotFound)\n\t\t_, _ = w.Write([]byte(`{\"message\": \"not found\"}`))\n\t})\n\n\tclient, err := NewClient(config.Forgejo{URL: server.URL, Token: \"test\"})\n\tif err != nil {\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"new client: %v\", err)\n\t}\n\n\tif err := client.ResolveReviewComment(\"acme\", \"widgets\", 9, 99); err == nil {\n\t\tt.Fatal(\"expected an error for a missing review comment\")\n\t}\n}\n\nfunc TestSubmitReview(t *testing.T) {", "replace": "func TestSubmitReview(t *testing.T) {", "path": "internal/forgejo/client_test.go"}
Arguments
{"find": "func TestResolveReviewComment(t *testing.T) {\n\tserver, mux := newTestServer(t)\n\n\tvar method, auth string\n\n\tmux.HandleFunc(\"/api/v1/repos/acme/widgets/pulls/9/review_comments/7/resolve\", func(w http.ResponseWriter, r *http.Request) {\n\t\tmethod = r.Method\n\t\tauth = r.Header.Get(\"Authorization\")\n\t\tw.WriteHeader(http.StatusNoContent)\n\t})\n\n\tclient, err := NewClient(config.Forgejo{URL: server.URL, Token: \"test\"})\n\tif err != nil {\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"new client: %v\", err)\n\t}\n\n\tif err := client.ResolveReviewComment(\"acme\", \"widgets\", 9, 7); err != nil {\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"resolve: %v\", err)\n\t}\n\n\tif method != http.MethodPost {\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected POST, got %s\", method)\n\t}\n\tif auth != \"token test\" {\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"expected bearer token auth, got %q\", auth)\n\t}\n}\n\nfunc TestResolveReviewCommentError(t *testing.T) {\n\tserver, mux := newTestServer(t)\n\n\tmux.HandleFunc(\"/api/v1/repos/acme/widgets/pulls/9/review_comments/99/resolve\", func(w http.ResponseWriter, r *http.Request) {\n\t\tw.Header().Set(\"Content-Type\", \"application/json\")\n\t\tw.WriteHeader(http.StatusNotFound)\n\t\t_, _ = w.Write([]byte(`{\"message\": \"not found\"}`))\n\t})\n\n\tclient, err := NewClient(config.Forgejo{URL: server.URL, Token: \"test\"})\n\tif err != nil {\n\t\tt.Fatalf(\"new client: %v\", err)\n\t}\n\n\tif err := client.ResolveReviewComment(\"acme\", \"widgets\", 9, 99); err == nil {\n\t\tt.Fatal(\"expected an error for a missing review comment\")\n\t}\n}\n\nfunc TestSubmitReview(t *testing.T) {", "replace": "func TestSubmitReview(t *testing.T) {", "path": "internal/forgejo/client_test.go"}
Result
1 occurrences replaced
Thinking
Next, let's build and test everything:
Now build and run the full suite:
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /project && go build ./... && go vet ./... && gofmt -l . && go test ./... 2>&1 | tail -12", "timeout": 300}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /project && go build ./... && go vet ./... && gofmt -l . && go test ./... 2>&1 | tail -12", "timeout": 300}
Result
? github.com/abrander/zoo/cmd/zoo [no test files] ok github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/agentrun 0.004s ok github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/config (cached) ok github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/forgejo 0.500s ok github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/livelog (cached) ok github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/llm (cached) ok github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/scheduler 2.335s ok github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/store (cached) ok github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/tools 0.003s ok github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/web 1.281s
Thinking
All green. Let's do a final check on the complete diff of the second commit, and also re-verify a few points:
1. The `ReviewCommentDetail` struct in client.go — check whether its doc comment mentions resolve.
2. Check whether there are any other places referencing the resolve tool (e.g., the `submit_review` description in `internal/tools/forgejo.go` is fine).
3. Verify that the final state of zoo.hcl.example is correct.
Let's check the doc comment on ReviewCommentDetail and the final state of the main files.
All green. Let me review the final state of the changed files and the full diff:
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /project && git diff --stat && echo === && sed -n '60,85p' zoo.hcl.example && echo === && grep -n -B3 -A8 \"ReviewCommentDetail struct\" internal/forgejo/client.go"}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /project && git diff --stat && echo === && sed -n '60,85p' zoo.hcl.example && echo === && grep -n -B3 -A8 \"ReviewCommentDetail struct\" internal/forgejo/client.go"}
Result
internal/agentrun/forgejo.go | 7 ------
internal/agentrun/run.go | 4 ++--
internal/agentrun/system.md | 12 +++++------
internal/forgejo/client.go | 32 ----------------------------
internal/forgejo/client_test.go | 47 -----------------------------------------
internal/tools/context.go | 4 ----
internal/tools/forgejo.go | 22 -------------------
internal/tools/tools_test.go | 27 +++--------------------
zoo.hcl.example | 7 +++---
9 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 148 deletions(-)
===
}
event "issue:comment" {
agent = "leon"
instructions = "Please review what this comment says and respond appropriately."
}
event "pr:new" {
agent = "greg"
instructions = "Please review this pull request and respond appropriately."
}
# A review was submitted on a pull request (approved, changes requested,
# or comment). The agent that opened the PR is triggered to handle it,
# like issue:assigned: its working tree is checked out on the PR's head
# branch, so changes it pushes update the PR directly. It should address
# the feedback and reply to the review with a summary of what it
# addressed. (Forgejo has no API to mark review comments resolved, so
# that stays with the reviewer.)
event "pr:review" {
// No `agent` here: the agent whose name matches the pull request
// author's username is triggered.
instructions = "A review was submitted on this pull request. Address the feedback, push your changes to the PR branch, and reply to the review with a summary of what you addressed."
}
===
244-// ReviewCommentDetail is one inline comment on a pull request review,
245-// in the shape zoo needs when briefing an agent: where it points, what
246-// it says, and its id (so the agent can resolve it once addressed).
247:type ReviewCommentDetail struct {
248- ID int64
249- Path string
250- Line int
251- Body string
252- Author string
253-}
254-
255-// ReviewDetail is the review context zoo briefs an agent with when a
Thinking
The doc comment for `ReviewCommentDetail` says "its id (so the agent can resolve it once addressed)", but this is now outdated. Let's fix it.
One stale doc comment remains on `ReviewCommentDetail`. Let me fix it:
Tool 🔧 edit_file {"find": "// ReviewCommentDetail is one inline comment on a pull request review,\n// in the shape zoo needs when briefing an agent: where it points, what\n// it says, and its id (so the agent can resolve it once addressed).", "replace": "// ReviewCommentDetail is one inline comment on a pull request review,\n// in the shape zoo needs when briefing an agent: where it points, what\n// it says, and its id (so the agent can refer to it in its reply).", "path": "internal/forgejo/client.go"}
Arguments
{"find": "// ReviewCommentDetail is one inline comment on a pull request review,\n// in the shape zoo needs when briefing an agent: where it points, what\n// it says, and its id (so the agent can resolve it once addressed).", "replace": "// ReviewCommentDetail is one inline comment on a pull request review,\n// in the shape zoo needs when briefing an agent: where it points, what\n// it says, and its id (so the agent can refer to it in its reply).", "path": "internal/forgejo/client.go"}
Result
1 occurrences replaced
Thinking
Alright, let's also re-check the description of the `submit_review` tool — it says "A submitted review fires a pr:review event that triggers a run, so use it to react to a PR (e.g. after addressing earlier feedback) or to review someone else's PR." This is still accurate.
Also, let's check the wording in the PR description's "Loop safety" section: "The scheduler's existing self-trigger guard drops an event authored by the agent it would resolve to — so a review the pr:review agent submits itself never triggers itself." — With dynamic resolution, this is still accurate (a review submitted by the PR author agent on its own PR gets dropped).
Now, let's run the full test suite one more time, then commit and push.
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /project && go build ./... && go vet ./... && gofmt -l . && go test ./... 2>&1 | tail -12", "timeout": 300}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /project && go build ./... && go vet ./... && gofmt -l . && go test ./... 2>&1 | tail -12", "timeout": 300}
Result
? github.com/abrander/zoo/cmd/zoo [no test files] ok github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/agentrun (cached) ok github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/config (cached) ok github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/forgejo (cached) ok github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/livelog (cached) ok github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/llm (cached) ok github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/scheduler (cached) ok github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/store (cached) ok github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/tools (cached) ok github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/web (cached)
Thinking
Everything's fine. Next, commit the second change and push it.
Commit and push the second fix:
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /project && git add -A && git commit -m \"Remove resolve_review_comment: Forgejo has no such API\n\nThe tool POSTed to /repos/{o}/{r}/pulls/{i}/review_comments/{id}/resolve,\nan endpoint that does not exist: the live Forgejo (16.0.3, Gitea 1.22\nbased) answers 405, and no released Gitea (1.22-1.24) or Forgejo\n(16.0.3, main) has a resolve endpoint. Gitea added\nPOST /pulls/comments/{id}/resolve only after 1.24 (main), and the only\nroute on 16 is a CSRF-protected web form, unsuitable for a\ntoken-authenticated client.\n\nRather than ship a tool that always fails (or an untested\ncookie/CSRF/HTML-scraping workaround), drop it for v1: the agent\nreplies to the review with a summary of what it addressed, and the\nreviewer resolves the threads in the UI. Re-add the tool once the\nserver runs a Forgejo with the resolve API.\n\n- forgejo.Client: drop ResolveReviewComment (+ now-unused imports)\n- tools: drop the tool, the ForgejoActions method, and tests\n- agentrun: drop the runForgejoActions method; system prompt and\n seed-message comments no longer promise resolving\n- zoo.hcl.example: pr:review instructions say reply with a summary\" && git log --oneline -3"}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /project && git add -A && git commit -m \"Remove resolve_review_comment: Forgejo has no such API\n\nThe tool POSTed to /repos/{o}/{r}/pulls/{i}/review_comments/{id}/resolve,\nan endpoint that does not exist: the live Forgejo (16.0.3, Gitea 1.22\nbased) answers 405, and no released Gitea (1.22-1.24) or Forgejo\n(16.0.3, main) has a resolve endpoint. Gitea added\nPOST /pulls/comments/{id}/resolve only after 1.24 (main), and the only\nroute on 16 is a CSRF-protected web form, unsuitable for a\ntoken-authenticated client.\n\nRather than ship a tool that always fails (or an untested\ncookie/CSRF/HTML-scraping workaround), drop it for v1: the agent\nreplies to the review with a summary of what it addressed, and the\nreviewer resolves the threads in the UI. Re-add the tool once the\nserver runs a Forgejo with the resolve API.\n\n- forgejo.Client: drop ResolveReviewComment (+ now-unused imports)\n- tools: drop the tool, the ForgejoActions method, and tests\n- agentrun: drop the runForgejoActions method; system prompt and\n seed-message comments no longer promise resolving\n- zoo.hcl.example: pr:review instructions say reply with a summary\" && git log --oneline -3"}
Result
[issue-36-greg f336c58] Remove resolve_review_comment: Forgejo has no such API 9 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 149 deletions(-) f336c58 (HEAD -> issue-36-greg) Remove resolve_review_comment: Forgejo has no such API 6cd0612 Resolve pr:review to the agent that opened the PR eb16dd3 Add pr:review event so agents react to PR reviews
Thinking
Let's push it using the git tool.
Tool 🔧 git {"args": ["origin", "issue-36-greg"], "subcommand": "push"}
Arguments
{"args": ["origin", "issue-36-greg"], "subcommand": "push"}
Result
To https://code.stdio.dk/abrander/zoo.git 6cd0612..f336c58 issue-36-greg -> issue-36-greg
Thinking
Push complete. Next, I need to post a follow-up comment explaining the second change (the first comment has already been posted). After that, I'll try to resolve the inline comment again... no wait, the resolve call failed with 405 — and now I know exactly why: the endpoint doesn't exist. So `resolve_review_comment` (the tool available to me) can't possibly work. I should mention this in the follow-up comment: the inline comment can't be marked as resolved via the API (that's exactly the bug I just fixed), so abrander will need to click "resolve" in the UI.
Let me post a follow-up comment explaining the removal of the tool.
Now let me post a follow-up comment about the second fix:
Tool 🔧 comment {"body": "One more thing I found while working on this: **`resolve_review_comment` is broken — I removed it.**\n\nWhen I tried to resolve your inline comment with the tool, it failed with `405 Method Not Allowed`. I investigated, and the endpoint the client POSTs to (`/repos/{o}/{r}/pulls/{i}/review_comments/{id}/resolve`) **does not exist**:\n\n- The live server is Forgejo 16.0.3 (Gitea 1.22 based) — no such route (the 405 comes from the `GET /pulls/{base}/*` catch-all matching the path with the wrong method).\n- I checked the API route tables of Gitea 1.22, 1.23, 1.24, Gitea main, Forgejo 16.0.3, and Forgejo main: no released version has a resolve-review-comment API. Gitea added `POST /repos/{o}/{r}/pulls/comments/{id}/resolve` only after 1.24 (main), and Forgejo hasn't picked it up.\n- The only route on 16 is the web-UI form `POST /{owner}/{repo}/issues/{index}/resolve_conversation`, which is CSRF-protected and renders HTML — not something a token-authenticated daemon client should be scraping.\n\nSo in commit `f336c58` I removed the tool, the `ResolveReviewComment` client method, and their tests, and adjusted the wording (system prompt, `zoo.hcl.example` instructions, seed-message comments). The v1 workflow is now: the agent addresses the feedback, pushes, and replies to the review with a summary of what it addressed per comment — the reviewer resolves the threads in the UI. The tool can be re-added once the server runs a Forgejo with the resolve API.\n\nConsequences for you right now:\n\n1. I **can't mark your inline comment resolved** via the API (that's the bug) — it needs a click in the UI.\n2. The `event \"pr:review\"` instructions in your live `zoo.hcl` still say \"resolve the inline comments you have addressed\" — worth updating to match the example (the daemon config isn't in the repo, so I couldn't change it from here).\n3. The PR description still mentions the `resolve_review_comment` tool and the static event kind — both are now outdated; I can't edit the PR body from here.\n\nAll tests pass, `go vet` and `gofmt` clean."}
Arguments
{"body": "One more thing I found while working on this: **`resolve_review_comment` is broken — I removed it.**\n\nWhen I tried to resolve your inline comment with the tool, it failed with `405 Method Not Allowed`. I investigated, and the endpoint the client POSTs to (`/repos/{o}/{r}/pulls/{i}/review_comments/{id}/resolve`) **does not exist**:\n\n- The live server is Forgejo 16.0.3 (Gitea 1.22 based) — no such route (the 405 comes from the `GET /pulls/{base}/*` catch-all matching the path with the wrong method).\n- I checked the API route tables of Gitea 1.22, 1.23, 1.24, Gitea main, Forgejo 16.0.3, and Forgejo main: no released version has a resolve-review-comment API. Gitea added `POST /repos/{o}/{r}/pulls/comments/{id}/resolve` only after 1.24 (main), and Forgejo hasn't picked it up.\n- The only route on 16 is the web-UI form `POST /{owner}/{repo}/issues/{index}/resolve_conversation`, which is CSRF-protected and renders HTML — not something a token-authenticated daemon client should be scraping.\n\nSo in commit `f336c58` I removed the tool, the `ResolveReviewComment` client method, and their tests, and adjusted the wording (system prompt, `zoo.hcl.example` instructions, seed-message comments). The v1 workflow is now: the agent addresses the feedback, pushes, and replies to the review with a summary of what it addressed per comment — the reviewer resolves the threads in the UI. The tool can be re-added once the server runs a Forgejo with the resolve API.\n\nConsequences for you right now:\n\n1. I **can't mark your inline comment resolved** via the API (that's the bug) — it needs a click in the UI.\n2. The `event \"pr:review\"` instructions in your live `zoo.hcl` still say \"resolve the inline comments you have addressed\" — worth updating to match the example (the daemon config isn't in the repo, so I couldn't change it from here).\n3. The PR description still mentions the `resolve_review_comment` tool and the static event kind — both are now outdated; I can't edit the PR body from here.\n\nAll tests pass, `go vet` and `gofmt` clean."}
Result
Comment posted
Thinking
Both comments have been posted. Next, let me try `resolve_review_comment` one more time — no wait, I already know it'll fail with a 405 (that's the bug). I removed the tool from the codebase, but the tool available in this run is the one from the daemon currently deployed, and it's still broken. Trying again would just fail again. I've already explained in the comment that the reviewer needs to resolve it in the UI.
Let me do a final check on the complete diff of the PR branch against main, and confirm that everything is consistent.
Let me do a final verification of the complete PR diff against main:
Tool 🔧 bash {"command": "cd /project && git diff main --stat && echo === && go test ./... 2>&1 | grep -v \"no test files\"", "timeout": 300}
Arguments
{"command": "cd /project && git diff main --stat && echo === && go test ./... 2>&1 | grep -v \"no test files\"", "timeout": 300}
Result
internal/agentrun/clone.go | 23 +++++ internal/agentrun/forgejo.go | 7 ++ internal/agentrun/run.go | 118 ++++++++++++++++++++++++-- internal/agentrun/seed_test.go | 69 ++++++++++++++- internal/agentrun/system.md | 20 +++-- internal/config/config.go | 14 ++- internal/config/config_test.go | 24 ++++++ internal/forgejo/client.go | 127 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++ internal/forgejo/client_test.go | 131 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ internal/forgejo/event.go | 21 +++++ internal/forgejo/poll.go | 72 +++++++++++++--- internal/forgejo/poll_test.go | 160 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ internal/forgejo/webhook.go | 75 ++++++++++++++-- internal/forgejo/webhook_test.go | 87 +++++++++++++++++++ internal/scheduler/scheduler.go | 19 ++++- internal/scheduler/scheduler_test.go | 111 +++++++++++++++++++++++- internal/tools/context.go | 5 ++ internal/tools/forgejo.go | 29 +++++++ internal/tools/tools_test.go | 35 ++++++++ zoo.hcl.example | 13 +++ 20 files changed, 1113 insertions(+), 47 deletions(-) === ok github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/agentrun (cached) ok github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/config (cached) ok github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/forgejo (cached) ok github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/livelog (cached) ok github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/llm (cached) ok github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/scheduler (cached) ok github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/store (cached) ok github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/tools (cached) ok github.com/abrander/zoo/internal/web (cached)
Thinking
Everything is in place:
1. **Review feedback addressed**: `pr:review` now dynamically resolves to the agent who opened the PR (commit `6cd0612`).
2. **Bonus bug fix**: Removed the broken `resolve_review_comment` tool (commit `f336c58`).
3. **Pushed** both commits to the PR branch.
4. **Replied to the review** with two comments explaining both changes.
5. **Resolving the inline comment**: Tried `resolve_review_comment` (comment ID 4646), but it failed with 405 — which turned out to be exactly the bug I subsequently fixed (the endpoint doesn't exist in Forgejo). Explained in the follow-up comment that the reviewer needs to resolve it in the UI.
All tests pass, vet/gofmt are clean.
Summary of the final state:
- `internal/forgejo/event.go`: `PRAuthor` field.
- `internal/forgejo/webhook.go` + `poll.go`: Set `PRAuthor` on pr:new and pr:review events.
- `internal/config/config.go`: pr:review is a dynamic kind; `agent` attribute is rejected.
- `internal/scheduler/scheduler.go`: `resolveAgent` resolves pr:review to the PR author's agent.
- `zoo.hcl.example`: No agent in the pr:review block; updated the instructions.
- Removed the resolve tool from client, tools, agentrun, system.md, and tests.
- Tests updated/added throughout.
Done. The work is complete.
Everything is complete and verified. Here's a summary of what I did in response to the review:
## Addressing the review feedback
**1. The reviewer's point (zoo.hcl.example:78 — "the agent who opened the PR should process it")** — commit `6cd0612`:
- `forgejo.Event` gained a `PRAuthor` field (the username of the user who opened the PR), populated by both the webhook path (`pull_request.user`) and the poll path (PR poster) for `pr:new` and `pr:review` events.
- `scheduler.resolveAgent` now resolves `pr:review` dynamically — like `issue:assigned` — to the agent whose name matches the PR author's username. Reviews on PRs opened by non-agents are dropped.
- `internal/config`: `pr:review` is no longer a static event kind; declaring `agent` for it is now a validation error.
- `zoo.hcl.example`: the `agent = "greg"` attribute is gone from the `event "pr:review"` block.
- Tests updated/extended: config validation, scheduler resolution (match, non-agent author, self-review drop, dispatch to PR author), webhook/poll `PRAuthor` decoding.
**2. A bug I found while doing it** — commit `f336c58`: when I tried to resolve the reviewer's inline comment with the PR's new `resolve_review_comment` tool, it failed with **405**. Investigation showed the endpoint it calls doesn't exist anywhere: not in Gitea 1.22/1.23/1.24, not in Forgejo 16.0.3 (the live server) or Forgejo main — Gitea only added `POST /pulls/comments/{id}/resolve` after 1.24, and the only route on 16 is a CSRF-protected web form. Rather than ship a tool that always 405s (or an untested cookie/CSRF/HTML-scraping workaround), I removed the tool, the client method, and their tests, and updated all wording that promised it. The v1 workflow is now: address feedback → push → reply with a summary; the reviewer resolves threads in the UI.
**3. Communication**: posted two comments on the PR — one answering the feedback, one explaining the tool removal and its consequences (including that the inline comment needs a UI click to resolve, since the API doesn't exist — the very bug I fixed).
All tests pass (`go test ./...`), `go vet` and `gofmt` clean, both commits pushed to the PR branch.