Skip to content

[comp] Production Deploy#3377

Merged
tofikwest merged 2 commits into
releasefrom
main
Jul 8, 2026
Merged

[comp] Production Deploy#3377
tofikwest merged 2 commits into
releasefrom
main

Conversation

@github-actions

@github-actions github-actions Bot commented Jul 8, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

This is an automated pull request to release the candidate branch into production, which will trigger a deployment.
It was created by the [Production PR] action.


Summary by cubic

Fixes hidden results when running checks for providers that have both a code manifest and an active dynamic integration. Code-based checks are now treated as static in manual runs and self-heal re-runs, so real failures are shown instead of held as “inconclusive” (CS-715).

  • Bug Fixes
    • Added isCodeManifest to the @trycompai/integration-platform registry and exported it.
    • Updated manual run and self-heal rerun logic to use isCodeManifest when deciding dynamic vs static; code manifests override dynamic rows with the same slug.
    • Added tests for the registry helper and regression tests in controller/debug service to cover mixed code+dynamic providers (e.g., github).

Written for commit 200b191. Summary will update on new commits.

Review in cubic

github-actions Bot and others added 2 commits July 8, 2026 19:31
…anual run (CS-715) (#3376)

* fix(integration-platform): classify code-based checks statically on manual run (CS-715)

The manual "run a check" endpoint decided whether a run was dynamic (held as an
'inconclusive' result for the self-heal agent, and hidden from the run history)
versus static (shown as failed/pass) by checking only whether an active
DynamicIntegration row existed for the provider slug.

Several providers ship a code-based manifest AND an active DynamicIntegration row
of the same slug for their extra DB-backed checks. A code manifest always wins in
the registry, so the check that actually runs is the code one and must be
classified statically. Keying `isDynamic` off the DB row alone marked those
code-check runs 'inconclusive', so their results were withheld from the manual
run while the scheduled and server-run paths (which guard on the code manifest)
kept showing them correctly.

Add a registry helper `isCodeManifest` and gate the manual-run `isDynamic` on it,
mirroring the scheduled/server-run paths: a provider with a code manifest is never
dynamic; only a provider with no code manifest is. Add unit tests covering the
bundled manifests, the mixed code+dynamic providers, and the dynamic-only case.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01CRPjA4fQxdXuELyfTjYF8b

* fix(integration-platform): guard self-heal re-run classification for code-based checks (CS-715)

Extend the isCodeManifest guard from the manual run-check path to the self-heal
agent's re-run (rerunAndPersistCheck). A code-based provider that also has a
dynamic integration row of the same slug (github/vercel/aikido/rippling) was
re-held as 'inconclusive' on re-run — and since the agent cannot patch a code
check, it stayed hidden in a loop. It is now classified statically and its real
result is shown. Dynamic integrations are unaffected (isCodeManifest is false for
them, so the dynamic lookup runs exactly as before).

Tests:
- self-heal re-run reveals a code-based check as 'failed' (not re-held), even when
  a dynamic row shares the slug.
- manual run-check treats a code-based provider as static under the same
  condition; adds the isCodeManifest mock the controller spec now requires.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01CRPjA4fQxdXuELyfTjYF8b

---------

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
@vercel

vercel Bot commented Jul 8, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.

Project Deployment Actions Updated (UTC)
app (staging) Ready Ready Preview, Comment Jul 8, 2026 10:47pm
comp-framework-editor (staging) Ready Ready Preview, Comment Jul 8, 2026 10:47pm
1 Skipped Deployment
Project Deployment Actions Updated (UTC)
portal (staging) Skipped Skipped Jul 8, 2026 10:47pm

Request Review

@cubic-dev-ai cubic-dev-ai Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

No issues found across 8 files

Confidence score: 5/5

  • Automated review surfaced no issues in the provided summaries.
  • No files require special attention.

Re-trigger cubic

@tofikwest tofikwest merged commit 4a5ba6d into release Jul 8, 2026
14 checks passed
@claudfuen

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🎉 This PR is included in version 3.99.3 🎉

The release is available on GitHub release

Your semantic-release bot 📦🚀

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants