Skip to content

Decouple workflow admission from credential transport - #3699

Open
louis4li wants to merge 3 commits into
feature/integratefrom
fix/2026-10-09_workflow-credential-transport
Open

louis4li wants to merge 3 commits into
feature/integratefrom
fix/2026-10-09_workflow-credential-transport

Conversation

@louis4li

@louis4li louis4li commented Oct 9, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Issue

Closes #3698

Scope

  • Allow a durable workflow capability admission plan to satisfy interactive execution when the underlying explicit NyxID request grant permits interactive use.
  • Keep durable proof requirements fail-closed by retaining durable catalog source and owner validation for durable stored plans.
  • Preserve durable admission mode during persisted admission refresh when the persisted expected execution mode is interactive.
  • Apply the same directional execution-mode compatibility to workflow service revision artifacts and deployment binding integrity.
  • Keep scoped workflow draft APIs layout-free so Studio layout facts remain client-owned compatibility fields.
  • Add regression coverage for durable explicit request revalidation, missing durable proof evidence, refresh behavior, artifact/deployment compatibility, and reverse mode rejection.

Verification

  • dotnet test test/Aevatar.Workflow.Application.Tests/Aevatar.Workflow.Application.Tests.csproj --nologo - passed, 684 tests.
  • dotnet test test/Aevatar.GAgentService.Tests/Aevatar.GAgentService.Tests.csproj --nologo --filter WorkflowServiceRevisionArtifactBuilderTests - passed, 15 tests.
  • bash tools/ci/test_stability_guards.sh - passed.
  • bash tools/ci/architecture_guards.sh - passed.
  • Endpoint/NyxID binding check not run; the change is admission-plan compatibility and refresh logic covered by application/service tests.

Notes

  • The workflow YAML capability contract remains unchanged; this separates stored admission capability proof from the caller credential transport used at execution time.

Generated with Claude Code.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
@louis4li
louis4li requested a review from jason-aelf as a code owner October 9, 2026 07:54
@chatgpt-codex-connector

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot commented Oct 9, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codex Review Summary

This comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.

Review Status Commit Review trigger
📝 Code Review ✅ Completed 2026-10-09T07:57:07.225719Z 10baea3 PR opened
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review" or "@codex security review".

Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings.

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 10baea3b70

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

louis4li and others added 2 commits October 9, 2026 16:10
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
@codecov

codecov Bot commented Oct 9, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 91.89189% with 3 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 83.47%. Comparing base (a560e49) to head (4d74b1f).
⚠️ Report is 2 commits behind head on feature/integrate.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
...tService.Hosting/Endpoints/WorkflowApiEndpoints.cs 0.00% 2 Missing ⚠️
...ctions/WorkflowCapabilityAdmissionPlanIntegrity.cs 94.73% 0 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
@@                  Coverage Diff                  @@
##           feature/integrate    #3699      +/-   ##
=====================================================
- Coverage              83.50%   83.47%   -0.03%     
=====================================================
  Files                   1716     1719       +3     
  Lines                 198660   198936     +276     
  Branches               23820    23850      +30     
=====================================================
+ Hits                  165886   166064     +178     
- Misses                 21710    21807      +97     
- Partials               11064    11065       +1     
Flag Coverage Δ
ci 83.47% <91.89%> (-0.03%) ⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Files with missing lines Coverage Δ
...Services/WorkflowServiceDeploymentPlanIntegrity.cs 98.18% <100.00%> (ø)
...Services/WorkflowServiceRevisionArtifactBuilder.cs 93.61% <100.00%> (+1.06%) ⬆️
...ties/WorkflowExternalCapabilityAdmissionService.cs 86.29% <100.00%> (+0.09%) ⬆️
...ctions/WorkflowCapabilityAdmissionPlanIntegrity.cs 84.98% <94.73%> (+0.30%) ⬆️
...tService.Hosting/Endpoints/WorkflowApiEndpoints.cs 47.32% <0.00%> (ø)

... and 4 files with indirect coverage changes

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
  • 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

This branch has not been deployed

No deployments
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant