Repository navigation
Offer Grok Build as an unattended review-flow reviewer - #1432
Merged
Merged
Conversation
Ask mode is the boundary: Grok asks before every edit and non-read-only command, and only a use_tool call on a server the review injected is approved. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
|
No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉 ℹ️ Recent review info
📝 Walkthrough
Merge Risk: ⚪ Minimal · up to
|
| Check name | Status | Explanation | Resolution |
|---|---|---|---|
| Docstring Coverage |  |
Docstring coverage is 30.95% which is insufficient. The required threshold is 80.00%. Docstring coverage is scoped to functions touched by this diff. Analyzed 42 functions across 19 files. | Write docstrings for the functions missing them to satisfy the coverage threshold. |
-
Check name Status Explanation Description Check Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled. Title check The title clearly and concisely describes the main change: adding Grok Build as an unattended review-flow reviewer. Linked Issues check Issue #1431requirements are implemented. Grok is an owned-worktree-only reviewer and does not support borrowed review.KCAP_GROK_UNATTENDED_REVIEWERand the startup-recorded version floor gate revi…Out of Scope Changes check The changes stay within Issue #1431. The sharedUnattendedToolAdmitterand runtime wiring support vendor-specific admission. The Grok launch, capability, environment, alias, registry, preference, do…
- Fix all pre-merge checks with AI
- Autofix · Keep fixing CodeRabbit findings and required CI, and resolving merge conflicts
Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.
PR Summary by QodoEnable Grok Build as an unattended review-flow reviewer
AI Description
Diagram
High-Level Assessment
Files changed (21)
|
Code Review by Qodo
1.
|
![qodo-code-review[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/484649?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
The user's own Grok permission rules, hooks and MCP servers act without asking, and no per-process switch reaches them short of moving GROK_HOME. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Closes #1431 — AI-3654
What & why
Grok Build becomes an unattended review-flow reviewer, owned worktree only. Like Claude it declares no containment, so borrowed review stays unsupported. It is gated like the other reviewers, by
KCAP_GROK_UNATTENDED_REVIEWER(opt-out) and a version floor recorded at startup. It uses the allowlisted auto-approve policy.Where to look
session/newkeepsyoloMode: false. Measured on grok 1.0.52: a shell write raisessession/request_permission(kind: execute) and does not run when refused; read-only commands and file reads raise nothing. The policy approves only a frame Grok names structurally as a call on an injected server:_meta.x.ai/tool.name == "use_tool",rawInput.variant == "UseTool",rawInput.tool_name == "<injected server>__<tool>", and the title equal to that name. Any other frame reaps the round.UnattendedToolAdmitteron the descriptor carries the admitted-set builder and the matcher. Kiro's title match moved behind it unchanged, andAllowlistedAutoApprovenow requires one._meta.agentProfile(measured to take effect as a JSON object) removessearch_replace,write, subagents and web search. The review environment turns off Grok's Claude/Cursor compat sources and subagents. The user's own Grok configuration still applies: their permission rules approve matching calls without a frame, and their hooks and MCP servers run, the same as the Claude and Codex reviewers running under the user's own config. No per-process switch reaches them short of movingGROK_HOME, which would mean handling the user's credential.Verification
GrokToolAdmissionTests: probe-shaped frames. The result call on an injected server is admitted. Edits, commands, other servers, prefix and embedded names, and mismatched fields are not. Through the bridge, the result call is approved and a command reaped.GrokReviewerLaunchTests: the reviewsession/newcarries the clamp, an interactive one does not. The review environment is set and the interactive one inherited. Refused when disabled or below the floor.GrokReviewerCapabilityTests, plus the gated-reviewer registry and preference pins.🤖 Generated with Claude Code
Summary by CodeRabbit
KCAP_GROK_UNATTENDED_REVIEWER=0.