You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
Repository navigation
fix(ci): show example test failure reasons - #1020
When the examples suite fails, the gate reports the test name but drops the failure message from the JUnit report. This makes the CI failure hard to diagnose.
What changed
Keep failure details on stderr so the gate can still read the same classification from stdout.
Show up to five non-budget failures, capped at 1,000 characters each, with a marker when truncated.
Add 14 checks to the existing budget-gate tests for diagnostics, output limits, and unchanged exit codes.
Test plan
bash scripts/test-examples-budget-gate.sh: 58 passed. The same tests with the original classifier: 49 passed, 9 failed.
bash -n scripts/test-examples-budget-gate.sh and Python compile() syntax check: passed.
git diff --check: passed.
Run on Windows with Python 3.14.6 and Git Bash 5.3.9. Full SDK suites and live examples were not run locally.
How I can prove I was successful
No playable artifact — see Test plan. The regression tests run the real gate with JUnit fixtures and check that failure details appear in its log.
Anything surprising?
This fixes the missing diagnostics in #1010. The underlying evaluator failure still needs investigation; budget handling is unchanged.
No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉
ℹ️ Recent review info
⚙️ Run configuration
Configuration used: Organization UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Advanced
Run ID: 163f1054-9660-490c-bdec-12edc64fa9d5
📥 Commits
Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between ad220e6 and bc2d47c.
📒 Files selected for processing: 2
scripts/ci/classify-examples-failures.py
scripts/test-examples-budget-gate.sh
Included review availability: This review used your included allowance. Your plan provides up to 4 included reviews per hour; 3 remain after this review.
Walkthrough
The example failure classifier now emits normalized, bounded diagnostics for up to five non-budget failures. The test harness checks diagnostic content and confirms that classification output and suite exit status remain unchanged.
Changes
Failure diagnostics
Layer / File(s)
Summary
Emit and verify failure diagnostics scripts/ci/classify-examples-failures.py, scripts/test-examples-budget-gate.sh
The classifier emits normalized diagnostics for up to five non-budget failures and truncates long text at 1,000 characters. Harness checks cover report content, budget-only output, classifier stdout, and suite exit status.
Suggested reviewers:langwatch-agent
Priority: ⬇️ Low
Change: Bug fix
Merge Risk:⚪ Minimal · up to bc2d4
The diagnostic change appears ready to merge after normal checks; no merge-blocking issue was identified.
Pre-merge checks: 4 · 1
Failed checks: 1 warning
Check name
Status
Explanation
Resolution
Docstring Coverage
Docstring coverage is 50.00% which is insufficient. The required threshold is 80.00%. Docstring coverage is scoped to functions touched by this diff. Analyzed 2 functions across 2 files.
Write docstrings for the functions missing them to satisfy the coverage threshold.
Passed checks: 4 passed
Check name
Status
Explanation
Linked Issues check
Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Out of Scope Changes check
Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Title check
The title clearly and concisely describes the main change: showing example test failure reasons in CI.
Description check
The description directly explains the missing failure messages, the diagnostic limits, the test updates, and the validation results.
Fix all pre-merge checks with AI
✨ Finishing Touches
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Create a new PR
Autofix · Keep fixing CodeRabbit findings and required CI, and resolving merge conflicts
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.
A rabbit reads each test report, And trims long errors to their sort. Five failures leave a trace behind, Budget-only ones stay confined. The checks keep stdout as before, Then hop away across the floor.
Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.
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
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.
Why
Refs #1010.
When the examples suite fails, the gate reports the test name but drops the failure message from the JUnit report. This makes the CI failure hard to diagnose.
What changed
Test plan
bash scripts/test-examples-budget-gate.sh: 58 passed. The same tests with the original classifier: 49 passed, 9 failed.bash -n scripts/test-examples-budget-gate.shand Pythoncompile()syntax check: passed.git diff --check: passed.Run on Windows with Python 3.14.6 and Git Bash 5.3.9. Full SDK suites and live examples were not run locally.
How I can prove I was successful
No playable artifact — see Test plan. The regression tests run the real gate with JUnit fixtures and check that failure details appear in its log.
Anything surprising?
This fixes the missing diagnostics in #1010. The underlying evaluator failure still needs investigation; budget handling is unchanged.