-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1
wfctl validate: add field-level cross-reference checking for step outputs, SQL aliases, and plain-string step refs #373
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Merged
intel352
merged 5 commits into
main
from
copilot/add-cross-reference-checking-validation
Mar 24, 2026
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
5 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
6f7381e
Initial plan
Copilot b516da3
feat: add cross-reference checking for step output fields, SQL aliase…
Copilot 42b9a16
Merge branch 'main' into copilot/add-cross-reference-checking-validation
intel352 8fe8a0b
fix: skip field-path validation for steps with dynamic/wildcard place…
Copilot cce0f47
Merge branch 'main' into copilot/add-cross-reference-checking-validation
intel352 File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
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
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
Oops, something went wrong.
Oops, something went wrong.
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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The output-field validation will incorrectly warn for steps whose outputs are intentionally dynamic map keys (e.g. step.secret_fetch exposes arbitrary keys from its
secretsmap and its schema uses the placeholder output key "(key)"). With the current exact-match check onoutputs[i].Key == firstField, any access like.steps.fetch.api_keywill be flagged as unknown even though it’s valid. Consider treating placeholder keys like "(key)" as a wildcard (skip validation for that step type) or enhancing output inference for those steps to return the concrete keys from config so validation can be accurate.