ci: use docker/cagent-action/.github/workflows/review-pr.yml#24132
ci: use docker/cagent-action/.github/workflows/review-pr.yml#24132dvdksn wants to merge 1 commit intodocker:mainfrom
Conversation
✅ Deploy Preview for docsdocker ready!
To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify project configuration. |
![github-actions[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/15368?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Review Summary
Workflow refactoring looks good! ✅
This PR successfully migrates from an inline agent configuration to using the reusable workflow from docker/cagent-action. The configuration is clear and well-structured with no documentation quality issues found.
The additional-prompt parameter appropriately configures the review agent with clear instructions and guidelines. The content is technically accurate and suitable for its purpose as agent configuration.
derekmisler
left a comment
derekmisler
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
the only reason i haven't approved this yet is because we need this one to land first, or the prompt files will be ignored
|
@dvdksn could we make it aware of pages being removed, and for those to check if a correct redirect is added? i.e., to prevent things like #23949 (comment) |
|
I think we were also looking at (or already have?) helping with triage; for 404 reports, it could also check wayback-machine to verify if it was a page that previously existed to exclude reports for made-up links 🤔 (if I'm not sure, I usually do a quick check to see if there was anything at that URL in the first place #23949 (comment)) |
|
@thaJeztah yes that would be a good addition. Let me update the instruction 👍 |
|
@thaJeztah for 404 - yes, for the triage agent (todo) we could probably just add a tool to check the wayback api, eg: https://archive.org/wayback/available?url=docs.docker.com/engine/reference/builder |
Signed-off-by: David Karlsson <35727626+dvdksn@users.noreply.github.com>
dvdksn
force-pushed
the
use-cagent-review-action
branch
from
f3b26ff to
44692cc
Compare
4 participants
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.