feat(auth): close prepared artifact boundaries - #211
Conversation
|
Warning Review limit reached
Next review available in: 28 minutes Enable usage-based reviews in Billing to review now. Otherwise, wait until the next included review is available. How can I continue?After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the To avoid repeated limits, reduce automatic review volume by pausing incremental auto-reviews earlier, using label-based review opt-in, excluding WIP or generated PR titles, or requesting reviews manually when the PR is ready. If your team needs uninterrupted high-volume reviews, an organization admin can enable usage-based reviews. How do review limits work?CodeRabbit enforces per-developer PR review limits for each organization. Most developers receive the normal plan review availability. For paid Pro and Pro+ PR reviews, CodeRabbit uses adaptive limits for sustained high-volume activity. When a developer's recent PR review activity reaches the 95th percentile or higher among CodeRabbit users, additional reviews become available more gradually as earlier reviews age out of the rolling window. Please refer docs for additional details. Review details⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: defaults Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro Plus Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (3)
📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughThe PR closes the PREP-to-ART interface around opaque prepared authorization, introduces typed artifact binding and bundle operations, removes legacy upload contracts, strengthens architecture and authorization tests, and updates related initiative specifications and status records. ChangesPrepared ART boundary
Estimated code review effort: 4 (Complex) | ~45 minutes Possibly related PRs
🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 4 | ❌ 1❌ Failed checks (1 warning)
✅ Passed checks (4 passed)
✨ Finishing Touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
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. Comment |
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
Inline comments:
In `@docs/spec_artifact_storage_service.md`:
- Around line 378-383: Update the `PreparedBundleMaterializationRequest`
description to include its `task_id` and `assignment_id` fields, ensuring the
exhaustive “wraps only” list matches the dataclass while preserving the existing
references to prepared authority, `PreparedArtifact` generation, and
policy/checker selectors.
🪄 Autofix (Beta)
Fix all unresolved CodeRabbit comments on this PR:
- Push a commit to this branch (recommended)
- Create a new PR with the fixes
ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration
Configuration used: defaults
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro Plus
Run ID: fa32381b-d5ca-4df0-a4e4-aa29e620796e
📒 Files selected for processing (12)
.agent-loop/initiatives/WS-XINT-002-art-auth-end-to-end/CHUNK_MAP.md.agent-loop/initiatives/WS-XINT-002-art-auth-end-to-end/DECISIONS.md.agent-loop/initiatives/WS-XINT-002-art-auth-end-to-end/PLAN.md.agent-loop/initiatives/WS-XINT-002-art-auth-end-to-end/STATUS.md.agent-loop/initiatives/WS-XINT-002-art-auth-end-to-end/chunks/WS-XINT-002-02-prepared-feature-boundaries.md.agent-loop/initiatives/WS-XINT-002-art-auth-end-to-end/reviews/WS-XINT-002-02-internal-review.md.agent-loop/initiatives/WS-XINT-002-art-auth-end-to-end/reviews/WS-XINT-002-02-pr-trust-bundle.mdbackend/app/interfaces/artifact_operations.pybackend/tests/test_artifact_architecture.pybackend/tests/test_authorization.pydocs/spec_artifact_storage_service.mddocs/spec_authorization_service.md
2 participants
WS-XINT-002-02 PR Trust Bundle
Chunk
WS-XINT-002-02— Prepared Operation Boundaries (L1).Goal and human-approved intent
Close the reusable PREP-to-ART interface without activating any planned ART
action. Prevent the stale status wording that previously reached
main.What changed and why
PreparedAuthorizationHandle, not raw request authentication context.typed methods, preventing action and resource confusion.
provider/public interfaces, and unauthorized method signatures.
fixed service denies before availability, and all rollback/cancellation
classes burn the handle without kernel or evidence reentry.
transient active, merge-pending, or next-chunk state.
Design and alternatives
Chosen: one existing PREP capability protocol plus closed operation-specific
requests. Exact feature row composers, locks, and resource contexts remain in
their evidence-backed activation chunks.
Rejected: generic binding requests, caller-selected actions/facts, raw
AuthorizationContextmutation authority, a second capability protocol,premature feature truth, and compatibility upload-session aliases.
Scope and product behavior
No action activation, catalogue/migration, evaluator, kernel, repository,
route, provider I/O, durable write, or lifecycle change. Operator read/recovery
remains on its existing bounded path. Review packet/evidence work remains
deferred to
WS-XINT-002-07.Acceptance proof and checks
contracts, stale Workstream wording, and
git diff --check: passed.Backend / testandAgent Gates / agent-gatesremain required forfull exact-head coverage.
Reviewer results
Senior, architecture, QA, security, product/ops, CI integrity, docs, and test
delta: PASS. Reuse/dedup: PASS WITH LOW RISK for one intentionally retained
focused test overlapping the new exhaustive regression.
External review
Pending GitHub Actions and CodeRabbit on the exact PR head.
Remaining risks and follow-up
This chunk intentionally activates nothing. Chunks 03-07 and 05A-D must supply
their exact non-forgeable feature proofs, lock order, stale/race tests, and
activation evidence. Full repository coverage is delegated to GitHub Actions.
Human review focus and merge ownership
Confirm no raw authentication context or generic resource/action selector can
enter durable ART mutation ports, no planned action issues a handle, and the
status file cannot become stale at merge. The user retains merge approval for
this specific PR.
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Updates
Documentation