docs: record the direct-coverage wave in the audit delivery log - #568
Conversation
|
Codex usage limits have been reached for code reviews. Please check with the admins of this repo to increase the limits by adding credits. |
|
Warning Review limit reached
More reviews will be available in 39 seconds. Learn how PR review limits work. Your organization has used up its prepaid credits, and credit purchases are no longer available. Enable the review add-on in the billing tab to keep reviews running — you're only billed for reviews past your plan's rate limits ($0.25/file). ⌛ How to resolve this issue?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 credits. 🚦 How do rate limits work?CodeRabbit enforces per-developer PR review limits for each organization. Most developers receive the normal plan refill rate. 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, the refill rate gradually slows as usage increases. The highest same-day bursts are limited more strictly. Please see our Fair Usage Limits Policy for further information. ℹ️ Review info⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: Organization UI Review profile: ASSERTIVE Plan: Pro Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (1)
📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughnew audit subsection §5.2 added to ChangesAudit Coverage Documentation
docs file updated only; no public API changes. notes: missing regression tests for retry behavior consolidation are not present in Estimated code review effort🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~3 minutes 🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5✅ Passed checks (5 passed)
✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings. ✨ Finishing Touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
✨ Simplify code
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 |
docs(audit): record the direct-coverage wave in the audit delivery log
docs(audit): record the direct-coverage wave in the audit delivery log
Summary
docs/audits/AUDIT_2026-06-10.mdrecording the direct-coverage wave so the audit's delivery log stays the single record of what the roadmap produced.What Changed
Validation
npm run lintnpm run typechecknpm test -- test/documentation.test.tsnpm test/npm run build— not run for this markdown-only change; no code paths touchedDocs and Governance Checklist
docs/DOCUMENTATION.mdaudit policy)Risk and Rollback
Additional Notes
https://claude.ai/code/session_01XNtnkLbBiXZxfQQYLMpucB
note: greptile review for oc-chatgpt-multi-auth. cite files like
lib/foo.ts:123. confirm regression tests + windows concurrency/token redaction coverage.Greptile Summary
this doc-only PR appends #590 (spy-cascade isolation fix for
test/storage.test.ts) to the §5.2 direct-coverage wave table and threads it into the closing prose sentence. no code, tests, or config is touched.vi.restoreAllMocks()guard added to the storage suite's top-levelafterEach.Confidence Score: 5/5
additive markdown in an audit history file; no code, tests, or config touched — safe to merge
the change is two hunks in a single markdown file: one sentence extension and one table row, both accurately describing an already-merged PR (#590). nothing in the rest of the repo depends on this section.
no files require special attention
Important Files Changed
Flowchart
%%{init: {'theme': 'neutral'}}%% flowchart TD A["§5.2 Direct-Coverage Wave"] --> B["Test PRs\n#559–#575, #580, #582–#584"] A --> C["Follow-up PRs\n#576–#579, #581, #585–#590"] B --> D["17 direct suites\nreal logic, effectful seams mocked"] B --> E["2 fast-check property\ncompanions (#574, #575)"] C --> F["L3 convention doc (#576)"] C --> G["Version-drift fix (#577)"] C --> H["Dead-code sweep (#578→#554)"] C --> I["Dedup idempotence fix (#579)"] C --> J["§4.2 retry consolidation (#585)"] C --> K["§4.3 typed-error slices (#586, #587)"] C --> L["KB refreshes (#588, #589)"] C --> M["Storage spy-cascade fix (#590) ← new"]%%{init: {'theme': 'base', 'themeVariables': {"darkMode": true, "background": "#0d1117", "primaryColor": "#21262d", "primaryTextColor": "#e6edf3", "primaryBorderColor": "#8b949e", "lineColor": "#8b949e", "textColor": "#e6edf3", "edgeLabelBackground": "#161b22", "actorBkg": "#21262d", "actorBorder": "#8b949e", "actorTextColor": "#e6edf3", "actorLineColor": "#8b949e", "signalColor": "#8b949e", "signalTextColor": "#e6edf3", "noteBkgColor": "#373320", "noteBorderColor": "#d4a72c", "noteTextColor": "#f0e6c0", "labelBoxBkgColor": "#21262d", "labelBoxBorderColor": "#8b949e", "labelTextColor": "#e6edf3", "loopTextColor": "#e6edf3", "activationBkgColor": "#30363d", "activationBorderColor": "#8b949e"}}}%% flowchart TD A["§5.2 Direct-Coverage Wave"] --> B["Test PRs\n#559–#575, #580, #582–#584"] A --> C["Follow-up PRs\n#576–#579, #581, #585–#590"] B --> D["17 direct suites\nreal logic, effectful seams mocked"] B --> E["2 fast-check property\ncompanions (#574, #575)"] C --> F["L3 convention doc (#576)"] C --> G["Version-drift fix (#577)"] C --> H["Dead-code sweep (#578→#554)"] C --> I["Dedup idempotence fix (#579)"] C --> J["§4.2 retry consolidation (#585)"] C --> K["§4.3 typed-error slices (#586, #587)"] C --> L["KB refreshes (#588, #589)"] C --> M["Storage spy-cascade fix (#590) ← new"]Reviews (22): Last reviewed commit: "Merge branch 'main' into claude/audit-49..." | Re-trigger Greptile