Commit graph

2 commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Jesper Schulz-Wedde
186d8a1314
Complete AL review knowledge readiness (#108)
Some checks failed
Validate knowledge index / validate-index (push) Has been cancelled
Validate AL review fixtures / validate-review-fixtures (push) Has been cancelled
Validate frontmatter and structure / validate (push) Has been cancelled
* Complete AL review knowledge readiness

Fill telemetry and Query coverage, strengthen thin review domains, correct audited content defects, and add deterministic cheap-model evaluation and reference-integrity safeguards.

Co-authored-by: Copilot App <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>

Copilot-Session: 9825b012-e653-496a-9310-c1f4b6f8ac27

* Generalize review fixture discovery

Derive smoke cases from the leaf, domain, and paired-sample conventions so new leaves require no scoring-contract changes. Keep only exceptional selection/context overrides and fail when retrieval metadata cannot rank the selected article.

Co-authored-by: Copilot App <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>

Copilot-Session: 9825b012-e653-496a-9310-c1f4b6f8ac27

* Preserve published field IDs in sample

Keep the existing Email and Contact Email field IDs unchanged, clarify that the sample represents an independent baseline, and use a local breaking-change rule for the generic smoke evaluation.

Co-authored-by: Copilot App <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>

Copilot-Session: 9825b012-e653-496a-9310-c1f4b6f8ac27

* Clarify published field identity rules

State explicitly that a published field keeps its ID, name, and type while a replacement is added as a separate field under an unused ID.

Co-authored-by: Copilot App <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>

Copilot-Session: 9825b012-e653-496a-9310-c1f4b6f8ac27

* Align field obsoletion sample baselines

Use Email field ID 3 as the shared baseline so the bad example demonstrates a same-ID rename while the good example retains the original field and adds a separate replacement.

Co-authored-by: Copilot App <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>

Copilot-Session: 9825b012-e653-496a-9310-c1f4b6f8ac27

---------

Co-authored-by: Jesper Schulz-Wedde <jesper.schulzwedde@microsoft.com>
2026-07-15 10:55:25 +02:00
Jesper Schulz-Wedde
b11f3ec506 Improve PR-review parity: suggestion blocks, missing KB articles, privacy cross-ref
Adds the contract field, skill instructions, and two knowledge articles
that BCAppsBCQuality's PR-review agent needs to match (and exceed) the
coverage of the embedded review agent in BCAppsCampAIRHack:

skills/do.md
- New optional findings[].suggested-code field. Documents what it MUST
  contain (a literal line-replacement payload) and when to emit it.

microsoft/skills/review/al-code-review.md
- Instructs both the agent self-review pass and rolled-up sub-skill
  findings to populate suggested-code when the fix is mechanical.
- Lists examples (dead code removal, Count > 0 -> IsEmpty, object-scope
  Label) that map to issues observed in the parity comparison.

microsoft/knowledge/style/telemetry-event-id-stable-unique.{md,bad.al,good.al}
- New knowledge article: telemetry event IDs must be stable, unique,
  and non-placeholder. Closes a gap surfaced by the parity comparison.

microsoft/knowledge/style/labels-declared-at-object-scope.{md,bad.al,good.al}
- New knowledge article: Labels must live in the object-level var
  block, not in procedure-local var blocks. Closes the second gap.

microsoft/knowledge/privacy/no-pii-in-telemetry-message-string.md
- Adds an explicit note that changing DataClassification alone does not
  make embedding PII into the message string acceptable, plus links to
  the two adjacent privacy articles. Resolves the privacy advice the
  parity comparison flagged as ambiguous.

Co-authored-by: Copilot <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
2026-05-27 15:45:49 +02:00