fix(templates): auto-select the only active change instead of always prompting - #1468
Merged
Conversation
…prompting
The continue, update, verify, sync, and archive workflows told agents
'Do NOT guess or auto-select a change. Always let the user choose', which
contradicted their own Input line ('check if it can be inferred from
conversation context') and stalled every invocation on a question with a
single possible answer when only one change was active. Align them with
the selection pattern /opsx:apply has used since #513: use the provided
name, infer from context, auto-select a sole active change, prompt only
when ambiguous, and always announce the selection with how to override.
Bulk archive keeps its always-prompt behavior.
Closes #679
Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Contributor
|
No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉 ℹ️ Recent review info⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro Plus Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (4)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (4)
📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughWorkflow change-selection guidance now infers from context, auto-selects a sole active change, prompts only when ambiguous, and announces the selection with an override hint across archive, continue, sync, update, and verify workflows. ChangesChange selection behavior
Estimated code review effort: 3 (Moderate) | ~20 minutes Sequence Diagram(s)sequenceDiagram
participant Agent
participant WorkflowSkill
participant ConversationContext
participant OpenSpecList
Agent->>WorkflowSkill: invoke workflow without change name
WorkflowSkill->>ConversationContext: infer target change
ConversationContext-->>WorkflowSkill: target or ambiguous result
WorkflowSkill->>OpenSpecList: list filtered changes when ambiguous
OpenSpecList-->>Agent: candidate changes
Agent-->>WorkflowSkill: choose or confirm change
WorkflowSkill-->>Agent: announce Using change and override hint
Possibly related PRs
Suggested reviewers: 🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 4 | ❌ 1❌ Failed checks (1 warning)
✅ Passed checks (4 passed)
✨ Finishing Touches📝 Generate docstrings
🧪 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}
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 4
🤖 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 `@openspec/changes/add-update-workflow/design.md`:
- Around line 35-37: Update the selection flow described under
openspec/changes/add-update-workflow/design.md lines 35-37 to require announcing
“Using change: <name>” after selecting a change and documenting how an explicit
override changes selection. Add the same announcement and override behavior as
normative scenario conditions in
openspec/changes/add-update-workflow/specs/opsx-update-skill/spec.md lines 9-11,
keeping both descriptions aligned.
In `@skills/openspec-verify-change/SKILL.md`:
- Line 31: Update the override hint in the announcement text to use the public
`/opsx:verify <other>` command instead of `/openspec-verify-change <other>`,
while preserving the existing change-name announcement.
In `@src/core/templates/workflows/continue-change.ts`:
- Around line 22-37: Update the change-selection logic to inspect and count
active candidates before choosing: use the named or context-inferred change when
available, auto-select the sole active candidate, and prompt only when multiple
active candidates remain; remove unconditional prompt wording and retain the
required selection announcement and override guidance. Apply this logic at
src/core/templates/workflows/continue-change.ts lines 22-37 and 140-155, and
skills/openspec-verify-change/SKILL.md lines 20-25, with identical behavior at
each site.
In `@src/core/templates/workflows/sync-specs.ts`:
- Around line 24-33: Filter active changes by each workflow’s eligibility
criteria before resolving selection ambiguity: sync-specs flows in
src/core/templates/workflows/sync-specs.ts at lines 24-33 and 234-243 must use
only changes with delta specs, while verify-change flows in
src/core/templates/workflows/verify-change.ts at lines 22-33 and 197-208 must
use only changes with implementation tasks. Auto-select one eligible candidate,
prompt for multiple, and report no eligible candidate for none; update
skills/openspec-sync-specs/SKILL.md lines 22-31 to preserve the same sync
selection contract.
🪄 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: Path: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro Plus
Run ID: 89a12ef2-596d-4ba6-9fb3-672a9acbdef5
📒 Files selected for processing (17)
.changeset/single-change-autoselect.mdopenspec/changes/add-update-workflow/design.mdopenspec/changes/add-update-workflow/specs/opsx-update-skill/spec.mdopenspec/specs/opsx-archive-skill/spec.mdopenspec/specs/opsx-verify-skill/spec.mdopenspec/specs/specs-sync-skill/spec.mdskills/openspec-archive-change/SKILL.mdskills/openspec-continue-change/SKILL.mdskills/openspec-sync-specs/SKILL.mdskills/openspec-update-change/SKILL.mdskills/openspec-verify-change/SKILL.mdsrc/core/templates/workflows/archive-change.tssrc/core/templates/workflows/continue-change.tssrc/core/templates/workflows/sync-specs.tssrc/core/templates/workflows/update-change.tssrc/core/templates/workflows/verify-change.tstest/core/templates/skill-templates-parity.test.ts
…ction contract CodeRabbit noted the add-update-workflow delta spec and design sketch adopted auto-selection without the 'Using change: <name>' announcement the other selection contracts require. Add the same announce-and-override clause so the update skill's contract matches the template it describes. Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
alfred-openspec
previously approved these changes
Jul 28, 2026
alfred-openspec
left a comment
alfred-openspec
left a comment
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Reviewed at 556560a. Continue, update, verify, sync, and archive now match apply selection semantics: explicit name, context inference, sole-active-change auto-selection, ambiguity prompt, and announced override; bulk archive remains interactive. 19 focused tests, strict validation, all-tool generation with no stale guardrail, the 2,301-test cross-platform suite, CodeQL, audit, dependency review, and release tracking all pass.
github-merge-queue
Bot
removed this pull request from the merge queue due to a conflict with the base branch
Jul 28, 2026
…oselect # Conflicts: # test/core/templates/skill-templates-parity.test.ts
alfred-openspec
approved these changes
Jul 28, 2026
alfred-openspec
left a comment
alfred-openspec
left a comment
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Reviewed at 587659b. The main merge preserves the explicit/context/sole-active/ambiguous selection ladder, announced override behavior, and bulk archive’s interactive contract while incorporating the newer sync-subset and YAML safeguards. Build, lint, 26 focused parity/template tests, strict validation of all 36 specs and add-update-workflow, generated-skill parity, all-tool generation, the cross-platform suite, CodeQL, audit, dependency review, and release tracking all pass.
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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
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.
Closes #679
Status: LGTM — full suite green (2,301 tests), specs validated, e2e-inspected generated output, three independent adversarial reviews run and their one finding fixed.
What was wrong: Invoking
/opsx:continue(or update, verify, sync, archive) without a change name always stalled on "which change?" — even when only one active change existed, so there was only one possible answer. The templates' step 1 said "Do NOT guess or auto-select a change. Always let the user choose," which also contradicted their own Input line ("check if it can be inferred from conversation context"). #679 describes exactly this: fire the command, walk away, come back to find nothing happened. Meanwhile/opsx:applyhas inferred and auto-selected since #513.How it was fixed: The five workflows now use apply's exact selection step: use the provided name → infer from conversation context → auto-select when exactly one active change exists → prompt only when genuinely ambiguous — and always announce
Using change: <name>with how to override. Each workflow keeps its own presentation hints for the prompt path (recent-first options for continue/update, task-bearing changes for verify, delta-bearing changes for sync, active changes for archive). Bulk archive intentionally keeps its always-prompt behavior (multi-select is inherently interactive). Main specs for the archive/verify/sync skills and the activeadd-update-workflowchange were updated in the same commit, plus a changeset.Proof it works:
pnpm vitest run: 113 files, 2,301 tests pass (parity hashes and committedskills/*/SKILL.mdregenerated).openspec validate --specs --allandopenspec validate add-update-workflowpass (the oneschema-alias-supportfailure is pre-existing and identical on clean main).openspec init --tools claude,codexin a fresh project — no generated file retains the old guardrail; the new selection step renders correctly in both skills and commands.openspec archive <name>without--yesalready does, and archive's completion/sync confirmation gates are untouched.Notes: Guidance-only — no CLI code paths change; users pick the new prompts up via
openspec update.#663looks adjacent but is a different defect (agent running ahead of/opsx:continue), so it is not claimed here.🤖 Generated with Claude Code
Summary by CodeRabbit
Behavior Improvements
Documentation / Tests