Disclose Copilot authorship on expert reviewer comments#8819
Open
Evangelink wants to merge 2 commits into
Open
Disclose Copilot authorship on expert reviewer comments#8819Evangelink wants to merge 2 commits into
Evangelink wants to merge 2 commits into
Conversation
The expert-reviewer agent posts reviews via gh-aw safe-output tools that use a maintainer's PAT (COPILOT_GITHUB_TOKEN), so every comment appears under that maintainer's avatar and username. Readers currently have no way to tell the content was authored by Copilot rather than the human whose account they see. Add a mandatory attribution banner at the top of every add_comment body and every submit_pull_request_review body, with a link back to the generating workflow run so anyone can audit it. The orchestrator now forwards the workflow run URL to the subagent so the banner link resolves. Inline review comments still get no per-comment footer: they are bundled into the Wave 4 review whose body already carries the banner, and gh-aw's formatting shared fragment already appends an automatic attribution footer that we should not duplicate. Co-authored-by: Copilot <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull request overview
This PR improves transparency for the repository’s “expert-reviewer” agentic workflow by requiring an explicit “authored by GitHub Copilot” disclosure in posted PR comments and review bodies, clarifying that content is published via a maintainer PAT and may otherwise be mistaken for human-written feedback.
Changes:
- Added a mandatory Copilot attribution banner (with a workflow-run URL placeholder) to the expert reviewer agent definition and required it at the start of
add_commentandsubmit_pull_request_reviewbodies. - Clarified that inline comments (
create_pull_request_review_comment) should not add per-comment attribution, since they’re bundled into the final review and gh-aw already appends its own footer attribution. - Updated the shared review workflow instructions to forward the workflow run URL into the subagent prompt so it can populate the banner link.
Show a summary per file
| File | Description |
|---|---|
| .github/workflows/shared/review-shared.md | Instructs the orchestrator to pass the workflow run URL to the expert-reviewer subagent so it can link the disclosure banner to the originating run. |
| .github/agents/expert-reviewer.agent.md | Defines the required Copilot attribution banner and enforces its inclusion at the start of posted top-level comments and the submitted review body. |
Copilot's findings
- Files reviewed: 2/2 changed files
- Comments generated: 2
Two clarifications: - expert-reviewer.agent.md: spell out a full fallback banner variant for the case where the orchestrator does not supply a workflow run URL, instead of telling the agent to `omit the parenthesized link'' (which would have left dangling markdown like `[Expert Code Review workflow]()`). The fallback drops the entire `Generated by ...'' sentence so the rendered markdown stays valid. - shared/review-shared.md: tighten the rationale for forwarding the workflow run URL. The URL is needed for the banner that goes on add_comment and submit_pull_request_review bodies only; inline create_pull_request_review_comment bodies inherit the banner from the bundled review and do not carry it themselves. Co-authored-by: Copilot <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
Member
Author
|
Addressed both review comments in 3ed7f9f:
Strict compile still clean: |
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
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.
What & why
The
expert-revieweragentic workflow posts reviews via gh-aw safe-output tools that use a maintainer's PAT (COPILOT_GITHUB_TOKEN). As a result, everyadd_comment,create_pull_request_review_comment, andsubmit_pull_request_reviewcall shows the maintainer's avatar and username — with no way for readers to tell the content was authored by Copilot rather than by the human whose account they see.This PR adds an explicit disclosure so the authorship is clear.
Change
.github/agents/expert-reviewer.agent.md## Copilot Attribution Bannersection defining the verbatim banner with a<workflow-run-url>placeholder.add_comment) and Wave 4 step 6 (submit_pull_request_review) updated to require the banner at the top of each body. Both example bodies in step 6 now show the banner.shared/formatting.mdalready appends an automatic footer that we should not duplicate..github/workflows/shared/review-shared.md## Instructions: the orchestrator now forwards the workflow run URL (${{ github.server_url }}/${{ github.repository }}/actions/runs/${{ github.run_id }}) to the subagent prompt and references the new banner section. Without this forwarding, the subagent (a backgroundtask) has no access to the parent<github-context>block and could not populate the link.Resulting banner
Note
🤖 Automated review by GitHub Copilot. Posted via a maintainer's GitHub token, so it appears under their account — the account owner did not write or approve this content personally. Generated by the Expert Code Review workflow. To request a follow-up action, reply by tagging
@copilotdirectly.Validation
gh aw compile --strict review.agent review-on-open.agent review-after-autofix.agent→ 3 workflow(s), 0 errors, 0 warnings.shared/review-shared.mdis pulled in via{{#runtime-import}}rather than inlined. Local strict-compile did surface unrelated SHA-pin regressions in the lock files (likely a local compiler-version artifact) — those were reverted to keep this PR scoped to the disclosure change.