mirror of
https://github.com/qodo-ai/pr-agent.git
synced 2025-07-04 12:50:38 +08:00
@ -108,7 +108,7 @@ If you prefer to have the file summaries appear in the "Files changed" tab on ev
|
||||
|
||||
{width=512}
|
||||
|
||||
- `true`: A collapsable file comment with changes title and a changes summary for each file in the PR.
|
||||
- `true`: A collapsible file comment with changes title and a changes summary for each file in the PR.
|
||||
|
||||
{width=512}
|
||||
|
||||
|
@ -157,7 +157,7 @@ the tool can automatically approve the PR when the user checks the self-review c
|
||||
|
||||
!!! tip "Extra instructions"
|
||||
|
||||
Extra instructions are very important for the `imrpove` tool, since they enable you to guide the model to suggestions that are more relevant to the specific needs of the project.
|
||||
Extra instructions are very important for the `improve` tool, since they enable you to guide the model to suggestions that are more relevant to the specific needs of the project.
|
||||
|
||||
Be specific, clear, and concise in the instructions. With extra instructions, you are the prompter. Specify relevant aspects that you want the model to focus on.
|
||||
|
||||
@ -190,6 +190,6 @@ the tool can automatically approve the PR when the user checks the self-review c
|
||||
- Only if the `Category` header is relevant, the user should move to the summarized suggestion description
|
||||
- Only if the summarized suggestion description is relevant, the user should click on the collapsible, to read the full suggestion description with a code preview example.
|
||||
|
||||
In addition, we recommend to use the `exra_instructions` field to guide the model to suggestions that are more relevant to the specific needs of the project.
|
||||
In addition, we recommend to use the `extra_instructions` field to guide the model to suggestions that are more relevant to the specific needs of the project.
|
||||
<br>
|
||||
Consider also trying the [Custom Prompt Tool](./custom_prompt.md) 💎, that will **only** propose code suggestions that follow specific guidelines defined by user.
|
||||
|
@ -235,7 +235,7 @@ class BitbucketProvider(GitProvider):
|
||||
except Exception as e:
|
||||
get_logger().exception(f"Failed to remove comment, error: {e}")
|
||||
|
||||
# funtion to create_inline_comment
|
||||
# function to create_inline_comment
|
||||
def create_inline_comment(self, body: str, relevant_file: str, relevant_line_in_file: str, absolute_position: int = None):
|
||||
position, absolute_position = find_line_number_of_relevant_line_in_file(self.get_diff_files(),
|
||||
relevant_file.strip('`'),
|
||||
|
@ -211,7 +211,7 @@ class BitbucketServerProvider(GitProvider):
|
||||
def remove_comment(self, comment):
|
||||
pass
|
||||
|
||||
# funtion to create_inline_comment
|
||||
# function to create_inline_comment
|
||||
def create_inline_comment(self, body: str, relevant_file: str, relevant_line_in_file: str,
|
||||
absolute_position: int = None):
|
||||
|
||||
|
@ -107,7 +107,7 @@ class GithubProvider(GitProvider):
|
||||
git_files = context.get("git_files", None)
|
||||
if git_files:
|
||||
return git_files
|
||||
self.git_files = list(self.pr.get_files()) # 'list' to hanlde pagination
|
||||
self.git_files = list(self.pr.get_files()) # 'list' to handle pagination
|
||||
context["git_files"] = self.git_files
|
||||
return self.git_files
|
||||
except Exception:
|
||||
|
@ -131,7 +131,7 @@ async def handle_webhook(background_tasks: BackgroundTasks, request: Request):
|
||||
content=json.dumps({"message": "Internal server error"}),
|
||||
)
|
||||
return JSONResponse(
|
||||
status_code=status.HTTP_202_ACCEPTED, content=jsonable_encoder({"message": "webhook triggerd successfully"})
|
||||
status_code=status.HTTP_202_ACCEPTED, content=jsonable_encoder({"message": "webhook triggered successfully"})
|
||||
)
|
||||
|
||||
@router.get("/")
|
||||
|
@ -40,8 +40,8 @@ After that, rank each response. Criterions to rank each response:
|
||||
- How well does the response follow the specific task instructions and requirements?
|
||||
- How well does the response analyze and understand the PR code diff?
|
||||
- How well will a person perceive it as a good response that correctly addresses the task?
|
||||
- How well does the reponse prioritize key feedback, related to the task instructions, that a human reader seeing that feedback would also consider as important?
|
||||
- Don't neccessarily rank higher a response that is longer. A shorter response might be better if it is more concise, and still addresses the task better.
|
||||
- How well does the response prioritize key feedback, related to the task instructions, that a human reader seeing that feedback would also consider as important?
|
||||
- Don't necessarily rank higher a response that is longer. A shorter response might be better if it is more concise, and still addresses the task better.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
The output must be a YAML object equivalent to type $PRRankRespones, according to the following Pydantic definitions:
|
||||
|
@ -73,7 +73,7 @@ class Review(BaseModel):
|
||||
security_concerns: str = Field(description="does this PR code introduce possible vulnerabilities such as exposure of sensitive information (e.g., API keys, secrets, passwords), or security concerns like SQL injection, XSS, CSRF, and others ? Answer 'No' if there are no possible issues. If there are security concerns or issues, start your answer with a short header, such as: 'Sensitive information exposure: ...', 'SQL injection: ...' etc. Explain your answer. Be specific and give examples if possible")
|
||||
{%- endif %}
|
||||
{%- if require_can_be_split_review %}
|
||||
can_be_split: List[SubPR] = Field(min_items=0, max_items=3, description="Can this PR, which contains {{ num_pr_files }} changed files in total, be divided into smaller sub-PRs with distinct tasks that can be reviewed and merged independently, regardless of the order ? Make sure that the sub-PRs are indeed independent, with no code dependencies between them, and that each sub-PR represent a meaningfull independent task. Output an empty list if the PR code does not needd to be split.")
|
||||
can_be_split: List[SubPR] = Field(min_items=0, max_items=3, description="Can this PR, which contains {{ num_pr_files }} changed files in total, be divided into smaller sub-PRs with distinct tasks that can be reviewed and merged independently, regardless of the order ? Make sure that the sub-PRs are indeed independent, with no code dependencies between them, and that each sub-PR represent a meaningful independent task. Output an empty list if the PR code does not need to be split.")
|
||||
{%- endif %}
|
||||
{%- if num_code_suggestions > 0 %}
|
||||
|
||||
|
Reference in New Issue
Block a user