Repository navigation
Document admission setup and server-size AIC policies - #71323
Conversation
Co-authored-by: pelikhan <4175913+pelikhan@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: pelikhan <4175913+pelikhan@users.noreply.github.com>
|
✅ PR Code Quality Reviewer completed the code quality review.
|
|
✅ Ponytail Reviewer completed successfully! Ponytail ReviewerOutcome: The agent completed and reported no action. A no-op output alone does not verify that all required work was completed or that publication was possible. Agent messages are omitted from this comment. The category uses structured run status, not interpretation of agent prose.
|
|
✅ Test Quality Sentinel completed test quality analysis. Test Quality SentinelOutcome: The agent completed and reported no action. A no-op output alone does not verify that all required work was completed or that publication was possible. Agent messages are omitted from this comment. The category uses structured run status, not interpretation of agent prose.
|
|
✅ Design Decision Gate 🏗️ completed the design decision gate check. See the comment below for the result and any generated ADR draft. Design Decision Gate 🏗️Outcome: The agent completed and reported no action. A no-op output alone does not verify that all required work was completed or that publication was possible. Agent messages are omitted from this comment. The category uses structured run status, not interpretation of agent prose.
|
|
🧠 Matt Pocock Skills Reviewer has completed the skills-based review. ✅
|
![github-actions[bot]](https://cdn.statically.io/img/avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/15368?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Review: COMMENT
No actionable blocking issues found in the changed documentation. The admission opt-in, managed-variable setup, OIDC boundaries, allowance semantics, outage behavior, and cooperative-enforcement limits are consistent with the repository specification. Static review only; tests were not run.
🔎 Code quality review by PR Code Quality Reviewer · copilot · gpt50 · ~3 AIC · ⌖ ~1 AIC · ⊞ 1.6K
Comment /review to run again
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Skills-Based Review 🧠
Applied /grill-with-docs and /codebase-design — no actionable issues found; approving.
📋 Review Notes
This is a docs-only PR (84 additions, 0 deletions, 4 files) adding admission-gate guidance to Cost Management and routing advanced-cost-control requests to it. Verified the new content against the source of truth:
on.admission: true/aw.json"admission": trueopt-in matchespkg/workflow/compiler_admission.goandisAdmissionEnabled.GH_AW_DEFAULT_ADMISSION_URL/_AUDIENCE/_ON_OUTAGEvariable names andgh aw env get/updateusage matchdocs/src/content/docs/specs/admission-service-specification.md§2.max_ai_credits/max_ai_credits_threat_detection/max_ai_credits_evalsJSON field names, the1–2147483647positive-integer constraint, and "replaces rather than adds to the configured limit" semantics all match spec §5 and tie back correctly to the existingmax-ai-creditsfrontmatter field documented just above.- The
.github/aw/token-optimization.md,.github/skills/agentic-workflows/SKILL.md, andpkg/cli/data/agentic_workflows_skill.mdrouting paragraph is duplicated verbatim in the checked-in skill file and its embeddedgo:embedcounterpart, which is intentional —TestCheckedInAgenticWorkflowsSkillMatchesGeneratedContentauto-regenerates.github/skills/agentic-workflows/SKILL.mdfrombuildAgenticWorkflowsSkillContent(), so keeping both in sync by hand here is correct and matches the existing pattern for other.github/aw/*.mdentries. - Admission-authority boundaries (cooperative, not a hard cap; no PATs/App tokens;
id-token: writescoped only to admission jobs) are stated consistently with the spec's normative language, avoiding over-promising enforcement.
No incorrect claims, broken cross-references, or inconsistent terminology found. Nothing further to request.
Positive Highlights
- ✅ Precise alignment between prose, YAML/JSON examples, and the formal admission-service specification
- ✅ Clear boundary-setting ("cooperative admission, not a hard quota") prevents readers from over-trusting the feature
- ✅ Table of server-size tiers explicitly labeled as illustrative, avoiding the appearance of a built-in gh-aw policy
🧠 Reviewed using Matt Pocock's skills by Matt Pocock Skills Reviewer · copilot · sonnet50 · ~60 AIC · ⌖ ~15 AIC · ⊞ 10.2K
Comment /matt to run again
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🟢 Approval recommended
The documentation and routing changes are consistent, with only optional wording improvements remaining.
No open issues 🎉
What changed in this PR
Documents how gh-aw admission integrates with an external policy authority for advanced cost controls, including server-size-based AI Credit allowances.
Changes:
- Explain admission opt-in, recompilation, managed defaults, authentication, and outage behavior.
- Show size-tier and component allowances while distinguishing cooperative admission from hard enforcement.
- Route authoring and optimization requests to the new guidance, keeping the embedded CLI skill synchronized.
| File | Description |
|---|---|
pkg/cli/data/agentic_workflows_skill.md |
Add cost-control routing to the embedded skill template. |
docs/src/content/docs/reference/cost-management.md |
Document admission setup, allowances, and enforcement boundaries. |
.github/skills/agentic-workflows/SKILL.md |
Route advanced cost-control requests to admission guidance. |
.github/aw/token-optimization.md |
Link optimization guidance to external admission policies. |
Review effort: Max
|
🎉 This pull request is included in a new release. Release: |
Add admission-gate guidance to Cost Management and route unsupported advanced cost-control requests to it.