DRAFT: T073: the composed declarations (ARC-Q2 (a)): every declared entry runs composed, the rail files get the host's rail (plan 038)

[brettheap]

Lane: openxfactory-4 (openXfactory-4-openDox_extraction)
Authored by lane openXfactory-3, delegated by lane openxfactory-4 (#656 6016678145)

Arc: neutral-product-standalone-operability

T073 [US3] [oXc]: the composed declarations (ARC-Q2 (a))

This is plan 038's T073, in openxFactory's specs/038-opendox-document-tool-self-maintenance/tasks.md (opensoft/openxFactory#1245).

This PR is a DRAFT. Its After set, as of head 81796156:

• still open: T029 (DRAFT: T029, U-9: the composed run, permanent: composed.yml and its openxFactory pin (plan 038) #44), which waits on lane 4's T028. It is the only one.
• landed:
  • T005 (T005: batch Q, the release-2 answers' amendments in #1144 (plan 038) openxFactory#1248, batch Q);
  • T020 (T020, U-1: the governed host for the governed suites that drive the gate verbs (plan 038, P4F-5) #39), T024 (T024, U-5: the H-1 shim, ideation_dashboard.session_git answers with opendox.session_git (plan 038, CF-3) #38), T023 (T023, U-4: swb-session.js spells the model's two names at its call sites again (plan 038) #42), T021 (T021, U-2: the gate console's schemas, each read where its owner keeps it, nothing vendored (plan 038, P4F-4) #40), T026 (T026, U-7: the allow-list for 12.5's governed suites, with R-1 (a)'s span kind (plan 038, H-2) #43), and T021's follow-on (T021 follow-on: the cyclic-schema test asserts only that GateRefused escapes (jsonschema>=4.18) #55);
  • T022 (T022, U-3: the runbook placed from the composed tree, git-ignored, nothing vendored (plan 038, P4F-3) #41, as aefd1091), whose fix commit dc879beb answers r4196244480 below;
  • the repair slices T095 (T095: the composed harness for the declared integration tests (plan 038, T094's R2-INV-R9) #46), T096 (T096: the contract family's tests read the composed farm where the run is composed (plan 038, T094's R2-INV-R9, CS) #53, with its follow-on T096 follow-on: the validator-root comment names the openxdox package's contracts/ #56), T097 (T097, display harnesses (B): display.js beside the copied module, S7's role keys and the served words (plan 038) #50), T098 (T098: display harnesses (A), and the server's scope labels from the served facet (plan 038, T094's R2-INV-R9) #51), T099 (T099: test_renderer.py, the renderer's 21 composed reds (DJ + VR, HH, CP, PI) (plan 038) #47), T100 (T100: the repo selector's declared tests, respelled to the carve (plan 038, T094's map R2-INV-R9) #54), T101 (T101: the doxBench texts read the carved and composed homes (plan 038; T094's map R2-INV-R9) #48), T102 (T102: the small texts, seven tests respelled to the carve's homes and the arc's rulings (plan 038, T094's R2-INV-R9) #52), T103 (T103: the T074 files' composed reds, respelled to their carved homes and the composed tree (plan 038, T094's R2-INV-R9) #49) and T104 (openDox-code#94).

The landed batch Q text of F9.1 is identical to the text this PR implements against (94d6e7c7), as diffed. Its points are met as follows:

• every file of the declaration is a declared integration test;
• each entry keeps its reason, and the declaration keeps its count;
• the declaration names the commit by naming tests/composed_host_pin.yaml;
• the workflow runs every entry (steps 5 and 5a);
• the three checks stand;
• the lone run reports under batch B's title line.

It is branched from #44, which carries T029 until it lands. #44's newer heads and main are merged in, never rebased. The latest merge brought main 9720925e in at 81796156. It conflicted only in T022's two files, scripts/composed_placements.py and tests/test_composed_placements.py, which this branch carried from #41 through #44, and it kept main's landed side for both. tests/declared_exclusion.yaml merged clean, with T101's entry edits beside T073's header and open_until. This PR's own commits touch only T073's five files:

• the three plan 038 names;

• tests/test_declared_rail_registration.py, which the holder added under ruling (a) (openDox + openXdox: two open-source layers, an installable app with users, projects and a database; domain descendants pin openXdox (Brett's ruling 2026-09-04) openxFactory#656, question 6020683941);

• tests/test_host_plane.py, for one farm case. That case is the fix for Copilot r4201411760 on T095: the composed harness for the declared integration tests (plan 038, T094's R2-INV-R9) #46, which rides T073 by the holder's r4201421102 (under #656 5988818366).

• Realizes: requirement 9 for openXdox-code, by declaration. That is #1144's F9.1 as batch Q amends it. F9.1 is already [x], so its re-run is quoted, not ticked.

• Falsifier: F9.1 as batch Q amends it, and the composed workflow green.

• Ruled:

  • ARC-Q2 (a) (openDox + openXdox: two open-source layers, an installable app with users, projects and a database; domain descendants pin openXdox (Brett's ruling 2026-09-04) openxFactory#656 comment 6003918488, "Composed CI in openXdox-code (Recommended)");
  • the holder's T073 ruling (#656 comment 6016982816): option (a), and the open_until wording.

  It answers lane 3's question 6016925160.

• Decisions: the task names none beyond its Ruled line.

What changes

• tests/declared_exclusion.yaml (first in its chain, then T074):

  • A header section declares EVERY entry a declared integration test. .github/workflows/composed.yml runs it, composed, at the ONE openxFactory commit tests/composed_host_pin.yaml names: 12.5's governed suites in step 5, every other entry in step 5a, each file alone. By that declaration requirement 9 closes for openXdox-code (batch Q). A lone run still reports the declaration under batch B's title line.

  • The count (66), every entry, and each reason's id, reason and ruled are byte-identical, checked against DRAFT: T029, U-9: the composed run, permanent: composed.yml and its openxFactory pin (plan 038) #44's file.

  • open_until, as ruled:

    • doc_health keeps its words and gains "; run composed, as a declared integration test, by .github/workflows/composed.yml at the openxFactory commit tests/composed_host_pin.yaml names (ARC-Q2 (a), openxFactory#656 comment 6003918488)";
    • status-exemption-rail and openxfactory-contracts read "never in a lone checkout: a declared integration test, run composed by .github/workflows/composed.yml at the openxFactory commit tests/composed_host_pin.yaml names (ARC-Q2 (a), openxFactory#656 comment 6003918488)".

    Every lone run prints these.

  • No commit id is written outside the pin file, so a pin advance (T030, T064, T075) needs no edit here.

• tests/conftest.py (third: T020 → T021 → T073 → T074). One self-contained block, appended after T095's composed harness, so this branch's diff against main is a pure append there. No line of T020, T021, T026 or T095 is touched, except the one fix below that the holder assigned to T073.

  • The fix for Copilot r4201411760 on T095: the composed harness for the declared integration tests (plan 038, T094's R2-INV-R9) #46 (holder r4201421102). T095's contracts farm (build_contracts_farm) skipped every opendox-snapshot-* example whichever owner kept it. It now skips only openDox-spec's (CONTRACT_EXAMPLE_LEFT_OUT_OWNER = "opendox_spec"), so a same-prefix example from openxFactory or openXdox-spec is linked like any other. As the holder measured, none exists today, so the composed farm is unchanged.
  • Where the run is composed, each test of a file the declaration names under status-exemption-rail runs with the rail openxFactory's host registers. That rail is the register_status_exemption row of opendox_host.seams(), the table the host's process start registers from, read off it rather than named.
  • It is registered for the test and taken back after it, as U-1 registers the governed host. Where the run is not composed, nothing is registered, so the declaration's lone evidence is unchanged.

• .github/workflows/composed.yml (second: T029 → T073 → T074). Step 5a runs every declared entry outside 12.5's governed set, composed in step 5's form and each file alone, and tabulates the results as step 5 does. It refuses an entry that has a report from neither step ("dropped from both suites"). The header's list gains 5a. Nothing else of T029's is changed.

• tests/test_host_plane.py (the fifth file, one case): test_the_farm_leaves_out_only_opendox_specs_snapshot_examples, beside T095's farm cases. A same-prefix example from openxFactory and one from openXdox-spec are linked, and openDox-spec's two are not.

• tests/test_declared_rail_registration.py (new, the fourth file, holder ruling (a) on question 6020683941; fix-now for Copilot r4197793290). It holds 5 cases with stand-in rails, so they run in the lone required check:

  • an earlier host rail is dropped for the block and put back after;
  • no rail is left behind where none was registered;
  • openDox's own default is not put back;
  • the seam is put back when the block fails;
  • the rail suites are the declaration's rail entries.

  Each case leaves openDox's seam as it found it.

Where the two lists come from

• R1Q24's 3 rail files are tests/test_doxbench_abstract_envelope.py, tests/test_doxbench_packet.py and tests/test_doxbench_turns.py. Sources:
  • plan 034's clarify-questions.md:920-926 (R1Q24 (a), ruled 5850003126);
  • the staged topic ideation/staging/doc-health-direction-arc/doc-health-direction-arc.md:180-187;
  • the declaration's own status-exemption-rail entries.
• The 5 contracts files are tests/test_doxbench_blank_reason.py, tests/test_project_action_contracts.py, tests/test_project_schema_election.py, tests/test_validate_ideation_dashboard_contracts.py and tests/test_wheel_action_contracts.py. Sources:
  • plan 034's clarify-questions.md:929-944: R1Q24's four, and the eighth file T006 found;
  • the staged topic :188-196;
  • the declaration's openxfactory-contracts entries.

(openxFactory at 92010d3e.)

The falsifier, measured

Environment. openXdox-code at this branch, openDox-code dede32b4 installed by CI's command, openxFactory 92010d3e, which tests/composed_host_pin.yaml names, with openDox, openXdox and openXwallet initialized recursively. The colour variables were unset, TERM=dumb, and TMPDIR was short.

At head 81796156 (after merging main 9720925e):

• lone CI form: selected 1201, passed 1197, skipped 4, 0 failed, both locally and in CI's validate (run 37808162995). That meets the pins (≥ 1099, ≥ 1095, == 4).
• composed, in CI (runs 37808162815 and 37808186218, which agree):
  • step 5 reads 821 passed, 17 failed, 4 errors: 21 red, unchanged from cebf3452;
  • step 5a reads 1950 passed, 2 failed, 7 errors, 2 skipped: 9 red, down from 324;
  • no entry is NOT RUN by either step;
  • the oracle reads ok: 8 protected edit(s), each entered and holding, and the help tree passes.
• composed, locally, each file alone:
  • the three rail files read 57, 86 and 183 passed, so the carve-residue node below is gone;
  • the four contracts files read 11, 13, 33 and 18 passed;
  • tests/test_declared_rail_registration.py reads 5 passed, and tests/test_host_plane.py 29;
  • the five files that are red in CI reproduce locally with the same counts.
• The 30 reds, none in T073's files:
  • 26 are node-harness ERR_MODULE_NOT_FOUND: each test copies openDox's staging-workbench-model.js (or model.js) alone into a temporary directory, and the copy cannot find the ./display.js it imports;
  • 3 assert on the same workbench module or its view (test_staging_workbench_view_has_no_write_path, the pure model "must stay import-free", and test_only_the_plane_postures_still_stand_as_an_inline_note);
  • 1 is tests/test_renderer.py::test_every_constructed_doxbench_class_has_a_styles_rule, where doxchat-no-model and doxchat-untrusted have no styles.css rule.
• Where the reds sit:
  • step 5's 21 are all tests/test_staging_workbench.py, which is T023 to T028's;
  • step 5a's 9 are tests/test_doxbench_save.py (3), tests/test_doxbench_transport.py (4), tests/test_renderer.py (1) and tests/test_session_document_ownership.py (1). They remain after T095 to T104 landed, so they are with the holder for routing (lane 3's log, 2026-10-08).

At head cebf3452 (after merging main e2340bb6):

• lone CI form: selected 1185, passed 1181, skipped 4, 0 failed, both locally and in CI's validate. That meets the pins (≥ 1099, ≥ 1095, == 4).
• composed, in CI: step 5 reads 821 passed, 17 failed, 4 errors: 21 red, and step 5a reads 1476 passed, 245 failed, 79 errors, 3 skipped: 324 red. The oracle reads ok: 8 protected edit(s), each entered and holding, and the help tree passes. T095 and the landed 12.5 repairs moved both counts down, and the rest belong to the open slices.
• composed, locally: the three rail files read 325 passed and 1 failed (the mapped carve-residue node). tests/test_declared_rail_registration.py and tests/test_host_plane.py are green.

The measurements below were taken at the earlier heads they name.

F9.1 (lone), in validate's form, python -m pytest -q --deselect "$LEFT_OUT":

1121 passed, 4 skipped, 1 deselected in 80.43s (0:01:20)
triple: selected=1125 passed=1121 skipped=4 failures=0 errors=0
=================== open extraction: the declared exclusion ====================
declared exclusion: 66 files, listed in tests/declared_exclusion.yaml and left out of this run. It is an OPEN extraction: each file runs again once its reason is cleared.

The run meets validate's pins (selected ≥ 1099, passed ≥ 1095, skipped == 4). tests/test_declared_exclusion.py, inside that run, still holds each listed file to its reason, alone.

F9.1's own command block (a fresh mktemp -d venv, pip install ".[test]", batch J's --deselect, and the two validate.yml assertions), at bf8f5b74, whose tree b09c1384 equals byte for byte:

1121 passed, 4 skipped, 1 deselected in 75.24s (0:01:15)
F9.1 EXIT 0

The composed workflow, run locally step by step as the runner runs it, at the same openxFactory pin as #44, and at #44's head for comparison:

step	#44 (local)	this PR (local)	this PR, CI at b09c1384
5, 12.5's 16 governed suites	760 passed, 78 failed, 4 errors: 82 red	the same 82 red nodes, node for node (diffed)	the same 82, node for node
5a, the declaration's other 51 entries	(no such step)	1356 passed, 366 failed, 79 errors, 2 skipped: 445 red	1357 passed, 364 failed, 79 errors, 3 skipped: 443 red
6, the oracle	ok: 3 protected edit(s), each entered and holding	the same	the same (10 arc landings since ARC_BASE)
7, the help tree	1 passed	the same	the same

CI's 443 are the local 445 less two nodes that depend on the environment:

• tests/test_repo_root_guard.py::test_the_refusal_names_the_resolved_path_what_it_wanted_and_a_correct_shape trips locally on the local checkout's path;
• tests/test_wheel_model.py::test_landed_parses_a_real_archived_change_delta is a node-harness failure locally, and CI reads one more skip.

CI is the authority for T094's map.

So the composed workflow is not yet green, as the holder's ruling foresaw. Step 5a's 445 are exactly the reds lane 3 mapped in question 6016925160:

class	red
the rail files' one carve-residue node, tests/test_doxbench_packet.py::test_the_status_read_agrees_with_the_repositorys_own_corpus_reader (assert 2 > 10: it reads this checkout's docs/)	1
the 5 contracts files (they take Path(__file__).parents[2] for openxFactory's root, which no composed placement serves)	75
33 of the 43 other doc_health files: carve residue (node harness ERR_MODULE_NOT_FOUND 138, pre-carve paths, moved names, unregistered routes)	369

T094 (R2-INV-R9) maps them, and T095 onward repair them, both in lane 3. Step 5 is T023 to T028's.

The rail, red first and then green (the 3 rail files, each alone):

run	result
composed, without this block (#44's head)	236 passed, 90 failed; all 90 are StatusExemptionNotRegistered or the AttributeError raised from it
composed, with it	325 passed, 1 failed; the one is the carve-residue node above, a doc_health case when the file runs alone
lone, with it	236 passed, 90 failed, every one the rail's refusal, unchanged

So the declaration's lone evidence still holds.

Mutants

Every mutant was run against the step or block it targets. Each one stays valid code, and each is killed.

Step 5a: 7 of 7 killed. The step's two Python blocks were extracted from this workflow and driven against crafted reports. As written, the split and 5 cases are right. The mutants:

• S1, the split keeps the governed entries;
• S2, the split keeps only the governed entries;
• M1, no check that every entry was run, killed by "an entry with no report from either step" and "a governed entry whose step-5 report is missing";
• M2, only step 5a's reports count as run;
• M3, the step exits 0 whatever it read;
• M4, a failed case is not red;
• M5, a collection error is not red.

The tests/conftest.py rail block: 7 of 7 killed. These ran in a throwaway worktree. Two probe test files were used there only, never committed.

mutant	killed by
C1, never registers	the composed rail file
C2, the list is read from the wrong reason	the composed rail file; tests/test_declared_rail_registration.py (lone)
C3, the wrong row of the host's seam table	the composed rail file: 57 errors
C4, a rail registered in a lone checkout too	tests/test_declared_exclusion.py's alone check for the rail entry
C5, the rail is not taken back after the test	tests/test_declared_rail_registration.py (lone), committed at 26fe63e7
C6, a host's earlier rail is not put back	tests/test_declared_rail_registration.py (lone), committed at 26fe63e7
C7, the earlier rail is not dropped before the test	tests/test_declared_rail_registration.py (lone), committed at 26fe63e7

The farm fix (r4201411760): red first, then green, 3 of 3 mutants killed. In tests/test_host_plane.py -k farm:

• main's owner-wide line (M0) turns the new case red;
• scoping the exclusion to the wrong owner (M1) is killed by both farm cases;
• dropping the exclusion (M2) is killed by both farm cases;
• as written, 5 passed.

Re-run at 81796156: M0 turns 1 case red, M1 2 and M2 2. Restored, it reads 5 passed.

C1, re-run at 81796156 (the fixture's rail set to none), turns the three composed rail files red: tests/test_doxbench_packet.py 57 failed, tests/test_doxbench_turns.py 32 and tests/test_doxbench_abstract_envelope.py 1. As written, they are green.

So all 7 are killed by committed tests in CI: C1 and C3 by the composed run of the rail files, C4 by tests/test_declared_exclusion.py, and C2, C5, C6 and C7 by tests/test_declared_rail_registration.py in the lone required check. Measured in a throwaway worktree, the new file kills C2, C5, C6 and C7, and passes as written: 5 passed, both lone and composed.

CI and Copilot at the head

CI at 81796156:

• validate: success (run 37808162995), triple: selected=1201 passed=1197 skipped=4 failures=0 errors=0;
• SonarCloud Code Analysis: success;
• copilot-pull-request-reviewer: success;
• composed: failure (runs 37808162815 and 37808186218): step 5 21 red, step 5a 9 red, both as measured above. The oracle reads ok: 8 protected edit(s), and the help tree passes.

Copilot at 81796156: review 5459767763, COMMENTED, Needs a closer look, 0 open findings. Every earlier thread stays resolved:

• r4197793290 (rail restore coverage) was answered by 26fe63e7;
• r4197897284 (the description's file count) was answered by the description;
• r4196244480 (scripts/composed_placements.py, T022's file) was answered by T022, U-3: the runbook placed from the composed tree, git-ignored, nothing vendored (plan 038, P4F-3) #41's commit dc879beb. T022, U-3: the runbook placed from the composed tree, git-ignored, nothing vendored (plan 038, P4F-3) #41 landed as aefd1091, which carries that guard: on main, scripts/composed_placements.py:204 reads if ignored_by != ".gitignore":. The follow-up is r4221492981.

3 threads, 0 unresolved.

What is NOT done

• The composed workflow green. At 81796156 it waits for step 5's 21 (T023 to T028's, with T028 open), for step 5a's 9, which are with the holder for routing, and for T029 (DRAFT: T029, U-9: the composed run, permanent: composed.yml and its openxFactory pin (plan 038) #44). This PR stays a DRAFT until it is told otherwise, as ruled.
• The re-runs after each tests/composed_host_pin.yaml advance (T030, T064 and T075) are later work.
• tests/test_dependency_direction.py::test_first_attribute_access_refuses_and_names_the_layering, the known pre-existing composed red, is not a declared entry. So it is outside T073's declared set, and neither step runs it. It is T074's, in the direction arc.
• .gitignore and T022's scripts/composed_placements.py are not T073's files, and nothing is placed for the contracts files. A scratch placement, removed afterwards, left 60 of their 75 red, so their repair is T094's to map.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

[sourcery-ai]

Reviewer's Guide

This draft establishes the composed execution infrastructure for T073: CI checks out a pinned openxFactory host, safely supplies files and host seams, runs every declared exclusion alongside the governed suites, and relocates contract-schema lookup to explicit package or host ownership while preserving lone-checkout behavior.

Sequence diagram for composed declared integration tests

sequenceDiagram
    participant CI as composed.yml
    participant Decl as declared_exclusion.yaml
    participant Host as openxFactory host
    participant Conf as tests/conftest.py
    participant Pytest as pytest

    CI->>Decl: Read declared entries
    CI->>Host: Checkout pinned commit and initialize submodules
    CI->>Conf: Run composed test session
    Conf->>Host: Read register_status_exemption from opendox_host.seams()
    Conf->>Conf: Register host rail for the test
    CI->>Pytest: Run each non-governed declared file alone
    Pytest-->>CI: Write per-file report
    Conf->>Conf: Unregister host rail after the test
    CI->>CI: Refuse entries without a report from either suite

Loading

Sequence diagram for host-owned contract schema validation

sequenceDiagram
    participant Host as Host process
    participant Gate as openxdox.gate_console
    participant Schema as Host contract schema directory
    participant Validator as JSON Schema validator

    Host->>Gate: register_contract_schema_source(source)
    Gate->>Schema: Check demotion-execution-receipt.schema.yaml
    Schema-->>Gate: Registered schema source
    Host->>Gate: validate_demotion_execution_receipt(receipt)
    Gate->>Schema: Read host schema text
    Schema-->>Gate: YAML schema text
    Gate->>Validator: _schema_errors(receipt, schema_text)
    Validator-->>Gate: Validation result
    Gate-->>Host: Success or GateRefused

Loading

File-Level Changes

Change	Details	Files
Adds a permanent composed CI workflow that pins and assembles an openxFactory host, runs governed suites plus every declared exclusion, and reports missing or failing entries.	Validate a strict host-pin manifest and initialize the required public submodules at that commit. Place pinned openDox-spec files into the composed tree using guarded symlinks. Run governed and declared suites independently with JUnit aggregation, then execute the oracle and help-tree checks.	.github/workflows/composed.yml tests/composed_host_pin.yaml scripts/composed_placements.py tests/test_composed_placements.py .gitignore
Introduces host-aware test fixtures so composed runs use openxFactory's registered host behavior while lone runs retain stand-ins and isolation.	Register and restore governed host profiles, extension columns, and process import paths around each test. Derive and register the status-exemption rail only for declaration-listed suites during composed runs. Register the host contract-schema source at startup and preserve packaged-schema validation for consumer-owned contracts.	tests/conftest.py tests/test_host_plane.py tests/test_gate_console_schema_source.py
Moves contract-schema validation from checkout-relative paths to explicit package-owned or host-registered schema sources.	Read gate-action schemas through verified packaged contract copies. Require hosts to register a validated demotion-receipt schema directory and reject conflicting registrations. Normalize malformed, invalid, or unresolvable schemas into GateRefused errors.	src/openxdox/gate_console.py
Declares all excluded entries as composed integration tests while preserving lone-checkout exclusion evidence and documenting the composed host pin.	Add composed execution and open-until wording to the declaration metadata. Run the declaration's non-governed files individually in the composed workflow and reject entries absent from both suites. Keep declaration counts and entry reasons intact.	tests/declared_exclusion.yaml

---

Tips and commands

Interacting with Sourcery

• Trigger a new review: Comment @sourcery-ai review on the pull request.
• Continue discussions: Reply directly to Sourcery's review comments.
• Generate a GitHub issue from a review comment: Ask Sourcery to create an
  issue from a review comment by replying to it. You can also reply to a
  review comment with @sourcery-ai issue to create an issue from it.
• Generate a pull request title: Write @sourcery-ai anywhere in the pull
  request title to generate a title at any time. You can also comment
  @sourcery-ai title on the pull request to (re-)generate the title at any time.
• Generate a pull request summary: Write @sourcery-ai summary anywhere in
  the pull request body to generate a PR summary at any time exactly where you
  want it. You can also comment @sourcery-ai summary on the pull request to
  (re-)generate the summary at any time.
• Generate reviewer's guide: Comment @sourcery-ai guide on the pull
  request to (re-)generate the reviewer's guide at any time.
• Resolve all Sourcery comments: Comment @sourcery-ai resolve on the
  pull request to resolve all Sourcery comments. Useful if you've already
  addressed all the comments and don't want to see them anymore.
• Dismiss all Sourcery reviews: Comment @sourcery-ai dismiss on the pull
  request to dismiss all existing Sourcery reviews. Especially useful if you
  want to start fresh with a new review - don't forget to comment
  @sourcery-ai review to trigger a new review!

Customizing Your Experience

Access your dashboard to:

• Enable or disable review features such as the Sourcery-generated pull request
  summary, the reviewer's guide, and others.
• Change the review language.
• Add, remove or edit custom review instructions.
• Adjust other review settings.

Getting Help

• Contact our support team for questions or feedback.
• Visit our documentation for detailed guides and information.
• Keep in touch with the Sourcery team by following us on X/Twitter, LinkedIn or GitHub.

[Copilot]

Copilot review overview

🟡 Changes recommended

The placement guard can incorrectly accept a global Git exclusion instead of the repository’s required .gitignore entry, and the draft composed workflow remains red.

Review effort: Balanced
Findings: 1

Open (1)

• Ensure placement is covered by the repository's root .gitignore · New

What changed in this PR

Adds pinned, composed openxFactory test execution for declared integration suites and supporting host seams.

Changes:

• Runs every declared exclusion in composed CI.
• Registers governed host, schema, and status-exemption seams.
• Adds pinned runbook placement and comprehensive tests.

File	Description
.github/​workflows/​composed.yml	Adds composed test workflow.
.gitignore	Ignores the placed runbook link.
scripts/​composed_placements.py	Safely places composed-tree files.
src/​openxdox/​gate_console.py	Resolves schemas from their owners.
tests/​composed_host_pin.yaml	Pins the openxFactory host.
tests/​conftest.py	Registers composed host seams.
tests/​declared_exclusion.yaml	Declares composed execution for exclusions.
tests/​test_composed_placements.py	Tests placement safeguards.
tests/​test_gate_console_schema_source.py	Tests schema-source behavior.
tests/​test_host_plane.py	Tests governed-host registration.

---

💡 Add a code-review agent skill or configure MCP servers for context-aware, tailored reviews. Learn more in the docs.

[Copilot]

Copilot review overview

🟡 Changes recommended

Rail cleanup lacks committed regression coverage, and the composed check remains intentionally red pending prerequisite repairs.

Review effort: Balanced
Findings: 1

Open (1)

• Add regression tests for host rail state restoration · New

Resolved since last review (1)

• Ensure placement is covered by the repository's root .gitignore

[Copilot]

Copilot review overview

🔵 Needs a closer look

The draft’s composed check remains intentionally red across hundreds of nodes, and its description no longer matches the committed test scope.

Review effort: Balanced
Findings: 1 · 1

Open (2)

• Add regression tests for host rail state restoration
• Update PR description for newly admitted fourth T073 file · New

[Copilot]

Copilot review overview

🔵 Needs a closer look

It remains a draft with stacked dependencies and an intentionally failing composed integration workflow.

Review effort: Balanced
Findings: None

Resolved since last review (2)

• Add regression tests for host rail state restoration
• Update PR description for newly admitted fourth T073 file

[sonarqubecloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
1 New issue
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
0.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud

[Copilot]

🔵 Needs a closer look

The composed gate remains red and the draft depends on unresolved repair slices.

0 open findings

🧠 Review effort: Balanced

---

Give feedback about Copilot approvals in this survey to enter a drawing for a $150 gift card.

[brettheap]

@codex review

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Codex Review Summary

This comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.

Review	Status	Commit	Review trigger
📝 Code Review	✅ Completed 2026-10-08T19:43:15.065948Z	8179615	Manual request

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review" or "@codex security review".

Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings.

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. What shall we delve into next?

Reviewed commit: 817961568e

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".