Add protocol incident response runbook#175
Merged
Merged
Conversation
Contributor
Author
|
@coderabbitai review |
|
No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉 ℹ️ Recent review info⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: defaults Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (3)
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (1)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (2)
📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughAdds an operator-facing incident response runbook, a CLI validator and unit tests, and integrates them into local/CI checks, release manifest generation, audit/readiness checkers, Makefile targets, tooling docs, and release-artifact metadata. ChangesIncident Response Runbook and Validation
Estimated code review effort🎯 3 (Moderate) | ⏱️ ~25 minutes Possibly related issues
Possibly related PRs
🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5✅ Passed checks (5 passed)
✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings. ✨ Finishing Touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Comment |
✅ Action performedReview finished.
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
Caution
Some comments are outside the diff and can’t be posted inline due to platform limitations.
⚠️ Outside diff range comments (1)
docs/release-readiness.md (1)
38-43: 📐 Maintainability & Code Quality | 🟡 Minor | ⚡ Quick winKeep the CI/local-gates summary in sync.
The readiness table still omits the incident-response gate even though
make checkand CI now run it. That makes the dashboard summary stale.Suggested wording
-| CI and local gates | Passing local/CI baseline exists for build, tests, size, local deployment rehearsals, release artifacts, architecture/threat model, audit package, release manifest, checksums, and changelog | No | No, but release commit CI must be green | +| CI and local gates | Passing local/CI baseline exists for build, tests, size, local deployment rehearsals, incident response, release artifacts, architecture/threat model, audit package, release manifest, checksums, and changelog | No | No, but release commit CI must be green |🤖 Prompt for 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. In `@docs/release-readiness.md` around lines 38 - 43, Update the readiness table row under the "CI and local gates" summary to include the incident-response gate so the dashboard matches current checks; specifically, add a cell noting that "incident-response" is now run by make check/CI and mark its status appropriately (e.g., Passing or Yes) alongside the existing build, tests, size, local deployment rehearsals, release artifacts, etc.; ensure the table text that starts with "CI and local gates" and the phrasing referencing "make check" and CI are synchronized so the summary is no longer stale.
🤖 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 `@ops/AUTONOMOUS_RUN.md`:
- Around line 165-174: The runbook summary in AUTONOMOUS_RUN's "Queue Item 90"
must be expanded to match issue `#173` by re-adding the missing "curator-claims"
and "drop-pause" slices; update the summary section text so it explicitly lists
curator-claims and drop-pause alongside the existing items (stuck auctions,
failed/stale randomness, bad Merkle roots, bad metadata/dependency
configuration, signer compromise, and release artifact/evidence mistakes) and
ensure any links or acceptance-criteria bullets reference issue `#173` to keep
scope aligned.
---
Outside diff comments:
In `@docs/release-readiness.md`:
- Around line 38-43: Update the readiness table row under the "CI and local
gates" summary to include the incident-response gate so the dashboard matches
current checks; specifically, add a cell noting that "incident-response" is now
run by make check/CI and mark its status appropriately (e.g., Passing or Yes)
alongside the existing build, tests, size, local deployment rehearsals, release
artifacts, etc.; ensure the table text that starts with "CI and local gates" and
the phrasing referencing "make check" and CI are synchronized so the summary is
no longer stale.
🪄 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: defaults
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
Run ID: 608b8b67-eccf-4ec7-9999-e3f0cb77a618
📒 Files selected for processing (25)
.github/workflows/ci.ymlCHANGELOG.mdMakefileSECURITY.mddocs/audit-package.mddocs/dependency-operations.mddocs/incident-response.mddocs/randomizer-operations.mddocs/release-readiness.mddocs/tooling.mdops/AUTONOMOUS_RUN.mdops/ROADMAP.mdrelease-artifacts/README.mdrelease-artifacts/latest/SHA256SUMSrelease-artifacts/latest/release-checksums.jsonrelease-artifacts/latest/release-manifest.jsonscripts/check.ps1scripts/check.shscripts/check_audit_package.pyscripts/check_incident_response.pyscripts/check_release_readiness.pyscripts/generate_release_manifest.pyscripts/test_incident_response.pyscripts/test_release_manifest.pyscripts/test_release_readiness.py
This was referenced Jun 12, 2026
![claude[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1236702?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Claude Code Review
This repository is configured for manual code reviews. Comment @claude review to trigger a review and subscribe this PR to future pushes, or @claude review once for a one-time review.
Tip: disable this comment in your organization's Code Review settings.
This was referenced Jun 12, 2026
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
1 participant
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.
Summary
Validation
python scripts/test_incident_response.pypython scripts/check_incident_response.pypython scripts/test_release_readiness.pypython scripts/check_release_readiness.pypython scripts/test_audit_package.pypython scripts/check_audit_package.pypython scripts/test_release_manifest.pypython scripts/generate_release_manifest.py --checkpython scripts/test_release_checksums.pypython scripts/generate_release_checksums.py --checkpython scripts/check_changelog.pybash -n scripts/check.shscripts/check.ps1python -m py_compilefor touched scripts/testsrg -n "^#|^##|^###" docs\incident-response.md docs\release-readiness.md docs\tooling.md docs\randomizer-operations.md docs\dependency-operations.md SECURITY.md ops\ROADMAP.md ops\AUTONOMOUS_RUN.mdgit diff --checkmake checkCodeRabbit follow-up validation:
python scripts/test_release_readiness.pypython scripts/check_release_readiness.pygit diff --checkCloses #173
Summary by CodeRabbit
Documentation
Tests & Validation
Chores