Pull request at auto-approve trivial
Aaron Lindqvist
Engineering · Code Review & Quality · EN4A Pull Request Review
$42k
value
67%
confidence
6
people affected
1h 19m
age
2h 43m
sla
67%
progress
Currently held by
GBS spine
Running in the shared AI GBS spine
Raised by
Idris Sandoval
Requester of record
At station
Auto-approve trivial
AI GBS layer · station 4 of 6
Where this train is on the line
Evidence trail
Every station this unit has passed, who acted, and what they left behind
This is the readable trail. The same actions are held in the append-only evidence spine with their authority grant, version stamps and hash links; open the auditor pack to see them.
Cleared static analysis
-79mCode Quality Orchestrator
Spine control pack posted, three-way evidence attached
Cleared generate review comments
-59mStatic Analysis Agent
Spine control pack posted, three-way evidence attached
Cleared score risk
-40mComplexity Monitor
Inputs, rule version and output hash written to the evidence log
Holding at auto-approve trivial
-20mComplexity Monitor
Spine control pack posted, three-way evidence attached
What happens next
The next station and its rule
Human review
run by Director, Engineering Quality · Policy layer
Held for a named human when the unit exceeds the pull request decision envelope, when confidence falls below the floor, or when a policy clause is engaged.
approver Director, Engineering Quality
Why the signal is what it is
Plain reading of the current state
Amber. The agent completed the work but the outcome fell into a sampling band, so it posted evidence for review rather than closing silently. Work carries on; a human confirms after the fact.