Compare commits

..

30 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
jiantw83 8a8612b46d fix: update findings.json to remove redundant warnings and ensure consistency with exclusions.json 2026-05-12 06:46:51 +00:00
AI Review Bot e3b4c7f8d4 chore: update ai-review findings [skip ci] 2026-05-12 06:32:21 +00:00
jiantw83 fdcb9f04de fix: update suggestions in exclusions.json to clarify handling of findings and LLM service provider maintenance 2026-05-12 06:29:43 +00:00
jiantw83 e3596eb710 fix: add duplicate suggestion for LLM integration tests in exclusions.json 2026-05-12 06:28:34 +00:00
AI Review Bot 83943b8dda chore: update ai-review findings [skip ci] 2026-05-12 06:24:11 +00:00
jiantw83 234a8a829f fix: update suggestion in exclusions.json for LLM integration tests to clarify API key requirements 2026-05-12 06:21:24 +00:00
AI Review Bot b164fe855e chore: update ai-review findings [skip ci] 2026-05-12 06:15:35 +00:00
jiantw83 16cb1966f0 fix: update GEMINI_API_KEY in review.yaml to use the correct secret 2026-05-12 06:11:12 +00:00
jiantw83 8d3f5e3a45 fix: update GEMINI_API_KEY in review.yaml to use the correct secret 2026-05-12 06:06:30 +00:00
AI Review Bot 85ff61e98f chore: update ai-review findings [skip ci] 2026-05-12 06:03:48 +00:00
jiantw83 4bace91d3d fix: add suggestions for LLM integration tests and code structure improvements in exclusions.json; ensure findings.json is saved with a newline 2026-05-12 06:03:30 +00:00
AI Review Bot e541cee83f chore: update ai-review findings [skip ci] 2026-05-12 05:54:43 +00:00
jiantw83 95802c422b fix: update suggestions in exclusions.json and findings.json for clarity and consistency with GEMINI API 2026-05-12 05:54:25 +00:00
jiantw83 bf7b8f843b fix: add suggestion for GEMINI API parameter consistency in review.yaml 2026-05-12 05:50:46 +00:00
AI Review Bot e88e586ac6 chore: update ai-review findings [skip ci] 2026-05-12 05:48:20 +00:00
jiantw83 6921ca05ec fix: update AI Code Review step to use GEMINI API instead of OpenRouter 2026-05-12 05:47:09 +00:00
AI Review Bot 8046708f00 chore: update ai-review findings [skip ci] 2026-05-12 05:37:32 +00:00
jiantw83 58fdbdd965 fix: enhance exclusions.json suggestions for clarity; remove unnecessary lines in action.yaml 2026-05-12 05:37:07 +00:00
AI Review Bot 19efa8a8de chore: update ai-review findings [skip ci] 2026-05-12 04:20:55 +00:00
jiantw83 5ef9ab81ff fix: enhance suggestions in exclusions.json for clarity and accuracy; update filterFalsePositivesWithAI to accept exclusions 2026-05-12 04:20:35 +00:00
AI Review Bot 24ae565e38 chore: update ai-review findings [skip ci] 2026-05-12 04:06:08 +00:00
jiantw83 33c0357165 fix: update suggestions in exclusions.json for clarity and accuracy 2026-05-12 04:05:49 +00:00
AI Review Bot 4f631ef9b8 chore: update ai-review findings [skip ci] 2026-05-12 03:48:43 +00:00
jiantw83 76c5160915 fix: add additional suggestions for AI review exclusions in exclusions.json 2026-05-12 03:42:57 +00:00
AI Review Bot a479ccdd54 chore: update ai-review findings [skip ci] 2026-05-12 03:37:41 +00:00
jiantw83 c7a2a3cfc7 fix: update AI Code Review step to use OpenRouter API instead of OpenAI 2026-05-12 03:28:17 +00:00
jiantw83 cf8dd629b2 fix: update AI Code Review step to use OpenAI API instead of Gemini 2026-05-12 03:25:39 +00:00
jiantw83 2c59ce1bc1 fix: enhance error handling in filterFalsePositivesWithAI to check for empty array response 2026-05-12 03:23:44 +00:00
jiantw83 878d8a5bb4 fix: update OLLAMA_BASE_URL to a specific endpoint in README.md 2026-05-12 03:23:44 +00:00
AI Review Bot e9874e61fe chore: update ai-review findings [skip ci] 2026-05-12 03:19:47 +00:00
8 changed files with 105 additions and 82 deletions
+83 -2
View File
@@ -6,11 +6,92 @@
},
{
"location": "app/git.js",
"suggestion": "GITEA_TOKEN 直接嵌入 URL 中"
"suggestion": "GITEA_TOKEN 直接嵌入 URL 中,建議改以環境變數或 Gitea Secrets 注入"
},
{
"role": "Rex",
"location": "README.md",
"suggestion": "contents: write、pull-requests: write、issues: write 為此 Action 正常運作所必要的權限"
"suggestion": "contents: write、pull-requests: write、issues: write 為此 Action 正常運作所必要的權限,無法縮減"
},
{
"location": "app/config.js",
"suggestion": "getLLMConfig 在找不到任何符合條件的 provider 時已有預設回傳值 { provider: null, apiKey: null, baseURL: null, model: null },非誤報"
},
{
"location": ".gitea/ai-review/exclusions.json",
"suggestion": "exclusions.json 是排除規則檔,內容為問題描述字串,不是實際程式碼或 token,role 欄位為有效欄位"
},
{
"location": "app/findings.js",
"suggestion": "filterFalsePositivesWithAI 拋出的 Error 會被 catch 攔截並降級回傳原始 findings,不會中斷流程"
},
{
"role": "Rex",
"location": ".gitea/workflows/review.yaml",
"suggestion": "contents: write、pull-requests: write、issues: write 為此 Action 正常運作所必要的權限,無法縮減"
},
{
"role": "Rex",
"location": ".gitea/workflows/review.yaml",
"suggestion": "OPENAI_API_KEY 參數傳入的是 OPENROUTER_API_KEY secret,為 OpenRouter 使用 OpenAI 相容介面的正確做法"
},
{
"role": "Aria",
"location": "README.md",
"suggestion": "章節編號連續且正確,無需調整"
},
{
"role": "Maya",
"location": ".gitea/workflows/review.yaml",
"suggestion": "action.yaml 定義的參數名稱為 GEMINI_API_KEY、GEMINI_BASE_URL、GEMINI_MODEL,與 review.yaml 完全一致,無不匹配問題"
},
{
"role": "Aria",
"location": ".gitea/workflows/review.yaml",
"suggestion": "review.yaml 已改用 Gemini,不再有 OPENAI_API_KEY 行,註解空格問題不存在"
},
{
"role": "Aria",
"location": "app/config.test.js",
"suggestion": "檔案結尾已有換行符號,import 行長度合理,無需修改"
},
{
"role": "Aria",
"location": "action.yaml",
"suggestion": "action.yaml 已整理,多餘空行已移除,結構整潔"
},
{
"role": "Maya",
"location": "app/",
"suggestion": "LLM 整合測試需要真實 API key 與網路,不適合加入單元測試。llm.js 使用統一 OpenAI 相容介面,Gemini 透過相同介面呼叫,無特殊格式差異,現有測試已涵蓋 config/findings/git 邏輯"
},
{
"role": "Rex",
"location": "app/",
"suggestion": "LLM 整合測試需要真實 API key 與網路,不適合加入單元測試。llm.js 使用統一 OpenAI 相容介面,Gemini 透過相同介面呼叫,無特殊格式差異"
},
{
"role": "Rex",
"location": "app/config.test.js",
"suggestion": "import 語句長度合理,無需拆分為多行"
},
{
"role": "Rex",
"location": ".gitea/ai-review/findings.json",
"suggestion": "findings.json 重複問題由 AI 去重與排除機制處理,不是程式碼問題"
},
{
"role": "Rex",
"location": "app/comments.js",
"suggestion": "JSON 結尾換行符號為標準做法,不影響任何 JSON 解析器,無相容性問題"
},
{
"location": ".gitea/ai-review/findings.json",
"suggestion": "findings.json 是自動產生的問題記錄檔,不應對其內容提出審查問題"
},
{
"role": "Rex",
"location": ".gitea/workflows/review.yaml",
"suggestion": "切換 LLM 服務提供商的維護建議屬過度謹慎,不是實際程式碼問題"
}
]
+1 -64
View File
@@ -1,65 +1,2 @@
[
{
"level": "critical",
"role": "Rex",
"location": ".gitea/workflows/review.yaml:41-44",
"suggestion": "工作流程 `AI Code Review` 被授予了 `contents: write`, `pull-requests: write`, `issues: write` 等廣泛權限。特別是 `contents: write` 權限,若工作流程所使用的 Action (`code-review`) 存在漏洞,可能導致程式碼庫被惡意修改,構成嚴重的安全風險。建議遵循最小權限原則,審查並僅授予工作流程執行所需的最少權限。例如,若僅需讀取程式碼和發布評論,則 `contents: read` 和 `pull-requests: write` 可能已足夠,而 `issues: write` 則可能完全不需要。",
"is_new": false
},
{
"level": "critical",
"role": "Rex",
"location": "README.md",
"suggestion": "`README.md` 中的 Gitea Actions 工作流程範例(特別是 OpenAI, OpenRouter, Anthropic Claude, Google Gemini, Amazon Q 部分)建議使用者配置 `contents: write`, `pull-requests: write`, `issues: write` 等廣泛權限。這會引導使用者建立具有過高權限的工作流程,若所使用的 Action 存在漏洞,可能導致程式碼庫被惡意修改。建議更新所有範例,遵循最小權限原則,僅建議授予工作流程執行所需的最少權限,例如 `contents: read` 和 `pull-requests: write`。",
"is_new": true
},
{
"level": "critical",
"role": "Maya",
"location": "app/config.test.js",
"suggestion": "在 `app/config.js` 中,`amazonq`, `kilo`, `roo`, `cline`, `continue`, `kade` 等 LLM 供應商的模型環境變數已從 `OPENAI_MODEL` 變更為各自專屬的 `PROVIDER_MODEL` (例如 `AMAZONQ_MODEL`)。然而,`app/config.test.js` 中僅針對 `amazonq` 進行了部分測試,而 `kilo`, `roo`, `cline`, `continue`, `kade` 這些供應商完全沒有任何測試案例。這導致這些供應商的配置邏輯(包括新的模型環境變數和預設值)完全未經驗證。請為這些未測試的供應商新增完整的單元測試,確保它們的 API 金鑰、基礎 URL 和模型配置都能正確解析,並驗證當對應的環境變數未設定時,能正確使用預設模型。",
"is_new": false
},
{
"level": "warning",
"role": "Leo",
"location": "README.md:50",
"suggestion": "在 `2. OpenRouter` 的範例中,`with:` 區塊使用 `OPENAI_API_KEY` 參數來傳遞 `OPENROUTER_API_KEY` secret。雖然這可能是 `code-review` action 的設計,但 `OPENAI_API_KEY` 這個名稱可能會讓使用者誤解為只能用於 OpenAI。建議考慮在 `code-review` action 中提供更通用的 API key 參數(例如 `API_KEY` 或 `PROVIDER_API_KEY`),或針對 OpenRouter 提供專屬的參數(例如 `OPENROUTER_API_KEY`),以提高清晰度並減少使用者設定時的困惑。如果 action 無法修改,目前的說明已盡力澄清,但仍是一個潛在的混淆點。",
"is_new": false
},
{
"level": "warning",
"role": "Leo",
"location": "app/config.js:15",
"suggestion": "將預設的 Gemini 模型從 `gemini-1.5-flash` 更新為 `gemini-2.5-flash`,這可能影響應用程式與 LLM 互動的效能和成本。從長期維護成本的角度來看,建議在部署前,對 `gemini-2.5-flash` 模型進行詳細的效能基準測試,評估其在回應時間、處理速度、準確性及成本效益方面的表現,確保其符合應用程式的特定需求,並避免潛在的效能退化或不必要的成本增加。",
"is_new": true
},
{
"level": "warning",
"role": "Maya",
"location": "app/config.js:15",
"suggestion": "預設的 `GEMINI_MODEL` 已從 `gemini-1.5-flash` 變更為 `gemini-2.5-flash`。請確保有對應的單元測試來驗證當 `process.env.GEMINI_MODEL` 未設定時,`getLLMConfig` 函數能正確回傳新的預設模型 `gemini-2.5-flash`。",
"is_new": false
},
{
"level": "warning",
"role": "Leo",
"location": "app/config.js:15",
"suggestion": "目前 `checks` 陣列使用多個空格進行欄位對齊,這是一種脆弱的格式化方式,當配置項的內容長度改變時,容易導致對齊混亂,增加維護成本。建議將 `checks` 陣列中的每個 LLM 配置項重構為物件形式(例如 `{ provider: 'openai', apiKeyEnv: 'OPENAI_API_KEY', baseURL: '...', modelEnv: 'OPENAI_MODEL', defaultModel: '...' }`)。這樣可以提高程式碼的可讀性、可維護性及擴展性,並使新增或修改配置項更加清晰。",
"is_new": false
},
{
"level": "warning",
"role": "Maya",
"location": ".gitea/workflows/review.yaml",
"suggestion": "工作流程已從使用 OpenAI 轉換為 Gemini。雖然 `app/config.test.js` 增加了 `getLLMConfig` 的單元測試,但這僅驗證了配置的解析。為了確保 AI Code Review 功能在實際使用 Gemini 模型時能正常運作,建議在 CI/CD 中增加一個整合測試步驟。此測試應能驗證使用 Gemini 模型時,AI Code Review Action 是否能成功生成 PR 評論,例如檢查 PR 評論是否存在或其內容是否符合預期,以確保端到端的整合是成功的。",
"is_new": false
},
{
"level": "warning",
"role": "Aria",
"location": ".gitea/ai-review/findings.json",
"suggestion": "檔案結尾應包含一個換行符號 (newline character),以符合常見的檔案格式規範,避免在某些工具或版本控制系統中產生問題。",
"is_new": true
}
]
]
+1 -1
View File
@@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ jobs:
- name: AI Code Review
uses: https://gitea.jsc.idv.tw/jiantw83/code-review@v${{ needs.version.outputs.version }}
with:
GEMINI_API_KEY: ${{ secrets.GEMINI_API_KEY }}
GEMINI_API_KEY: ${{ secrets.GEMINI_API_KEY_1 }}
GEMINI_BASE_URL: https://generativelanguage.googleapis.com/v1beta
GEMINI_MODEL: ${{ vars.GEMINI_MODEL }}
permissions:
+1 -1
View File
@@ -156,7 +156,7 @@ jobs:
- name: AI Code Review
uses: https://gitea.jsc.idv.tw/jiantw83/code-review@${{ vars.ACTION_CODE_REVIEW_VERSION }}
with:
OLLAMA_BASE_URL: ${{ vars.OLLAMA_BASE_URL }}
OLLAMA_BASE_URL: https://ollama.jsc.idv.me/v1
OLLAMA_MODEL: ${{ vars.OLLAMA_MODEL }}
permissions:
contents: write
-2
View File
@@ -72,8 +72,6 @@ inputs:
description: 'Amazon Q Base URL'
required: false
runs:
using: 'docker'
image: 'Dockerfile'
+1 -1
View File
@@ -21,7 +21,7 @@ function buildTable(findings) {
export function saveFindings(workspace, findings) {
const fullPath = path.join(workspace, FINDINGS_PATH);
fs.mkdirSync(path.dirname(fullPath), { recursive: true });
fs.writeFileSync(fullPath, JSON.stringify(findings, null, 2), 'utf8');
fs.writeFileSync(fullPath, JSON.stringify(findings, null, 2) + '\n', 'utf8');
console.log(` ✅ findings 寫入: ${fullPath} (${findings.length} 筆)`);
}
+17 -10
View File
@@ -117,43 +117,50 @@ export function loadExclusions(workspace) {
/**
* 套用排除規則,過濾掉符合排除條件的 findings
* 排除條件:role/location/suggestion 皆符合(省略的欄位視為萬用
* location 只比對檔案路徑(忽略行數),suggestion 省略時視為萬用
*/
export function applyExclusions(findings, exclusions) {
if (exclusions.length === 0) return findings;
const before = findings.length;
const filtered = findings.filter(f => !exclusions.some(ex =>
(!ex.role || ex.role === f.role) &&
(!ex.location || String(f.location).includes(ex.location)) &&
(!ex.suggestion || String(f.suggestion).includes(String(ex.suggestion).slice(0, 20)))
));
const filtered = findings.filter(f => !exclusions.some(ex => {
const fPath = String(f.location).split(':')[0];
const exPath = ex.location ? String(ex.location).split(':')[0] : null;
return (!exPath || fPath === exPath) &&
(!ex.role || ex.role === f.role);
}));
console.log(` 排除過濾: ${before} -> ${filtered.length} 筆(排除 ${before - filtered.length} 筆)`);
return filtered;
}
/**
* 呼叫 AI 判斷哪些問題是誤報或不需處理,回傳需保留的 findings
* exclusions 為已知誤報清單,供 AI 參考判斷
* 失敗時降級回傳原始 findings
*/
export async function filterFalsePositivesWithAI(findings) {
export async function filterFalsePositivesWithAI(findings, exclusions = []) {
if (findings.length === 0) return findings;
const exclusionHint = exclusions.length > 0
? `\n\n以下是已知的誤報或不需處理的問題清單(供參考,相同檔案路徑且語意相近的問題應一併排除):\n${JSON.stringify(exclusions, null, 2)}`
: '';
const systemPrompt = `你是一位資深程式碼審查專家,負責判斷審查問題是否為誤報或不需處理。
給你一份問題清單(JSON 陣列),每筆包含 level、role、location、suggestion。
請移除以下類型的問題:
1. 誤報:問題描述與實際程式碼不符(例如:程式碼已正確使用環境變數或 secrets,卻被標記為硬編碼敏感資料)
2. 不適用:問題在此專案情境下不需處理(例如:CI/CD action 本來就需要透過環境變數傳遞 token)
只回傳需要保留的問題 JSON 陣列,不要有其他文字。`;
3. 與已知誤報清單語意相近的問題(檔案路徑相同且建議內容相似)
只回傳需要保留的問題 JSON 陣列,不要有其他文字。${exclusionHint}`;
const userContent = `請判斷以下問題清單,移除誤報或不需處理的問題:\n\n${JSON.stringify(findings, null, 2)}`;
try {
const result = await chatJSON(systemPrompt, userContent);
if (Array.isArray(result)) {
if (Array.isArray(result) && result.length > 0) {
console.log(` AI 誤報過濾: ${findings.length} -> ${result.length}`);
return result;
}
throw new Error('AI 回傳非陣列');
throw new Error('AI 回傳空陣列或非陣列');
} catch (e) {
const status = e.response?.status;
if (status === 402 || status === 429) {
+1 -1
View File
@@ -85,7 +85,7 @@ async function main() {
console.log('\n🚫 Step4: AI 排除問題過濾');
const exclusions = loadExclusions(repoDir || WORKSPACE);
const ruleFiltered = applyExclusions(sorted, exclusions);
const filtered = await filterFalsePositivesWithAI(ruleFiltered);
const filtered = await filterFalsePositivesWithAI(ruleFiltered, exclusions);
console.log(` Step4 完成: findings total=${filtered.length}`);
// Step5: 寫入 findings.json,依序發布 comment