| name | triage_ci_failure |
| description | Triage CI failures, flaky tests, and broken builds in the sequencer mono-repo. Use when a user mentions a failing CI job, flaky test, red check, or shares a GitHub Actions / PR URL — the skill pulls failure context directly from the public GitHub REST API so you can usually diagnose and report a verdict without asking the user any follow-up questions. |
Triage CI Failure
Usually invoked when someone tags Claude in the mono-repo Slack channel about a CI failure. The repo (starkware-libs/sequencer) is public, so most of the GitHub REST API is reachable without auth. Your goal: diagnose and report a verdict without asking follow-up questions. Pull what failed, on which step, with which annotation, on which attempts — then report. Only fall back to "please paste the logs" when the public API genuinely can't get you there; never ask to confirm context you can already fetch.
Endpoint catalog, pagination, rate limits, and which tools to use in each environment live in references/github_api.md. Read it when you need an exact URL; this file is the decision flow. Substitute O=starkware-libs, R=sequencer throughout.
Step 1: Resolve the input, then check it isn't stale
From the message, extract a PR URL, run URL (/actions/runs/{run_id}), job URL (.../job/{job_id}), check-run id, commit SHA, or branch name. Key fact: job.id == check_run.id — one numeric id bridges "I have a job link" and "I want its annotations." With only a branch name, list recent failed runs on it before asking the user anything.
Triage the pasted link — it's usually accurate for the failure they want explained. Diagnose that run/job even if the user re-ran it afterward (a common flow: paste a link, then re-run assuming it's flaky). As a complementary check, note whether the run is stale: this repo uses Graphite stacks, so a run's head_sha can lag the PR's current head.sha (GET /pulls/{pr}). If they differ, also report the current head's status — so a "merge-gatekeeper noise, harmless" verdict on an old SHA doesn't mask a genuinely red live head. Add that as context; don't discard the pasted run in favor of the current head.
Step 2: Did it already go green on a re-run?
GET /actions/runs/{run_id} → check run_attempt, previous_attempt_url, conclusion. If it was re-run (run_attempt > 1 or previous_attempt_url set) and the latest conclusion is success, the workflow already passed on retry — lead with "the PR isn't blocked."
But don't wave it away: a fail-then-pass with no code change is a flaky test, a real signal worth understanding. So still:
- Find the flaky job/step —
GET /actions/runs/{run_id}/jobs?filter=all (the filter=all matters; the default hides the failed earlier attempt). Pull that job's annotations.
- Judge whether it's a known flake (see Step 4's flakiness note).
- Report a recommendation, e.g. "Passed on re-run (attempt 2), PR not blocked. Attempt-1 failure was
run-integration-tests — flaky; worth a tracking issue rather than per-PR re-runs."
Corollary trap: a pasted job link can point at a failed earlier attempt while the run is now green. Reconcile the job's run_attempt against the run's current one (via filter=all) before calling anything broken.
Diagnose the sporadic failure either way. A green-on-latest run doesn't end the triage — if a failure happened (even once, even already re-run away), root-cause it via Steps 3–4. Continue below regardless; the only thing the green status changes is the "is the PR blocked?" answer.
Step 3: Fast path — PR to root cause in a few calls
GET /pulls/{pr} → head.sha, base.refGET /commits/{head.sha}/check-runs?filter=all&per_page=100 → every check-run at that SHA- Keep
conclusion in ('failure','timed_out'); skip cancelled/skipped/neutral — a cancelled job usually means a sibling failed first, so the cause is elsewhere
- For each failing check,
GET /check-runs/{check_id}/annotations → the inline error (file + line + text) is usually all you need
merge-gatekeeper / merge-gatekeeper-new failing alone is a downstream alarm — something else failed first. Look at sibling check-runs at the same SHA or the previous attempt. Second mode: gatekeeper also fails by timing out waiting on a required check that never reached success (e.g. a cancelled sibling) — then there's no failed sibling at this SHA; the real red is usually on a newer SHA, i.e. the pasted run is stale (Step 1).
Step 4: When annotations aren't enough
Annotations are the primary signal, but for test/build jobs they're often just "Process completed with exit code 1". Treat a generic exit-code annotation (or an empty one, or null output.*) as no signal — the real assertion/panic is only in the raw step log, which needs auth (/logs is 403 unauthenticated; reach it via gh run view --job {id} --log-failed when authed — see references/github_api.md).
When logs are unreachable, don't go silent — narrow it from the diff. Pull pulls/{pr}/files; if the failing job is run-tests and the PR edits crates/foo/.../bar_test.rs or a fixture, report a scoped hypothesis ("likely a foo test or stale fixture from this rename") plus the one confirming command. That beats both a bare "can't see logs" and a fabricated test name.
Flakiness check: to tell flaky from newly-broken, see whether the same job fails in unrelated runs. Note many jobs here (run-integration-tests, run-tests) run only on pull_request, never push to main — so branch=main&status=failure won't show them and you'd wrongly conclude "not a known flake." For those, judge by (a) whether this run went green on re-run (Step 2, strongest signal) and (b) scanning recent failed runs of the same workflow across other PRs. Say which signal you used.
Step 5: Report — ask only when genuinely blocked
You usually have enough to classify the failure yourself. Report directly; don't tack on reflexive questions — every needless "is this flaky for you?" trains the user to expect noise. Answer these yourself rather than asking:
- New or flaky? → flakiness check above.
- Caused by this PR? → diff
pulls/{pr}/files against the failing crate/test path.
- Known pattern? → see Common patterns below.
Ask the user only when a tool genuinely can't close the gap:
- annotation empty/generic AND
output.text empty AND no gh/MCP raw-log access → ask for a paste;
- the cause hinges on something only they know (e.g. "did your last rebase pick up commit X?") → ask that.
Otherwise don't ask — report and move on.
Step 6: Classify and report
- Code issue in the PR — name the file/line, propose a fix
- Known flaky test — link prior discussion, suggest re-run
- Infrastructure / transient (network, action-download, GCloud) — suggest re-run, explain why
- Pre-existing on the base branch — call it out; the PR didn't cause it
State what you found, whether action is needed, and the next step.
Step 7: Fix only if asked
Apply a fix and commit only if the user explicitly asks. A triage request isn't an implicit "go patch it." Commit convention: scope: subject (no feat:/fix: prefix), one commit per PR.
Common patterns in this repo
blockifier_reexecution — transient GCloud network issues; suggest re-runmerge-gatekeeper / merge-gatekeeper-new — downstream/timeout failure; find the upstream cause (Step 3)- Formatting failures — run
scripts/rust_fmt.sh (pinned nightly), NOT cargo fmt directly
- Action-download failures from
codeload.github.com (404/503) — GitHub-side flake; re-run
