Megatron-Bridge/.github/workflows/claude-review.yml at main · redai-infra/Megatron-Bridge · GitHub

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
name: Claude Code Review

on:
  pull_request:
    types: [opened, reopened, ready_for_review]
  issue_comment:
    types: [created]

permissions:
  contents: read
  pull-requests: write
  issues: write
  id-token: write

jobs:
  pre-flight:
    uses: NVIDIA-NeMo/FW-CI-templates/.github/workflows/_cicd_preflight.yml@v0.80.1
    with:
      default_runner_prefix: ubuntu-latest
      sso_users_filename: ${{ vars.SSO_USERS_FILENAME }}
    secrets:
      NVIDIA_MANAGEMENT_ORG_PAT: ${{ secrets.NVIDIA_MANAGEMENT_ORG_PAT }}

  auto-review:
    name: Claude Review (auto)
    needs: [pre-flight]
    # Auto-review non-draft PRs from NVIDIA authors on open / reopen / ready-for-review.
    # Subsequent commits do not re-trigger; re-request a review by commenting
    # "/claude review" (handled by the manual-review job below).
    # Skip bot-generated PRs: dependency bumps (`bump-ci-container-*`) and
    # auto cherry-picks (`cherry-pick-*`).
    if: |
      github.event_name == 'pull_request' &&
      needs.pre-flight.outputs.is_member == 'true' &&
      github.event.pull_request.draft == false &&
      !startsWith(github.event.pull_request.head.ref, 'bump-ci-container-') &&
      !startsWith(github.event.pull_request.head.ref, 'cherry-pick-')
    runs-on: ubuntu-latest
    steps:
      - name: Checkout repository
        uses: actions/checkout@v6
        with:
          fetch-depth: 1

      - name: Run Claude Code Review
        uses: anthropics/claude-code-action@v1
        with:
          anthropic_api_key: ${{ secrets.ANTHROPIC_API_KEY }}
          claude_args: |
            --allowedTools "mcp__github_inline_comment__create_inline_comment,Bash(gh pr comment:*),Bash(gh pr diff:*),Bash(gh pr view:*),Bash(gh pr review:*),Read"
            --model "claude-opus-4-6"
          prompt: |
            REPO: ${{ github.repository }}
            PR NUMBER: ${{ github.event.pull_request.number }}

            Mandatory workflow — never skip or reorder:
            1. Read the PR diff first (gh pr diff).
            2. Based on the changed files and areas, identify relevant skills from skills/<name>/SKILL.md.
               Common skill names: linting-and-formatting, testing, cicd, build-and-dependency,
               adding-model-support, perf-activation-recompute, perf-memory-tuning, etc.
            3. Read the SKILL.md files for all relevant areas using the Read tool.
            4. Only then perform the review using the skill context.

            You are doing a light code review. Keep it concise and actionable.

            Focus ONLY on:
            - Critical bugs or logic errors
            - Typos in code, comments, or strings
            - Missing or insufficient test coverage for changed code
            - Outdated or inaccurate documentation affected by the changes

            Do NOT comment on:
            - Style preferences or formatting
            - Minor naming suggestions
            - Architectural opinions or refactoring ideas
            - Performance unless there is a clear, measurable issue

            Provide feedback using inline comments for specific code suggestions.
            Use top-level comments for general observations.

            Always end the review with a "Suggested test cases" bullet list, derived
            from the diff.

            Map source changes → test-case globs using:
            - A function `<model>_<task>_config_<gpu>` in scripts/performance/configs/<family>/...
              impacts cases matching `<model>_*gpu_<gpu>_*_perf`.
            - A base config `<MODEL>_..._<GPU>_<PRECISION>_V<N>` impacts that precision,
              plus any V<N+1> / LARGE_SCALE configs derived from it via `replace(...)`.

            Each bullet must be an explicit test case name — do NOT use globs
            or brace expansion. Enumerate every relevant combination, e.g.
            `qwen3_235b_a22b_512gpu_b300_bf16_perf`,
            `qwen3_235b_a22b_512gpu_b300_fp8_cs_perf`,
            `qwen3_235b_a22b_512gpu_b300_fp8_mx_perf`,
            `qwen3_235b_a22b_512gpu_b300_nvfp4_perf`. Discover the exact names
            by grepping the diff and the `scripts/performance/configs/` tree
            for the affected model/GPU/precision combinations.
            If no perf/recipe configs are touched, write "No perf tests impacted."

            End the review by posting it as a top-level PR comment using
            bash ANSI-C quoting so newlines render correctly:
              gh pr comment <PR NUMBER> --repo <REPO> --body $'line1\nline2\n...'
            Use $'...' (NOT plain "..."). Inside "..." the sequence \n is
            passed to gh literally and shows up as the two characters \n in
            the rendered comment; inside $'...' bash expands \n to a real
            newline before gh sees it. Do NOT use --body-file, output
            redirection, or HEREDOCs — the action sandbox blocks all three.
            The body must include the "Suggested test cases" list. If there
            is nothing to flag, the body is just "LGTM" followed by the
            test-case list. Inline comments via
            mcp__github_inline_comment__create_inline_comment are optional —
            use them only for specific code suggestions.

  manual-review:
    if: github.event_name == 'issue_comment' && github.event.issue.pull_request != null && contains(fromJson('["OWNER", "MEMBER", "COLLABORATOR"]'), github.event.comment.author_association)
    uses: NVIDIA-NeMo/FW-CI-templates/.github/workflows/_claude_review.yml@v0.88.0
    with:
      prompt: |
        Mandatory workflow — never skip or reorder:
        1. Read the PR diff first.
        2. Based on the changed files and areas, identify relevant skills from skills/<name>/SKILL.md.
           Common skill names: linting-and-formatting, testing, cicd, build-and-dependency,
           adding-model-support, perf-activation-recompute, perf-memory-tuning, etc.
        3. Read the SKILL.md files for all relevant areas using the Read tool.
        4. Only then perform the review using the skill context.

        You are doing a light code review. Keep it concise and actionable.

        Focus ONLY on:
        - Critical bugs or logic errors
        - Typos in code, comments, or strings
        - Missing or insufficient test coverage for changed code
        - Outdated or inaccurate documentation affected by the changes

        Do NOT comment on:
        - Style preferences or formatting
        - Minor naming suggestions
        - Architectural opinions or refactoring ideas
        - Performance unless there is a clear, measurable issue

        Provide feedback using inline comments for specific code suggestions.
        Use top-level comments for general observations.

        Always end the review with a "Suggested test cases" bullet list, derived
        from the diff.

        Map source changes → test-case globs using:
        - A function `<model>_<task>_config_<gpu>` in scripts/performance/configs/<family>/...
          impacts cases matching `<model>_*gpu_<gpu>_*_perf`.
        - A base config `<MODEL>_..._<GPU>_<PRECISION>_V<N>` impacts that precision,
          plus any V<N+1> / LARGE_SCALE configs derived from it via `replace(...)`.

        Each bullet must be an explicit test case name — do NOT use globs
        or brace expansion. Enumerate every relevant combination, e.g.
        `qwen3_235b_a22b_512gpu_b300_bf16_perf`,
        `qwen3_235b_a22b_512gpu_b300_fp8_cs_perf`,
        `qwen3_235b_a22b_512gpu_b300_fp8_mx_perf`,
        `qwen3_235b_a22b_512gpu_b300_nvfp4_perf`. Discover the exact names
        by grepping the diff and the `scripts/performance/configs/` tree
        for the affected model/GPU/precision combinations.
        If no perf/recipe configs are touched, write "No perf tests impacted."

        End the review by posting it as a top-level PR comment using
        bash ANSI-C quoting so newlines render correctly:
          gh pr comment <PR NUMBER> --repo <REPO> --body $'line1\nline2\n...'
        Use $'...' (NOT plain "..."). Inside "..." the sequence \n is
        passed to gh literally and shows up as the two characters \n in
        the rendered comment; inside $'...' bash expands \n to a real
        newline before gh sees it. Do NOT use --body-file, output
        redirection, or HEREDOCs — the action sandbox blocks all three.
        The body must include the "Suggested test cases" list. If there
        is nothing to flag, the body is just "LGTM" followed by the
        test-case list. Inline comments via
        mcp__github_inline_comment__create_inline_comment are optional —
        use them only for specific code suggestions.
    secrets:
      ANTHROPIC_API_KEY: ${{ secrets.ANTHROPIC_API_KEY }}