Skip to content

Report how many files each run read, and how many it used - #37

Merged
cabibbz merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
claude/pwa-chatgpt-model-selection-o38216
Jul 27, 2026
Merged

cabibbz merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
claude/pwa-chatgpt-model-selection-o38216

Conversation

@cabibbz

@cabibbz cabibbz commented Jul 27, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

Sol has no file access — files reach it only as the attachments the client pasted into the packet. So "files inspected" is exactly what ## Attached Paths produced, and that is now counted, stored, and shown per run.

Two numbers, because one of them isn't the interesting one

Shown Means
Files read: 3 of 7 Seven were readable; three are referenced in the review
Files read: 7 attached Seven were readable; none are referenced
Nothing The packet carried no attachments, so every claim about the code is a description

The gap is the useful part: an attachment nothing refers to did no work. A run reading 3 of 7 tells you the evidence you sent was larger than the evidence the decision turned on.

The result view lists the referenced paths separately from the attached-but-never-mentioned ones.

Where it appears

  • History rows — … · 2 files, visible before opening a review
  • Run fact table — Files read, beside Protocol and Research
  • Result view — a Files card with both path lists

Counted once, at commit

commitJob already reads the packet for its integrity checks, so the count is taken there and stored on the job. History and the answered review then report it without decrypting a packet again — which matters because the packet leaves retention before the record does.

Matching rule

A path counts as referenced when the released text names it, or names its file name where the full path would be unwieldy (overlay.cpp for DmaKit/overlay.cpp). A base name shorter than four characters is not matched, so an incidental word can't fake a citation.

Verification

  • Unit: cited/uncited split, base-name matching, the short-name guard, a count with no paths (packet aged out), and zero attachments staying zero
  • analyzePacketQuality names the paths in order and returns an empty list when there are none
  • e2e: a packet with two attachments stores attachedFiles: 2 at commit, the paths reach the phone, and the count survives onto the answered job; a packet with none records zero
  • Browser at 390×844: FILES | 2 attached, 48 B with both paths listed, FILES READ | 2 attached in the fact table, scroll stable

119 unit tests (118 pass / 1 Windows-only skip), mocked e2e, lint, build clean.


Generated by Claude Code

Sol has no file access: files reach it only as the attachments the
client pasted into the packet. So what a run could read is exactly
what the Attached Paths section produced, and that is now counted once
when the packet passes its integrity checks and stored on the job.
History rows, the run fact table, and the answered review all report
it without decrypting a packet again, which matters because the packet
leaves retention before the record does.

The second number is the one worth having. The result view separates
the paths the review actually names from the ones that were attached
and never mentioned, because an attachment nothing refers to did no
work. A run reading "3 of 7" says the evidence sent was larger than
the evidence the decision turned on.

A path counts as referenced when the released text names it, or names
its file name where the full path would be unwieldy. A base name
shorter than four characters is not matched, so an incidental word
cannot fake a citation.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01FxxEQsJEXq9hZmjpNH5PxY
@vercel

vercel Bot commented Jul 27, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.

Project Deployment Actions Updated (UTC)
sol-review-gate Building Building Preview, Comment Jul 27, 2026 10:56pm

Request Review

@cabibbz
cabibbz merged commit eda99b9 into main Jul 27, 2026
2 of 3 checks passed

This branch was successfully deployed

1 active deployment
Preview — 0208da6f Deployed Jul 27, 2026 by vercel[bot]
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants