mirror of
https://github.com/openclaw/openclaw.git
synced 2026-03-24 16:32:29 +00:00
142 lines
3.2 KiB
Markdown
142 lines
3.2 KiB
Markdown
## Summary
|
||
|
||
Describe the problem and fix in 2–5 bullets:
|
||
|
||
- Problem:
|
||
- Why it matters:
|
||
- What changed:
|
||
- What did NOT change (scope boundary):
|
||
|
||
## Change Type (select all)
|
||
|
||
- [ ] Bug fix
|
||
- [ ] Feature
|
||
- [ ] Refactor required for the fix
|
||
- [ ] Docs
|
||
- [ ] Security hardening
|
||
- [ ] Chore/infra
|
||
|
||
## Scope (select all touched areas)
|
||
|
||
- [ ] Gateway / orchestration
|
||
- [ ] Skills / tool execution
|
||
- [ ] Auth / tokens
|
||
- [ ] Memory / storage
|
||
- [ ] Integrations
|
||
- [ ] API / contracts
|
||
- [ ] UI / DX
|
||
- [ ] CI/CD / infra
|
||
|
||
## Linked Issue/PR
|
||
|
||
- Closes #
|
||
- Related #
|
||
- [ ] This PR fixes a bug or regression
|
||
|
||
## Root Cause / Regression History (if applicable)
|
||
|
||
For bug fixes or regressions, explain why this happened, not just what changed. Otherwise write `N/A`. If the cause is unclear, write `Unknown`.
|
||
|
||
- Root cause:
|
||
- Missing detection / guardrail:
|
||
- Prior context (`git blame`, prior PR, issue, or refactor if known):
|
||
- Why this regressed now:
|
||
- If unknown, what was ruled out:
|
||
|
||
## Regression Test Plan (if applicable)
|
||
|
||
For bug fixes or regressions, name the smallest reliable test coverage that should have caught this. Otherwise write `N/A`.
|
||
|
||
- Coverage level that should have caught this:
|
||
- [ ] Unit test
|
||
- [ ] Seam / integration test
|
||
- [ ] End-to-end test
|
||
- [ ] Existing coverage already sufficient
|
||
- Target test or file:
|
||
- Scenario the test should lock in:
|
||
- Why this is the smallest reliable guardrail:
|
||
- Existing test that already covers this (if any):
|
||
- If no new test is added, why not:
|
||
|
||
## User-visible / Behavior Changes
|
||
|
||
List user-visible changes (including defaults/config).
|
||
If none, write `None`.
|
||
|
||
## Security Impact (required)
|
||
|
||
- New permissions/capabilities? (`Yes/No`)
|
||
- Secrets/tokens handling changed? (`Yes/No`)
|
||
- New/changed network calls? (`Yes/No`)
|
||
- Command/tool execution surface changed? (`Yes/No`)
|
||
- Data access scope changed? (`Yes/No`)
|
||
- If any `Yes`, explain risk + mitigation:
|
||
|
||
## Repro + Verification
|
||
|
||
### Environment
|
||
|
||
- OS:
|
||
- Runtime/container:
|
||
- Model/provider:
|
||
- Integration/channel (if any):
|
||
- Relevant config (redacted):
|
||
|
||
### Steps
|
||
|
||
1.
|
||
2.
|
||
3.
|
||
|
||
### Expected
|
||
|
||
-
|
||
|
||
### Actual
|
||
|
||
-
|
||
|
||
## Evidence
|
||
|
||
Attach at least one:
|
||
|
||
- [ ] Failing test/log before + passing after
|
||
- [ ] Trace/log snippets
|
||
- [ ] Screenshot/recording
|
||
- [ ] Perf numbers (if relevant)
|
||
|
||
## Human Verification (required)
|
||
|
||
What you personally verified (not just CI), and how:
|
||
|
||
- Verified scenarios:
|
||
- Edge cases checked:
|
||
- What you did **not** verify:
|
||
|
||
## Review Conversations
|
||
|
||
- [ ] I replied to or resolved every bot review conversation I addressed in this PR.
|
||
- [ ] I left unresolved only the conversations that still need reviewer or maintainer judgment.
|
||
|
||
If a bot review conversation is addressed by this PR, resolve that conversation yourself. Do not leave bot review conversation cleanup for maintainers.
|
||
|
||
## Compatibility / Migration
|
||
|
||
- Backward compatible? (`Yes/No`)
|
||
- Config/env changes? (`Yes/No`)
|
||
- Migration needed? (`Yes/No`)
|
||
- If yes, exact upgrade steps:
|
||
|
||
## Failure Recovery (if this breaks)
|
||
|
||
- How to disable/revert this change quickly:
|
||
- Files/config to restore:
|
||
- Known bad symptoms reviewers should watch for:
|
||
|
||
## Risks and Mitigations
|
||
|
||
List only real risks for this PR. Add/remove entries as needed. If none, write `None`.
|
||
|
||
- Risk:
|
||
- Mitigation:
|