The repository now has a measurable PR quality path instead of a loose set of
manual checks. Coverage, quarantine governance, provider smoke, desktop smoke,
and workflow wiring all produce durable reports that contributors and maintainers
can inspect without reconstructing terminal output.
This also fixes the desktop smoke current-runtime path so browser-driven smoke
runs use the desktop default active provider instead of forcing the official
current model, and records that runtime decision as an artifact.
Constraint: Default PR gates must remain non-live and contributor-safe while live model checks stay explicit.
Constraint: Release packaging is still GitHub Actions based, so release preflight must run before the build matrix.
Rejected: Make live provider or desktop smoke mandatory on every PR | secrets, quotas, and model availability are maintainer-controlled.
Rejected: Let PRs lower coverage baselines in the same change | base-branch ratchet comparison must remain authoritative.
Confidence: high
Scope-risk: moderate
Directive: Do not relax coverage or quarantine policy without a maintainer approval label and a fresh quality report.
Tested: ALLOW_CLI_CORE_CHANGE=1 ALLOW_COVERAGE_BASELINE_CHANGE=1 bun run quality:gate --mode pr
Tested: bun run quality:gate --mode baseline --allow-live --only provider-smoke:* --provider-model nvidia-custom:main:nvidia-custom-main --artifacts-dir /tmp/quality-gate-live-smoke
Tested: bun run quality:gate --mode baseline --allow-live --only desktop-smoke:* --provider-model current:current:current-runtime --artifacts-dir /tmp/quality-gate-desktop-smoke-fixed
Tested: git diff --check
Not-tested: Full live release mode with multiple providers in hosted CI; provider credentials and quota remain maintainer-controlled.
The desktop product needs a repeatable local gate that can prove the core Coding Agent loop still works after changes, not only that unit tests pass. This adds a quality-gate runner with PR, baseline, and release modes, structured reports, explicit quarantine metadata, and fixture-based live baseline cases that can run across provider/model targets.
Constraint: Existing check:pr and CI policy behavior must remain usable while the stronger baseline grows around it
Constraint: Default PR gates must not require real model credentials or provider quota
Rejected: Build a standalone QA platform first | too heavy before the baseline task shape is proven
Rejected: Keep unstable server exclusions hardcoded in run-server-tests | hides quarantine policy from reports and future review
Confidence: medium
Scope-risk: moderate
Directive: Expand baseline cases by adding focused fixtures and verifiers; do not make normal PR checks depend on live providers
Tested: bun test scripts/quality-gate/*.test.ts scripts/quality-gate/baseline/*.test.ts
Tested: bun run check:server
Tested: bun run quality:gate --mode baseline --allow-live --provider-model 2944f963-ce75-45b7-bac1-6e4f57df0970:kimi-k2.6:volc-kimi-k2.6 --provider-model 9c78d3df-7fb5-44c7-8436-3a41c3a59231:MiniMax-M2.7-highspeed:minimax-m2.7
Not-tested: desktop UI browser smoke and native release mode in this commit
Pull requests need a deterministic way to show changed areas, required checks, missing-test signals, and CLI-core risk before review. This adds a path-based policy gate, local impact reporting, PR triage labels/comments, and reusable check scripts so reviewers can evaluate blast radius without trusting contributor claims.
Constraint: CLI core should remain effectively frozen unless a maintainer explicitly overrides it.
Constraint: Default PR checks must be safe for external forks and avoid live model/provider calls.
Rejected: Run live provider tests on every PR | secrets, cost, network, and vendor instability would make the gate noisy and unsafe.
Rejected: Use Dosu as the merge gate | AI review is useful for risk explanation, but deterministic Actions must own blocking checks.
Confidence: high
Scope-risk: moderate
Directive: Keep real model/provider smoke tests in maintainer-controlled workflows; do not make them required for untrusted PRs.
Tested: bun run check:impact
Tested: bun run check:policy
Tested: ruby YAML parse for PR workflows
Tested: git diff --check
Tested: bun run check:native
Tested: npm run docs:build
Tested: bun run scripts/pr/run-server-tests.ts
Tested: bun run check:adapters
Tested: bun run check:desktop
Not-tested: GitHub-hosted pull_request_target label/comment execution before opening this PR
