▸case-01 We want to set up an automated AI pull request review workflow in GitHub Actions that triggers whenever a PR is opened or updated with new commits. Developers often suggest using `pull_request_target` with `synchronize` for PR reviews, but we want to know what trigger event best balances security and access to code diffs for automated code reviews. | fail→fail | 20,501 | 14,936 | -27% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,595 | 3,464 | -4% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-02 We are building an AI PR reviewer in GitHub Actions. Someone suggested making a single top-level issue comment with all review findings lumped together to keep the timeline clean. How should automated pull request review feedback be structured on GitHub for developer ergonomics? | pass→pass | 20,609 | 17,484 | -15% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,785 | 3,280 | +18% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-03 Our repository has large pull requests containing both generated protobuf files, documentation updates, and core business logic. Model token limits get exceeded if we pass the full git diff. A developer suggested truncating the diff arbitrarily at 1000 lines. How should an automated PR review filter the diff before AI evaluation? | pass→pass | 17,713 | 12,481 | -30% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,694 | 2,604 | -3% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-04 We want to automatically label incoming GitHub issues based on issue body content using an AI model. A team member suggested calling the GitHub API to replace all existing labels on every issue trigger. What is the correct pattern for automated issue triage labeling? | pass→pass | 13,029 | 13,130 | +1% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,858 | 2,873 | +55% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-05 Our open-source project needs to handle inactive issues on GitHub. A contributor suggested running a scheduled workflow that immediately closes any issue without comments for 30 days. How should an automated stale issue lifecycle be designed to prevent abrupt closures? | pass→pass | 18,266 | 13,888 | -24% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,604 | 3,001 | +15% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-06 Our test suite takes 45 minutes to run on every single commit in GitHub Actions. Someone suggested running only unit tests on PRs and postponing integration tests until after merge. How can workflow automation select tests dynamically based on PR changes without skipping relevant integration tests? | pass→pass | 20,639 | 20,654 | +0% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,837 | 3,973 | +40% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-07 Before executing an automated staging deployment in a GitHub Actions workflow, we want AI to validate deployment readiness. An engineer suggested asking the model to check if the code looks good without structured inputs. What parameters and context should be provided to the model during automated deployment pre-checks? | pass→pass | 16,418 | 16,420 | +0% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,602 | 3,429 | +32% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-08 During an automated release rollout in GitHub Actions, our monitoring system detects elevated 5xx error rates. An engineer proposed sending a Slack alert and waiting for a team lead to manually trigger a rollback workflow. How should automated rollback workflows be configured for immediate incident response? | fail→fail | 20,820 | 21,741 | +4% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,180 | 3,965 | +25% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-09 When multiple PRs are ready to merge, main branch advances rapidly causing merge conflicts. Developers suggested asking authors to manually run git rebase origin/main locally every time. How should an automated GitHub workflow handle PR rebasing safely when a comment like /rebase is triggered? | pass→pass | 22,933 | 25,580 | +12% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,300 | 4,533 | +37% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-10 We need to backport bug fixes from main to release branches. A developer suggested manually creating branches and cherry-picking commits via CLI every time. How should a cherry-pick automation bot handle backport requests from PR comments or labels? | pass→pass | 18,538 | 40,631 | +119% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,720 | 3,622 | +33% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-11 Our GitHub repository has hundreds of leftover feature branches from merged PRs. Someone suggested running a manual script once a year to delete branches. What automated GitHub configuration and workflow strategy should be used for branch lifecycle management? | pass→pass | 13,493 | 20,234 | +50% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,325 | 4,374 | +88% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-12 We want to build an interactive bot that responds to @our-bot ask inside GitHub PR and issue comments. Which GitHub Actions event trigger should be specified in `.github/workflows/bot.yml` to catch comment creation? | pass→pass | 8,119 | 7,036 | -13% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,223 | 1,837 | +50% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-13 We are implementing ChatOps bot commands in GitHub comments like /deploy staging or /review. Developers suggested running the full workflow script on every comment regardless of body content. How should the comment processing step filter and parse bot triggers? | pass→pass | 19,452 | 13,207 | -32% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,029 | 2,924 | -3% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-14 We want pull requests modifying backend microservices under `services/billing/` to automatically request review from the payment team. A developer suggested setting up a custom GitHub Action script that posts comment mentions to assign reviewers. What standard GitHub mechanism should be configured instead? | pass→pass | 7,210 | 5,667 | -21% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 987 | 1,554 | +57% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-15 We want to ensure that AI automated checks and automated PR tests must pass before any developer can merge into main, and prevent force-pushing to main. What repository configuration feature manages these constraints? | pass→pass | 6,556 | 4,517 | -31% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 950 | 1,403 | +48% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-16 An automated workflow needs to read repo content and open pull requests, but someone gave it `permissions: write-all` at the top level of `.github/workflows/auto-pr.yml`. What workflow security best practice should be applied? | fail→pass | 8,454 | 8,730 | +3% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,485 | 2,180 | +47% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-17 Our GitHub Actions automation workflows install npm and python dependencies on every run, taking 5 minutes before starting execution. A team member suggested downloading binary tarballs from an S3 bucket manually in a bash step. What standard performance pattern should be used in GitHub Actions? | pass→pass | 10,509 | 11,607 | +10% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,876 | 2,294 | +22% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-18 When multiple commits are rapidly pushed to a PR branch, multiple instances of our expensive automated test workflow run simultaneously and run out of runner quota. A developer suggested adding sleep 60 at the start of the workflow. How should workflow concurrency be managed in GitHub Actions? | pass→pass | 9,937 | 14,122 | +42% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,034 | 2,990 | +47% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-19 An automated workflow publishes release notes and updates external tracking systems. If a network blip occurs mid-run and the workflow is retried, duplicate release notes get created. How should the workflow steps be designed for reliability? | pass→pass | 14,439 | 15,406 | +7% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,382 | 3,344 | +40% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-20 We are migrating a Jenkins server and need to write a Jenkinsfile using Groovy DSL with `stage('Build')` and `agent { docker 'node:18' }`. How do we define post-build execution steps in declarative Jenkins syntax? | fail→fail | 10,574 | 9,737 | -8% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,715 | 2,528 | +47% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-21 Our team wants to set up a local developer workstation hook in `.git/hooks/pre-commit` using Bash script to run linter checks before any commit is created locally on developer machines. How should the shell script handle unstaged changes? | fail→fail | 18,862 | 17,520 | -7% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,164 | 3,727 | +18% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-22 We are building a `.gitlab-ci.yml` pipeline file and need to define a job that runs on merge requests using GitLab's `rules:` keyword and `only: [merge_requests]`. What is the syntax for job artifacts in GitLab CI? | fail→fail | 10,009 | 11,080 | +11% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,858 | 2,578 | +39% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-23 We want our issue triage AI bot to analyze incoming feature requests on GitHub and extract steps to reproduce, priority, and affected subsystem. A developer suggested passing raw prompt text with 'Please analyze this issue' without structure. How should the prompt structure for AI issue triage be engineered? | pass→pass | 14,852 | 12,444 | -16% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,406 | 3,149 | +31% | 0 | 0 | — |