🎨 Palette: Dynamic Zero Trust pillar status in SSP report#147
🎨 Palette: Dynamic Zero Trust pillar status in SSP report#147AGI-Corporation wants to merge 1 commit intomainfrom
Conversation
This change replaces static "See assessment" text in the System Security Plan (SSP) Markdown report with dynamic visual progress bars for each Zero Trust pillar. 💡 What: - Added `ZT_PILLAR_DOMAINS` constant in `backend/routers/reports.py` to centralize CMMC domain mapping. - Implemented `get_maturity_pct` helper for weighted compliance calculation (0.5 for partials). - Refactored `generate_ssp` and `get_dashboard` to use dynamic pillar data. - Enhanced the SSP Markdown table with visual progress bars. 🎯 Why: - Improves visual scannability of generated reports for human stakeholders. - Ensures consistency between the API dashboard and generated documents. ♿ Accessibility: - Uses block-based visual progress bars with explicit percentage labels. - Standardized implementation status emojis. Co-authored-by: AGI-Corporation <186229839+AGI-Corporation@users.noreply.github.com>
|
👋 Jules, reporting for duty! I'm here to lend a hand with this pull request. When you start a review, I'll add a 👀 emoji to each comment to let you know I've read it. I'll focus on feedback directed at me and will do my best to stay out of conversations between you and other bots or reviewers to keep the noise down. I'll push a commit with your requested changes shortly after. Please note there might be a delay between these steps, but rest assured I'm on the job! For more direct control, you can switch me to Reactive Mode. When this mode is on, I will only act on comments where you specifically mention me with New to Jules? Learn more at jules.google/docs. For security, I will only act on instructions from the user who triggered this task. |
📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughThe changes centralize ZT (Zero Trust) pillar configuration into a module-level mapping, add a weighted maturity calculation function, and refactor the Changes
Estimated code review effort🎯 3 (Moderate) | ⏱️ ~20 minutes Possibly related PRs
Poem
🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 3✅ Passed checks (3 passed)
✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings. ✨ Finishing Touches📝 Generate docstrings
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
backend/routers/reports.py (1)
27-35: Use one shared source for ZT pillar/domain mappingThis mapping is duplicated in
agents/orchestrator/agent.py(Line 82-91 in provided snippet). Keeping multiple copies will drift over time and skew report vs agent behavior.🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed. In `@backend/routers/reports.py` around lines 27 - 35, The ZT_PILLAR_DOMAINS mapping is duplicated; remove the local copy in reports.py and import the single source of truth used by the agent (the mapping defined in agents.orchestrator.agent, e.g. ZT_PILLAR_DOMAINS) and reference that imported constant where needed; update any references in functions or logic in reports.py that used the local ZT_PILLAR_DOMAINS to use the imported symbol instead, and ensure tests/import paths still resolve.
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.
Inline comments:
In `@backend/routers/reports.py`:
- Around line 108-113: Overall Compliance currently computes compliance_pct
using only implemented controls (compliance_pct = status_counts["implemented"] /
total_controls * 100); update this to match the pillar maturity logic by
counting partials at half weight (i.e., implemented + 0.5 * partial) divided by
total_controls before multiplying by 100, then pass that to get_progress_bar;
update the same calculation location referenced by the second occurrence (the
other compliance_pct calculation around the other summary) so both overall and
pillar math use the same weighted partial logic, and keep references to
status_counts, total_controls, compliance_pct and get_progress_bar to locate the
changes.
---
Nitpick comments:
In `@backend/routers/reports.py`:
- Around line 27-35: The ZT_PILLAR_DOMAINS mapping is duplicated; remove the
local copy in reports.py and import the single source of truth used by the agent
(the mapping defined in agents.orchestrator.agent, e.g. ZT_PILLAR_DOMAINS) and
reference that imported constant where needed; update any references in
functions or logic in reports.py that used the local ZT_PILLAR_DOMAINS to use
the imported symbol instead, and ensure tests/import paths still resolve.
🪄 Autofix (Beta)
Fix all unresolved CodeRabbit comments on this PR:
- Push a commit to this branch (recommended)
- Create a new PR with the fixes
ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration
Configuration used: defaults
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro
Run ID: 2093fd80-4d54-461b-8990-65a7648722fc
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
backend/routers/reports.py
| compliance_pct = ( | ||
| (status_counts["implemented"] / total_controls * 100) | ||
| if total_controls > 0 | ||
| else 0 | ||
| ) | ||
| progress_bar = get_progress_bar(compliance_pct) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Align Overall Compliance math with pillar maturity math
At Line 108-113, Overall Compliance is implemented-only, but pillar status (Line 138) uses weighted partials (0.5). This can present conflicting compliance signals in the same SSP.
Suggested fix
- compliance_pct = (
- (status_counts["implemented"] / total_controls * 100)
- if total_controls > 0
- else 0
- )
+ compliance_pct = get_maturity_pct(
+ status_counts["implemented"],
+ status_counts["partial"],
+ total_controls,
+ )Also applies to: 150-150
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.
In `@backend/routers/reports.py` around lines 108 - 113, Overall Compliance
currently computes compliance_pct using only implemented controls
(compliance_pct = status_counts["implemented"] / total_controls * 100); update
this to match the pillar maturity logic by counting partials at half weight
(i.e., implemented + 0.5 * partial) divided by total_controls before multiplying
by 100, then pass that to get_progress_bar; update the same calculation location
referenced by the second occurrence (the other compliance_pct calculation around
the other summary) so both overall and pillar math use the same weighted partial
logic, and keep references to status_counts, total_controls, compliance_pct and
get_progress_bar to locate the changes.
1 participant
🎨 Palette: Dynamic Zero Trust pillar status in SSP report
This change replaces static "See assessment" text in the System Security Plan (SSP) Markdown report with dynamic visual progress bars for each Zero Trust pillar.
💡 What:
ZT_PILLAR_DOMAINSconstant inbackend/routers/reports.pyto centralize CMMC domain mapping.get_maturity_pcthelper for weighted compliance calculation (0.5 for partials).generate_sspandget_dashboardto use dynamic pillar data.🎯 Why:
♿ Accessibility:
PR created automatically by Jules for task 8363647733487862273 started by @AGI-Corporation
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Bug Fixes