Implement PR CI workflow (lint, tests, contract checks, static analysis) #231
Description
🎯 Layer 1: Intent Parsing
What needs to be done?
Task Title:
Implement PR CI workflow (lint, tests, contract checks, static analysis)
Area: infra | Repos: infra/
Primary Goal:
Configure automated CI workflow for pull requests that runs linting, tests, smart contract checks, and static analysis to ensure code quality before merge
User Story / Context:
As a developer, I want automated CI checks on pull requests so that code quality, security, and correctness are validated before code is merged to main
Business Impact:
Prevents bugs and security issues from reaching main branch. Enforces code quality standards. Reduces manual review burden. Critical for Phase 1 Foundation goals.
Task Metadata:
- Sprint: Sprint 3
- Related Epic/Project: GitHub Project 9 - Phase 1 Foundation
- Issue Type: Feature
- Area: Infra, Security
- Related Documentation:
- Platform Blueprint - Complete platform specification
- System Architecture - Infrastructure design
- Execution Strategy - CI/CD strategy
📚 Layer 2: Knowledge Retrieval
What information do I need?
Required Skills / Knowledge:
- DevOps/Infra (CI/CD, GitHub Actions)
- Code quality tools (ESLint, Prettier, black, isort, flake8, mypy)
- Smart contract security (Slither, Mythril, MythX)
- Static analysis tools
Estimated Effort:
M (Medium - 3-5 days)
Knowledge Resources:
- Review
.cursor/skills/for relevant patterns (devops-engineer, github-actions-templates, smart-contract-security) - Check
.cursor/llm/docs/for implementation examples - Read Platform Blueprint:
docs/draft.md - Read System Architecture:
docs/planning/4-System-Architecture-Design.md - Read Execution Strategy:
docs/reference/spec/execute.md - Study tech docs / ADRs in
docs/adrs/directory - Review GitHub Actions CI/CD best practices
Architecture Context:
According to the Platform Blueprint, HyperAgent requires strict code quality and security checks. The PR CI workflow will enforce these standards across all code changes.
System Architecture Diagram:
graph TB
subgraph "PR CI Workflow"
PR[Pull Request]
Lint[Linting<br/>ESLint, Prettier, black]
Test[Test Suite<br/>Unit, Integration, E2E]
Contract[Contract Checks<br/>Slither, Mythril]
Static[Static Analysis<br/>CodeQL, SonarQube]
Report[Report Results]
end
subgraph "Quality Gates"
Pass[All Checks Pass]
Fail[Checks Fail]
Block[Block Merge]
end
PR --> Lint
PR --> Test
PR --> Contract
PR --> Static
Lint --> Report
Test --> Report
Contract --> Report
Static --> Report
Report --> Pass
Report --> Fail
Fail --> Block
Pass --> Merge
Code Examples & Patterns:
GitHub Actions Workflow Example:
name: PR CI Workflow
on:
pull_request:
branches: [main]
jobs:
lint:
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
steps:
- uses: actions/checkout@v4
- uses: actions/setup-node@v4
- run: npm ci
- run: npm run lint
- run: npm run format:check
test:
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
steps:
- uses: actions/checkout@v4
- uses: actions/setup-python@v5
- run: pip install -r requirements.txt
- run: pytest --cov --cov-report=xml
contract-checks:
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
steps:
- uses: actions/checkout@v4
- uses: foundry-actions/foundry-toolchain@v1
- run: forge test
- run: slither .
- run: mythril analyze contracts/
static-analysis:
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
steps:
- uses: actions/checkout@v4
- uses: github/codeql-action/init@v3
- uses: github/codeql-action/analyze@v3⚠️ Layer 3: Constraint Analysis
What constraints and dependencies exist?
Known Dependencies:
- Linting and formatting tools must be configured
- Test suites must exist and be passing
- Smart contract security tools (Slither, Mythril) must be installed
- Static analysis tools must be configured
Technical Constraints:
Scope limited to PR CI workflow. Release workflow tracked separately (see issue #232).
Current Blockers:
None identified (update as work progresses)
Risk Assessment & Mitigations:
Risk of false positives blocking legitimate PRs. Mitigation: Start with warning-level checks, gradually increase strictness, allow manual override for edge cases.
Resource Constraints:
- Deadline: Mar 3–16 (Sprint 3)
- Effort Estimate: M (Medium - 3-5 days)
💡 Layer 4: Solution Generation
How should this be implemented?
Solution Approach:
Implement GitHub Actions workflow:
- Linting: ESLint for TypeScript/JavaScript, black/isort/flake8/mypy for Python
- Formatting: Prettier for frontend, black/isort for backend
- Tests: Run unit, integration, and E2E tests with coverage reporting
- Contract checks: Slither static analysis, Mythril symbolic execution, Foundry tests
- Static analysis: CodeQL security scanning, dependency vulnerability scanning
- Report results: Post results as PR comments, block merge on failure
- Cache dependencies: Use GitHub Actions cache for faster runs
Design Considerations:
- Follow established patterns from
.cursor/skills/devops-engineer - Maintain consistency with existing CI/CD configurations
- Consider parallel job execution for faster feedback
- Ensure proper error reporting and actionable feedback
- Plan for testing and validation
- Support incremental checks (only changed files)
Acceptance Criteria (Solution Validation):
- PR CI workflow runs on all pull requests
- Linting checks pass/fail appropriately
- Test suite runs and reports coverage
- Smart contract checks run for Solidity changes
- Static analysis scans for security vulnerabilities
- PR merge blocked on check failures
- Results reported as PR comments
- Documentation updated with CI workflow details
- Code reviewed and approved
📋 Layer 5: Execution Planning
What are the concrete steps?
Implementation Steps:
- Configure linting tools (ESLint, Prettier, black, isort, flake8, mypy)
- Create GitHub Actions workflow file for PR CI
- Set up linting job
- Set up formatting check job
- Set up test job with coverage reporting
- Set up smart contract checks job
- Set up static analysis job (CodeQL, dependency scanning)
- Configure PR merge protection rules
- Set up result reporting (PR comments)
- Configure caching for faster runs
- Test workflow with sample PRs
- Document CI workflow procedures
- Code review and approval
Environment Setup:
Repos / Services:
- Main repo:
hyperagent/hyperagent - GitHub Actions runners
Required Environment Variables:
GITHUB_TOKEN=(Automatically provided by GitHub Actions)CODECOV_TOKEN=(For coverage reporting, if using Codecov)
Access & Credentials:
- GitHub Actions: Automatic via repository settings
- Access request: Contact @devops or project lead
✅ Layer 6: Output Formatting & Validation
How do we ensure quality delivery?
Ownership & Collaboration:
- Owner: @JustineDevs
- Reviewer: @ArhonJay
- Access Request: @JustineDevs or @ArhonJay
- Deadline: Mar 3–16 (Sprint 3)
- Communication: Daily stand-up updates, GitHub issue comments
Quality Gates:
- Code follows project style guide (see
.cursor/rules/rules.mdc) - All tests pass (unit, integration, e2e)
- No critical lint/security issues
- Documentation updated (README, CI workflow docs)
- Meets all acceptance criteria from Layer 4
- Follows production standards (see
.cursor/rules/production.mdc)
Review Checklist:
- Code review approved by @ArhonJay
- CI/CD pipeline passes (GitHub Actions)
- PR CI workflow tested and verified
- Security scan passes (no critical vulnerabilities)
- Documentation complete and accurate
Delivery Status:
- Initial Status: To Do
- Progress Tracking: Use issue comments for updates
- Sign-off: Approved by @Hyperionkit on [YYYY-MM-DD]
- PR Link: [Link to merged PR(s)]
Related Issues:
- Epic: CI/CD & quality gates #230: Epic: CI/CD & quality gates
- Implement release workflow (build Docker images, deploy to staging) #232: Implement release workflow (build Docker images, deploy to staging)
Documentation References:
Metadata
Metadata
Assignees
Type
Projects
Status