Skip to content

Redesign the AI tell report - #2

Open
Gandy2025 wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
feat/product-scan-report-redesign
Open

Redesign the AI tell report#2
Gandy2025 wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
feat/product-scan-report-redesign

Conversation

@Gandy2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Summary

  • redesign the AI Tell Scan report around the approved Product Scan editorial direction
  • report confirmed tell count only, with explicit boundaries against AI probability, authorship, provenance, and general design-quality claims
  • distinguish deterministic clean results, reviewed-zero results, and reported-versus-suppressed confirmed findings
  • add responsive, print, accessibility, escaping, and semantic-state coverage

Preview

Open the checked report example

Validation

  • python3 -B -m unittest discover -s tests -p 'test_*.py' -v — 14/14 passing
  • python3 -B scripts/validate_skill.py
  • python3 -B .claude/skills/ai-tell-scan/scripts/test_ats.py — 39/39 passing
  • git diff --check
  • Playwright: 1440px desktop, 390px mobile, horizontal overflow, console, and full-page screenshots
  • Letter PDF rendered and inspected page by page
  • two independent final code reviews completed with no code blockers

@Gandy2025
Gandy2025 requested a review from bestony as a code owner July 19, 2026 16:11

@bestony bestony left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Reviewed head 0595d5b. No blocking findings.

Verified locally:

  • python3 -B -m unittest discover -s tests -p "test_*.py" -v (14/14 passing)
  • python3 -B .claude/skills/ai-tell-scan/scripts/test_ats.py -v (39/39 passing)
  • python3 -B scripts/validate_skill.py
  • git diff --check 0da9ee7..0595d5b

The renderer keeps confirmed/reported/suppressed counts distinct, escapes report-controlled sinks, and preserves clean versus reviewed-zero semantics.

@CLAassistant

Copy link
Copy Markdown

CLA assistant check
Thank you for your submission! We really appreciate it. Like many open source projects, we ask that you sign our Contributor License Agreement before we can accept your contribution.
You have signed the CLA already but the status is still pending? Let us recheck it.

@Gandy2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@bestony The contributor reports completing the CLA as Gandy2025 from another device. I triggered the official CLA Assistant recheck endpoint afterward, but license/cla remains pending and the bot comment has not updated. The PR commit is authored and committed by the same linked GitHub account.

Could you please verify the CLA Assistant signature association/configuration or re-run the check from the maintainer side? This is now the only external status blocker; both Python checks and the approval remain green.

@bestony

bestony commented Jul 28, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Maintainer-side verification is complete:

  • I re-ran the official CLA Assistant recheck endpoint. It accepted the request and redirected normally, but license/cla is still pending and the bot comment did not change.
  • The PR head is still 0595d5bfe7f9a59902d620475043d82de2e6e9ab; both the commit author and committer resolve to the GitHub account Gandy2025. No commit rewrite is needed.
  • This repository inherits an organization-level CLA Assistant binding to this shared Gist. The Gist contains both ccla.md and icla.md, but the agreement CLA Assistant currently renders is the Corporate Contributor License Agreement. That is a configuration problem for an individual contributor; the CCLA itself directs individuals to use the ICLA.
  • The same GitHub account is also pending on other included repositories under this organization, so this is not specific to this PR or its commit identity.

CLA Assistant does not expose signature records through its public API, so I cannot confirm whether the signing click stored a signature association. I am escalating the organization-level configuration correction to the maintainer. Please do not rewrite the commit or attempt another signature against the current CCLA page; after the online flow is corrected to present only the ICLA, we will re-run the check and confirm whether a fresh signature is required.

@Gandy2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@bestony The owner has requested that both report redesigns proceed to merge. Code-side readiness is now complete:

  • agent-team-readiness-scan#4: exact head ee73b21ca21134a54534cd8a631145a56ea0993e is approved, tests pass, and the PR is mergeable/clean.
  • ai-tell-scan#2: exact head 0595d5bfe7f9a59902d620475043d82de2e6e9ab is approved, both Python checks pass, and the PR is mergeable; license/cla remains pending.

I will not use the absence of a CLA check on the newer readiness head to bypass the organization’s legal gate. Please switch the organization-level CLA Assistant binding to an ICLA-only Gist (with CCLA authorization handled separately), then notify us so Gandy2025 can sign the current ICLA if required and we can recheck and squash-merge both PRs immediately.

@bestony

bestony commented Jul 28, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Thanks for the update. I revalidated both exact heads. I have not switched the organization-level CLA binding or merged either PR: ai-tell-scan#2 still has license/cla pending, while agent-team-readiness-scan#4 has no CLA status at all. We will not treat the absence of a check as legal acceptance.

The ICLA-only configuration change is awaiting direct maintainer confirmation. Once that binding is confirmed, Gandy2025 must personally sign the current ICLA and we will recheck the required status before any merge.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants