feat(caretaker): post comment before auto-closing feature requests

[chadd28]

Summary

Posts an explanatory comment prior to attaching the auto-close label when an issue is triaged as a feature request (quality: FEATURE), informing users of current engineering focus on core stability.

Details

• Updated main.py in the Triage Worker execution loop to dispatch send_comment_action before send_label_action when quality == "FEATURE".
• Added unit test coverage in test_main.py for the FEATURE quality comment flow.

How to Validate

1. Run Python unit tests in the triage worker directory:

cd tools/caretaker-agent/cloudrun/triage-worker 
python -m unittest discover -s tests

Pre-Merge Checklist

• Updated relevant documentation and README (if needed)
• Added/updated tests (if needed)
• Noted breaking changes (if any)
• Validated on required platforms/methods:
  • MacOS
    • npm run
    • npx
    • Docker
    • Podman
    • Seatbelt
  • Windows
    • npm run
    • npx
    • Docker
  • Linux
    • npm run
    • npx
    • Docker

[gemini-code-assist]

Summary of Changes

Hello, I'm Gemini Code Assist¹! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request improves the transparency of the triage process by providing feedback to users when their feature requests are automatically closed. By posting a polite explanation regarding the current focus on core stability, the system manages user expectations more effectively during periods where feature development is deprioritized.

Highlights

• Enhanced Triage Communication: Updated the triage worker to post an explanatory comment on issues identified as feature requests before applying the auto-close label.
• Test Coverage: Added specific unit tests to verify the new comment dispatch flow for feature requests and refactored existing tests for better coverage of quality-based auto-close scenarios.

Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature	Command	Description
Code Review	/gemini review	Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary	/gemini summary	Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment	@gemini-code-assist	Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments.
Help	/gemini help	Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize the Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counterproductive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for GitHub and other Google products, sign up here.

Footnotes

1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩

[github-actions]

📊 PR Size: size/S

• Lines changed: 49
• Additions: +47
• Deletions: -2
• Files changed: 2

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request updates the triage worker to send an automated comment when an issue is classified as a 'FEATURE' request, explaining that the team is currently focusing on critical system maintenance and core stability, before auto-closing the issue. It also updates the corresponding unit tests to verify this new behavior separately from 'SPAM' and 'EMPTY' issues. There are no review comments, and I have no feedback to provide.