[Schema Consistency] 🔍 Schema Consistency Check - 2026-10-20

[github-actions[bot]]

Overview

Found 3 inconsistencies in a focused schema, compiler, documentation, and workflow comparison. No critical issue or workflow violation was confirmed. Strategy: cached schema spot checks with targeted parser/doc/workflow verification (strategy-2); new strategy: no.

Key findings

1. Medium — Invalid documented placement of stop-after. docs/src/content/docs/reference/rate-limiting-controls.md:49 shows top-level stop-after: +48h. The schema rejects this as an additional property; pkg/workflow/stop_after.go:25 reads it from the on map. Move it under on, alongside the trigger. Users copying the example cannot compile it.
2. Medium — Unsupported MCP-script parameter enum documented as validation. docs/src/content/docs/reference/mcp-scripts.md:187 shows choice-param.enum. The parameter schema at pkg/parser/schemas/main_workflow_schema.json:13893 excludes enum; a complete minimal configuration fails validation specifically at that property. pkg/workflow/mcp_scripts_parser.go:158 does not extract enum values, and pkg/workflow/mcp_scripts_generator.go:91 does not emit them. Remove the unsupported example or implement enum support across schema, types, extraction, and generated input validation together. Merely accepting the field in the schema would not enforce the advertised restriction.
3. Low — Python input transport is misdescribed in schema metadata. pkg/parser/schemas/main_workflow_schema.json:13944 says Python input parameters arrive as INPUT_* environment variables. pkg/workflow/mcp_scripts_generator.go:244 documents JSON stdin, and line 263 generates json.loads(sys.stdin.read()). Correct the schema description to explain the generated inputs dictionary; explicit env configuration is separate. This affects schema-derived guidance and editor help.

Evidence, scope, and exclusions

• Started from the precomputed schema diff and strategy cache. Day-of-year modulo 10 is 3, selecting a proven strategy. Avoided repeating the cached findings from October 18–19.
• Both top-level field gaps were false positives: docker-image-pull-policy is consumed through RawFrontmatter in pkg/workflow/docker.go:294, and work-queue-policy in pkg/workflow/work_queue_policy.go:184. Absence from typed frontmatter is insufficient evidence of an unsupported field.
• Local Draft7 validation of complete inert configurations confirmed rejection of top-level stop-after and MCP-script parameter enum; the corresponding nested on.stop-after configuration validates. No workflow code was executed.
• Workflow comparison used the precomputed root-field inventory plus targeted searches of workflow/shared markdown. The inventory has no root keys outside the schema; shared MCP examples use root mcp-servers. This focused check does not establish full nested-schema validity for every workflow.
• Non-authoritative AWF warning: the supplied AWF comparison has degraded: true; canonical config-source retrieval failed. AWF drift conclusions are excluded. No required-check failure, corrective PR, or drift issue is proposed from that comparison.
• Source files were unchanged. Only the strategy cache was updated.

Recommendations and next steps

• Correct the rate-limiting example to use on.stop-after.
• Remove the unsupported enum example, or add coordinated schema/parser/generator support with meaningful validation coverage.
• Correct the Python input-transport schema description.
• Validate complete documentation examples against the schema to catch these regressions.

Strategy performance: 3 findings; high effectiveness; reuse recommended. No workflow changes are indicated by the evidence collected.

References: §39375393940

Generated by ✅ Schema Consistency Checker · codex · gpt61 · 15.2 AIC · ⌖ 6.84 AIC · ⊞ 19.5K · ◷

• expires on Oct 20, 2026, 9:37 PM UTC-08:00

[github-actions[bot]]

This discussion has been marked as outdated by Schema Consistency Checker.

A newer discussion is available at Discussion #70798.