Add telcoeng-blueprint-workflow plugin for blueprint lifecycle automation#438
Open
mgonzalezo wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
Add telcoeng-blueprint-workflow plugin for blueprint lifecycle automation#438mgonzalezo wants to merge 1 commit into
mgonzalezo wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
Contributor
|
Note Reviews pausedIt looks like this branch is under active development. To avoid overwhelming you with review comments due to an influx of new commits, CodeRabbit has automatically paused this review. You can configure this behavior by changing the Use the following commands to manage reviews:
Use the checkboxes below for quick actions:
WalkthroughAdds a new Telcoeng Blueprint Workflow Claude plugin: marketplace/catalog registration, plugin manifest and README, five CLI command specs (fix, generate, ingest, search, validate), reference guides, and five skill specification documents for blueprint parsing, scoring, generation, deviation tracking, and kube-compare integration. ChangesTelco Blueprint Workflow (single DAG)
Sequence Diagram(s)sequenceDiagram
participant User
participant CLI
participant Plugin
participant StandardsRepo
participant MCP as kube-compare-mcp
participant JIRA
User->>CLI: run /telcoeng-blueprint-workflow:validate <blueprint> [--cluster|--jira]
CLI->>Plugin: invoke validate command with args
Plugin->>StandardsRepo: load telcoeng-blueprint-standards (structure, rubric)
Plugin->>Plugin: compute compliance scoring (blueprint-structure → compliance-scoring)
alt cluster validation requested
Plugin->>MCP: kube_compare_cluster_diff / kube_compare_validate_rds
MCP-->>Plugin: cluster diff/results
Plugin->>Plugin: map diffs to blueprint sections (kube-compare-integration)
end
alt create JIRA tickets requested
Plugin->>JIRA: create/update ECOPS tickets (confirmation flow)
JIRA-->>Plugin: ticket IDs/links
end
Plugin-->>CLI: report (score, report path, tickets)
CLI-->>User: display results / saved report
Estimated code review effort🎯 3 (Moderate) | ⏱️ ~25 minutes 🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 10✅ Passed checks (10 passed)
✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings. ✨ Finishing Touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Tip 💬 Introducing Slack Agent: The best way for teams to turn conversations into code.Slack Agent is built on CodeRabbit's deep understanding of your code, so your team can collaborate across the entire SDLC without losing context.
Built for teams:
One agent for your entire SDLC. Right inside Slack. 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}
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 2
🧹 Nitpick comments (7)
plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/README.md (1)
138-145: ⚡ Quick winDocument error handling when standards are unavailable.
The Standards Resilience section describes dynamic runtime loading of
telcoeng-blueprint-standards, but doesn't explain what happens when the standards repository is missing, inaccessible, or contains malformed content.Consider adding a brief note about fallback behavior (e.g., "If standards are unavailable, commands fall back to
reference/blueprint-sections.md" as mentioned in the command docs).🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed. In `@plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/README.md` around lines 138 - 145, Update the "Standards Resilience" section to document runtime error handling: explain what happens if the telcoeng-blueprint-standards repo is missing, inaccessible, or malformed and state the fallback behavior (for example: commands fall back to reference/blueprint-sections.md and log an error). Mention where errors are surfaced (e.g., command output or logs) and recommend how to recover (re-clone, fix format). Edit the README heading "Standards Resilience" to include this brief fallback and recovery note so readers know expected behavior when standards are unavailable.plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/skills/kube-compare-integration/SKILL.md (1)
27-38: ⚡ Quick winClarify handling of multi-profile blueprints.
The table maps single deployment types to RDS profiles, but
plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/skills/content-generation/SKILL.md(line 185) mentions "multi-profile blueprints (e.g., Hub + Core)".Consider adding guidance on how to select or combine RDS profiles when validating multi-profile blueprints, or note that cluster validation should be run separately for each profile.
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed. In `@plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/skills/kube-compare-integration/SKILL.md` around lines 27 - 38, Update Step 1 to explicitly handle multi-profile blueprints by explaining whether profiles should be validated separately or composed: call out that for multi-profile cases (e.g., Hub + Core) you should run kube_compare_resolve_rds for each RDS profile (e.g., hub then core) to obtain each profile's reference config paths, or document how to merge/override those paths if a combined validation is supported; reference the existing tool name kube_compare_resolve_rds and the SKILL.md section that describes multi-profile blueprints so readers know to either run cluster validation per profile or follow a defined merge procedure.plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/commands/ingest.md (1)
64-70: ⚡ Quick winClarify image handling for non-pandoc conversion tools.
The image handling description (lines 66-69) references "pandoc media extraction directory" and
patterns, which are pandoc-specific. MarkItDown and DocLing (the alternative tools in the priority order) may extract images differently or use different path conventions.Consider adding a note about how image extraction varies by tool, or generalize the description to "conversion tool's media extraction directory."
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed. In `@plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/commands/ingest.md` around lines 64 - 70, Update the image handling block so it no longer assumes a pandoc-specific path; generalize references to "conversion tool's media extraction directory" instead of "pandoc media extraction directory" and treat the pattern `` as an example of extracted-image references (not the only form). Ensure the instructions still require: copying any extracted image files to `.work/blueprints/<partner-name>/media/` when present, replacing missing images with the comment template `<!-- DIAGRAM: [description based on surrounding context] — source: original document -->`, and never leaving bare extracted-image references that point to nonexistent files; also add a brief note that different tools (e.g., MarkItDown, DocLing) may use different extraction paths or filename patterns and to check the conversion tool's extraction directory when locating images.plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/reference/compliance-rubric.md (1)
78-82: ⚡ Quick winProvide concrete guidance for point redistribution.
The update guidance instructs to "Adjust point distribution to maintain 35-point total" when adding new mandatory sections, but doesn't explain how to decide which existing sections should have their points reduced. This could lead to inconsistent rubric updates.
Consider adding a prioritization principle (e.g., "reduce points from sections with the highest current allocation first" or "distribute the reduction evenly across all existing sections").
📋 Proposed enhancement
When `telcoeng-blueprint-standards` adds new mandatory sections: 1. Add the section to the Section Presence table -2. Adjust point distribution to maintain 35-point total +2. Adjust point distribution to maintain 35-point total by reducing points evenly across existing sections (rounding to maintain integer values) 3. Add content completeness criteria if the section requires specific data 4. Bump the plugin version (PATCH for weight adjustments, MINOR for new sections)🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed. In `@plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/reference/compliance-rubric.md` around lines 78 - 82, The rubric update guidance in compliance-rubric.md lacks a concrete rule for redistributing points when adding sections; update the "Adjust point distribution to maintain 35-point total" instruction to specify a clear prioritization algorithm (e.g., "reduce points from existing sections with the largest current allocations first, taking from the top until the new section(s) are accommodated" or alternatively "evenly distribute the required reduction across all non-mandatory sections"), include a short step-by-step example showing how to compute reductions and tie-breakers, and clarify when to apply PATCH vs MINOR version bumps per the existing "Bump the plugin version" note so maintainers follow a repeatable procedure.plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/commands/validate.md (3)
85-88: ⚡ Quick winClarify how undocumented deviations affect compliance.
Line 87 states undocumented deviations are "not scored" but are "surfaced as actionable findings." This could be confusing — if they're not scored, how do they affect the compliance score? Consider clarifying that they appear in the report as gaps but don't reduce the numeric score, or that they reduce points in the "Deviations itemized" criterion.
💡 Proposed clarification
For each detected undocumented deviation, add it to the compliance report as a gap. These are not scored (scoring only evaluates what is documented), but they are surfaced as actionable findings to guide the `fix` and `generate` commands. + +Note: Undocumented deviations do not directly reduce the total score, but they may indirectly affect the "Deviations itemized" score (6 points) if the documented deviations list is incomplete relative to what exists in the blueprint.🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed. In `@plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/commands/validate.md` around lines 85 - 88, Summary: The wording about "undocumented deviations" is ambiguous about scoring. Update the text in validate.md (the paragraph that mentions "undocumented deviations are 'not scored' but are 'surfaced as actionable findings'") to explicitly state that undocumented deviations are listed in the compliance report as "gaps" and do not reduce the overall numeric compliance score; alternatively, if you intend them to affect the "Deviations itemized" criterion, state that specifically and explain how points are deducted. Use the terms "undocumented deviations", "compliance report", and "Deviations itemized" in the revised sentence so readers understand whether these gaps only appear as findings or also reduce the numeric score.
26-27: ⚡ Quick winRemove repetitive adverb.
Both lines start with "Optionally", creating a repetitive style pattern.
✨ Proposed fix
- Reads the standards document dynamically — adapts when standards change - Optionally validates against a live cluster using kube-compare-mcp -- Optionally creates ECOPS JIRA tickets for non-compliant findings +- Creates ECOPS JIRA tickets for non-compliant findings (optional via --jira flag) - Generates a detailed compliance report with actionable recommendations🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed. In `@plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/commands/validate.md` around lines 26 - 27, The two bullet lines "- Optionally validates against a live cluster using kube-compare-mcp" and "- Optionally creates ECOPS JIRA tickets for non-compliant findings" repeat the adverb "Optionally"; reword one (or both) to remove the repetition and improve flow — for example change the first to "Validate against a live cluster using kube-compare-mcp (optional)" or the second to "Create ECOPS JIRA tickets for non-compliant findings (optional)" so each conveys optionality without starting both bullets with the same word.
180-188: ⚡ Quick winDocument error handling for skill invocation failures.
The error handling section covers blueprint, standards, kube-compare-mcp, and JIRA issues, but doesn't address what happens if the invoked skills (
compliance-scoring,blueprint-structure,deviation-tracking,kube-compare-integration) fail to load or execute. The compliance-scoring skill documentation (context snippet 1) shows it has a fallback for missing rubric files, but that's not documented here.🛡️ Proposed addition
- **JIRA not configured**: Skip ticket creation, note in report, provide manual ticket creation guidance - **Empty blueprint**: Score 0/100 with rating "Draft", recommend using `generate` to scaffold content +- **Skill invocation failure**: If a required skill (compliance-scoring, blueprint-structure, deviation-tracking) fails to load, fall back to built-in defaults where possible (e.g., hardcoded rubric weights 35/30/20/15) and warn the user that scoring may be incomplete🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed. In `@plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/commands/validate.md` around lines 180 - 188, Add documentation for failures when invoking skills by describing expected behavior and fallbacks for each skill invocation (compliance-scoring, blueprint-structure, deviation-tracking, kube-compare-integration): state how a skill load/execute error is surfaced in the report/logs, what automatic fallback or default is used (e.g., compliance-scoring falls back to missing rubric handling), whether the run continues with partial scoring or is aborted, and user remediation steps (rerun, check skill installation/config, file paths). Update the "Error Handling" section to include these entries, mention that skill errors should be reflected in the validation report and CLI output, and add a short example message for each skill so readers know what to look for.
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.
Inline comments:
In `@plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/commands/validate.md`:
- Around line 81-82: The "Profile-aware scoring" section uses the vague phrase
"Score accordingly" without specifying the scoring logic; update the validate.md
"Profile-aware scoring" paragraph to include a concrete scoring methodology and
example: define how points are assigned when a setting like
realTimeKernel.enabled: false is baseline for one profile (e.g., Core) but a
deviation for another (e.g., RAN-DU) — for example, state whether each profile
is scored independently then aggregated, whether conflicts subtract points, and
show a numeric example calculating total score for a multi-profile blueprint;
reference the existing phrase "Score accordingly" and the specific key
realTimeKernel.enabled to locate where to insert the clarification and example.
In `@plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/reference/compliance-rubric.md`:
- Line 34: Update the "S-BOM has specific versions (not \"latest\" or \"TBD\")"
rubric row to explicitly state the partial-scoring formula: compute the row
score proportionally as (number_of_rows_with_concrete_versions / total_rows) ×
6, with any blank version counting as 0 for that row; specify how to round
(e.g., round to one decimal or nearest whole number) and note that OCP and RHCOS
must still be explicitly stated to count toward the numerator.
---
Nitpick comments:
In `@plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/commands/ingest.md`:
- Around line 64-70: Update the image handling block so it no longer assumes a
pandoc-specific path; generalize references to "conversion tool's media
extraction directory" instead of "pandoc media extraction directory" and treat
the pattern `` as an example of extracted-image references
(not the only form). Ensure the instructions still require: copying any
extracted image files to `.work/blueprints/<partner-name>/media/` when present,
replacing missing images with the comment template `<!-- DIAGRAM: [description
based on surrounding context] — source: original document -->`, and never
leaving bare extracted-image references that point to nonexistent files; also
add a brief note that different tools (e.g., MarkItDown, DocLing) may use
different extraction paths or filename patterns and to check the conversion
tool's extraction directory when locating images.
In `@plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/commands/validate.md`:
- Around line 85-88: Summary: The wording about "undocumented deviations" is
ambiguous about scoring. Update the text in validate.md (the paragraph that
mentions "undocumented deviations are 'not scored' but are 'surfaced as
actionable findings'") to explicitly state that undocumented deviations are
listed in the compliance report as "gaps" and do not reduce the overall numeric
compliance score; alternatively, if you intend them to affect the "Deviations
itemized" criterion, state that specifically and explain how points are
deducted. Use the terms "undocumented deviations", "compliance report", and
"Deviations itemized" in the revised sentence so readers understand whether
these gaps only appear as findings or also reduce the numeric score.
- Around line 26-27: The two bullet lines "- Optionally validates against a live
cluster using kube-compare-mcp" and "- Optionally creates ECOPS JIRA tickets for
non-compliant findings" repeat the adverb "Optionally"; reword one (or both) to
remove the repetition and improve flow — for example change the first to
"Validate against a live cluster using kube-compare-mcp (optional)" or the
second to "Create ECOPS JIRA tickets for non-compliant findings (optional)" so
each conveys optionality without starting both bullets with the same word.
- Around line 180-188: Add documentation for failures when invoking skills by
describing expected behavior and fallbacks for each skill invocation
(compliance-scoring, blueprint-structure, deviation-tracking,
kube-compare-integration): state how a skill load/execute error is surfaced in
the report/logs, what automatic fallback or default is used (e.g.,
compliance-scoring falls back to missing rubric handling), whether the run
continues with partial scoring or is aborted, and user remediation steps (rerun,
check skill installation/config, file paths). Update the "Error Handling"
section to include these entries, mention that skill errors should be reflected
in the validation report and CLI output, and add a short example message for
each skill so readers know what to look for.
In `@plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/README.md`:
- Around line 138-145: Update the "Standards Resilience" section to document
runtime error handling: explain what happens if the telcoeng-blueprint-standards
repo is missing, inaccessible, or malformed and state the fallback behavior (for
example: commands fall back to reference/blueprint-sections.md and log an
error). Mention where errors are surfaced (e.g., command output or logs) and
recommend how to recover (re-clone, fix format). Edit the README heading
"Standards Resilience" to include this brief fallback and recovery note so
readers know expected behavior when standards are unavailable.
In `@plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/reference/compliance-rubric.md`:
- Around line 78-82: The rubric update guidance in compliance-rubric.md lacks a
concrete rule for redistributing points when adding sections; update the "Adjust
point distribution to maintain 35-point total" instruction to specify a clear
prioritization algorithm (e.g., "reduce points from existing sections with the
largest current allocations first, taking from the top until the new section(s)
are accommodated" or alternatively "evenly distribute the required reduction
across all non-mandatory sections"), include a short step-by-step example
showing how to compute reductions and tie-breakers, and clarify when to apply
PATCH vs MINOR version bumps per the existing "Bump the plugin version" note so
maintainers follow a repeatable procedure.
In
`@plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/skills/kube-compare-integration/SKILL.md`:
- Around line 27-38: Update Step 1 to explicitly handle multi-profile blueprints
by explaining whether profiles should be validated separately or composed: call
out that for multi-profile cases (e.g., Hub + Core) you should run
kube_compare_resolve_rds for each RDS profile (e.g., hub then core) to obtain
each profile's reference config paths, or document how to merge/override those
paths if a combined validation is supported; reference the existing tool name
kube_compare_resolve_rds and the SKILL.md section that describes multi-profile
blueprints so readers know to either run cluster validation per profile or
follow a defined merge procedure.
🪄 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: Path: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Enterprise
Run ID: 054be2a5-5417-4784-82c6-fa26e6e9fbf2
📒 Files selected for processing (18)
.claude-plugin/marketplace.jsonPLUGINS.mddocs/data.jsonplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/.claude-plugin/plugin.jsonplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/README.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/commands/fix.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/commands/generate.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/commands/ingest.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/commands/search.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/commands/validate.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/reference/blueprint-sections.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/reference/compliance-rubric.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/reference/mcp-tools.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/skills/blueprint-structure/SKILL.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/skills/compliance-scoring/SKILL.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/skills/content-generation/SKILL.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/skills/deviation-tracking/SKILL.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/skills/kube-compare-integration/SKILL.md
Author
|
@enxebre @theobarberbany ptal. I have applied CR's recommendations. |
openshift-ci
Bot
added
the
needs-rebase
mgonzalezo
force-pushed
the
feat/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow
branch
from
May 6, 2026 17:08
bd043bd to
03fd0ee
Compare
openshift-ci
Bot
removed
the
needs-rebase
mgonzalezo
force-pushed
the
feat/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow
branch
from
May 7, 2026 08:50
03fd0ee to
00f2abd
Compare
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 2
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
Inline comments:
In `@plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/skills/content-generation/SKILL.md`:
- Around line 29-42: Update the SKILL.md content so the “Supported section
types” list is explicitly non-exhaustive and the skill first derives canonical
section types from telcoeng-blueprint-standards/README.md before using any local
examples; replace the hardcoded taxonomy wording (the “Supported section types”
header and enumerated list) with wording that instructs the skill to load and
prefer standards from telcoeng-blueprint-standards/README.md, then map or
suggest the shown items as example mappings only (e.g., “Examples: Document
Metadata, S-BOM, H-BOM…”), and ensure the skill logic that references this list
(the section-selection behavior) is updated to treat these as optional examples
rather than authoritative types.
In `@plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/skills/deviation-tracking/SKILL.md`:
- Around line 122-135: The SKILL.md currently embeds a fixed deviations table
and a hardcoded rubric value ("6 points"); replace these literals with
runtime-driven data by loading deviation categories and rubric weights from a
canonical standards source or configuration (e.g., JSON/YAML/remote API) and
using that data in the deviation-detection/evaluation codepath instead of the
inline table and the "6 points" constant; ensure the table in SKILL.md remains
as example-only documentation, implement a loader/validator for the standards
payload, and update the evaluator to reference the loaded rules and weights when
computing scores so changes in the canonical rubric automatically propagate.
🪄 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: Path: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Enterprise
Run ID: 55c97817-a9ff-4158-85e7-710492c896fe
📒 Files selected for processing (18)
.claude-plugin/marketplace.jsonPLUGINS.mddocs/data.jsonplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/.claude-plugin/plugin.jsonplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/README.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/commands/fix.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/commands/generate.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/commands/ingest.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/commands/search.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/commands/validate.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/reference/blueprint-sections.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/reference/compliance-rubric.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/reference/mcp-tools.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/skills/blueprint-structure/SKILL.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/skills/compliance-scoring/SKILL.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/skills/content-generation/SKILL.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/skills/deviation-tracking/SKILL.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/skills/kube-compare-integration/SKILL.md
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (9)
- plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/.claude-plugin/plugin.json
- plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/reference/blueprint-sections.md
- PLUGINS.md
- plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/skills/blueprint-structure/SKILL.md
- plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/README.md
- plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/reference/compliance-rubric.md
- plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/reference/mcp-tools.md
- plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/skills/compliance-scoring/SKILL.md
- plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/commands/generate.md
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (6)
- plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/commands/ingest.md
- plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/commands/validate.md
- .claude-plugin/marketplace.json
- plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/skills/kube-compare-integration/SKILL.md
- plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/commands/search.md
- plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/commands/fix.md
mgonzalezo
force-pushed
the
feat/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow
branch
from
May 7, 2026 09:52
00f2abd to
eb8351e
Compare
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 2
♻️ Duplicate comments (3)
plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/skills/content-generation/SKILL.md (1)
29-42: 🛠️ Refactor suggestion | 🟠 Major | ⚡ Quick winMake section types explicitly non-exhaustive and standards-derived.
The "Supported section types" list is presented as definitive, conflicting with the dynamic-standards design. This issue was previously flagged and remains unresolved. The skill should first parse section types from
telcoeng-blueprint-standards/README.md, then use this list as illustrative examples only.🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate. In `@plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/skills/content-generation/SKILL.md` around lines 29 - 42, The SKILL.md currently presents "Supported section types" as a definitive list; change the logic and wording so the skill dynamically reads section types from telcoeng-blueprint-standards/README.md (parse that README to build the canonical section-type set) and then render the SKILL.md list as illustrative examples only (e.g., prefix with "Examples include" or "For example"). Update any code or workflow that uses a hard-coded list to call the README parser and fall back to the example list from SKILL.md only when the README cannot be parsed; reference the README parsing routine (implement or update parser function that reads telcoeng-blueprint-standards/README.md) and the SKILL.md "Supported section types" block to locate where to change wording and behavior.plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/skills/deviation-tracking/SKILL.md (2)
172-172: 🛠️ Refactor suggestion | 🟠 Major | ⚡ Quick winReplace hardcoded rubric point value with standards-derived weight.
The "6 points" literal embeds a scoring rule that should be loaded from the canonical rubric configuration. This issue was previously flagged and remains unresolved.
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate. In `@plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/skills/deviation-tracking/SKILL.md` at line 172, The line in SKILL.md that reads "No deviations section found: Flag as a major compliance gap (6 points in the rubric)" hardcodes the rubric weight; change it to read the canonical weight from the rubric configuration instead. Replace the literal "6 points" text with a formatted value pulled from the rubric loader (e.g., rubric.getWeight('no_deviations_section') or RUBRIC_WEIGHTS['no_deviations_section']) in the code/path that generates this SKILL.md text (look for the "No deviations section found" string), and ensure you provide a safe fallback default if the rubric key is missing.
122-135: 🛠️ Refactor suggestion | 🟠 Major | ⚖️ Poor tradeoffReplace hardcoded deviation detection rules with standards-derived rules.
The embedded detection-pattern table should be loaded from standards at runtime rather than hardcoded. This issue was previously flagged and remains unresolved.
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate. In `@plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/skills/deviation-tracking/SKILL.md` around lines 122 - 135, The hardcoded deviation-detection table (the markdown table starting with "Signal in Blueprint" and entries like `aarch64`/`ARM`, `realTimeKernel.enabled: false`, GPU references, `Pod counts exceeding RDS limits`, `HugePages` sizes, `etcd` encryption, etc.) must be replaced with runtime-loaded rules from the standards source; implement a loader (e.g., getStandardsRules() / loadDeviationRules()) that reads standards-derived rules (JSON/YAML) and a validateDeviation(ruleSet, blueprint) function to drive detection instead of the static table, update any code that references the static table to call these functions, and ensure fallbacks and unit tests cover missing/invalid standards files.
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
Inline comments:
In `@plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/commands/ingest.md`:
- Around line 38-39: The partner name coming from the --partner flag (or
inferred from file name/prompt) is used directly in output paths like
".work/blueprints/<partner-name>/..." which allows path traversal; add a
sanitize/validate step (e.g., a sanitizePartnerName function) that: 1) rejects
or normalizes any path separators, leading dots, or traversal segments; 2)
enforces an allowed pattern (e.g., /^[A-Za-z0-9._-]+$/ or a stricter subset) and
a max length, returning an error if invalid; and 3) when constructing the final
path use path.join/path.resolve and assert the resolved path startsWith the
expected base directory (".work/blueprints") to prevent escapes—apply this
sanitize/validation wherever the partner name is read/used (the --partner flag
handling and every place that builds ".work/blueprints/<partner-name>/...").
- Around line 62-63: The broad cleanup rule "Any remaining `{.*}` attribute
patterns — remove curly-brace annotations not caught above" is too aggressive
and may strip legitimate content; change it to only remove curly-brace
attributes that are converter-injected trailing attributes on headings or images
(i.e., patterns that appear at the end of a heading line or immediately after an
image tag), preserving any inline or content-bearing `{...}` occurrences
referenced by the preservation guarantees. Update the wording so the rule
explicitly targets "trailing heading/image attribute annotations" and describe
the precise context (end-of-line after a heading marker or directly following an
image) to avoid destructive removals.
---
Duplicate comments:
In `@plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/skills/content-generation/SKILL.md`:
- Around line 29-42: The SKILL.md currently presents "Supported section types"
as a definitive list; change the logic and wording so the skill dynamically
reads section types from telcoeng-blueprint-standards/README.md (parse that
README to build the canonical section-type set) and then render the SKILL.md
list as illustrative examples only (e.g., prefix with "Examples include" or "For
example"). Update any code or workflow that uses a hard-coded list to call the
README parser and fall back to the example list from SKILL.md only when the
README cannot be parsed; reference the README parsing routine (implement or
update parser function that reads telcoeng-blueprint-standards/README.md) and
the SKILL.md "Supported section types" block to locate where to change wording
and behavior.
In `@plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/skills/deviation-tracking/SKILL.md`:
- Line 172: The line in SKILL.md that reads "No deviations section found: Flag
as a major compliance gap (6 points in the rubric)" hardcodes the rubric weight;
change it to read the canonical weight from the rubric configuration instead.
Replace the literal "6 points" text with a formatted value pulled from the
rubric loader (e.g., rubric.getWeight('no_deviations_section') or
RUBRIC_WEIGHTS['no_deviations_section']) in the code/path that generates this
SKILL.md text (look for the "No deviations section found" string), and ensure
you provide a safe fallback default if the rubric key is missing.
- Around line 122-135: The hardcoded deviation-detection table (the markdown
table starting with "Signal in Blueprint" and entries like `aarch64`/`ARM`,
`realTimeKernel.enabled: false`, GPU references, `Pod counts exceeding RDS
limits`, `HugePages` sizes, `etcd` encryption, etc.) must be replaced with
runtime-loaded rules from the standards source; implement a loader (e.g.,
getStandardsRules() / loadDeviationRules()) that reads standards-derived rules
(JSON/YAML) and a validateDeviation(ruleSet, blueprint) function to drive
detection instead of the static table, update any code that references the
static table to call these functions, and ensure fallbacks and unit tests cover
missing/invalid standards files.
🪄 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: Path: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Enterprise
Run ID: d55412a2-a25a-4ce9-bf26-7687ec70f33f
📒 Files selected for processing (18)
.claude-plugin/marketplace.jsonPLUGINS.mddocs/data.jsonplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/.claude-plugin/plugin.jsonplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/README.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/commands/fix.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/commands/generate.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/commands/ingest.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/commands/search.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/commands/validate.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/reference/blueprint-sections.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/reference/compliance-rubric.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/reference/mcp-tools.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/skills/blueprint-structure/SKILL.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/skills/compliance-scoring/SKILL.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/skills/content-generation/SKILL.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/skills/deviation-tracking/SKILL.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/skills/kube-compare-integration/SKILL.md
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (10)
- plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/.claude-plugin/plugin.json
- PLUGINS.md
- plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/README.md
- plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/skills/blueprint-structure/SKILL.md
- plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/reference/blueprint-sections.md
- plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/reference/mcp-tools.md
- plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/reference/compliance-rubric.md
- plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/commands/validate.md
- plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/skills/compliance-scoring/SKILL.md
- plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/commands/generate.md
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (4)
- .claude-plugin/marketplace.json
- docs/data.json
- plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/commands/search.md
- plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/commands/fix.md
mgonzalezo
force-pushed
the
feat/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow
branch
from
May 7, 2026 11:03
eb8351e to
f432ed5
Compare
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
Inline comments:
In `@plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/skills/content-generation/SKILL.md`:
- Around line 151-187: The hardcoded deviation taxonomy in SKILL.md must be
replaced with a lightweight illustrative example and the agent must load
deviation patterns at runtime from the canonical source (e.g., the standards
repository or deviation-tracking/SKILL.md) before scanning blueprints; update
the SKILL.md content to mark the list as examples only and implement or document
a prerequisite step (loadDeviationPatterns / fetchStandards or similar) so the
actual matching logic (the agent’s blueprint scanner) pulls patterns dynamically
and tags findings with <!-- TODO: Confirm rationale and file SUPPORTEX ticket
--> when rationale is unclear.
🪄 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: Path: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Enterprise
Run ID: 3b46824b-1dd1-4abe-8c6e-c4ea49cd80c4
📒 Files selected for processing (18)
.claude-plugin/marketplace.jsonPLUGINS.mddocs/data.jsonplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/.claude-plugin/plugin.jsonplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/README.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/commands/fix.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/commands/generate.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/commands/ingest.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/commands/search.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/commands/validate.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/reference/blueprint-sections.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/reference/compliance-rubric.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/reference/mcp-tools.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/skills/blueprint-structure/SKILL.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/skills/compliance-scoring/SKILL.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/skills/content-generation/SKILL.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/skills/deviation-tracking/SKILL.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/skills/kube-compare-integration/SKILL.md
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (9)
- plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/.claude-plugin/plugin.json
- plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/reference/blueprint-sections.md
- PLUGINS.md
- plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/commands/validate.md
- plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/reference/mcp-tools.md
- plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/commands/ingest.md
- plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/README.md
- plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/skills/kube-compare-integration/SKILL.md
- plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/commands/generate.md
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (6)
- plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/skills/blueprint-structure/SKILL.md
- plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/commands/search.md
- plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/skills/compliance-scoring/SKILL.md
- plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/commands/fix.md
- docs/data.json
- plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/reference/compliance-rubric.md
mgonzalezo
force-pushed
the
feat/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow
branch
from
May 7, 2026 12:43
f432ed5 to
09feac5
Compare
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
♻️ Duplicate comments (3)
plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/skills/deviation-tracking/SKILL.md (1)
122-135:⚠️ Potential issue | 🟠 Major | ⚡ Quick winRemove hardcoded deviation/rubric rules from the normative workflow text.
Line 122–135 and Line 172 still encode fixed detection expectations and a fixed rubric value (“6 points”), which conflicts with the PR’s dynamic-standards behavior and will drift over time. Make these examples explicitly non-authoritative and require runtime derivation from the canonical standards/rubric source.
Also applies to: 172-172
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate. In `@plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/skills/deviation-tracking/SKILL.md` around lines 122 - 135, The SKILL.md table rows (the hardcoded "Signal in Blueprint / Likely Deviation / RDS Expectation" entries currently listed) and the fixed rubric value ("6 points") must be removed as authoritative text and replaced with a clearly labeled example/placeholder that states detection expectations and point values are derived at runtime from the canonical standards/rubric service; update the table block to be an "Examples (non-authoritative)" snippet and replace any literal "6 points" with a runtime-derived placeholder (e.g., "points: <derived_at_runtime>") and an implementation note that the actual detection rules and rubric score must be fetched from the canonical standards/rubric source at evaluation time so they cannot drift.plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/skills/content-generation/SKILL.md (2)
151-187:⚠️ Potential issue | 🟠 Major | ⚡ Quick winAvoid embedding profile-specific deviation patterns as authoritative rules.
Line 151–187 hardcodes deviation taxonomies and matching behavior, which can drift from evolving RDS standards. Keep the list as examples only and require loading current deviation patterns at runtime from the canonical standards source before scanning.
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate. In `@plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/skills/content-generation/SKILL.md` around lines 151 - 187, The SKILL.md section titled "Common deviation patterns to detect..." hardcodes profile-specific rules (RAN-DU deviations, Core deviations, Hub deviations, Shared deviations) which risks drifting from RDS standards; change the text to present these entries explicitly as illustrative examples only and update the scanning instructions to require loading the authoritative deviation patterns at runtime from the canonical standards source before performing any matching (i.e., replace any wording that treats these lists as authoritative rules with language like "examples — load current patterns at runtime"), and add a clear note to tag any auto-detected items with <!-- TODO: Confirm rationale and file SUPPORTEX ticket --> when the runtime source or rationale is ambiguous; reference the "Common deviation patterns to detect from blueprint content" section and the RAN-DU/Core/Hub/Shared deviations headings to locate the content to revise.
29-42:⚠️ Potential issue | 🟠 Major | ⚡ Quick winMake the section taxonomy explicitly standards-derived, not fixed.
Line 29–42 still presents a hardcoded authoritative list of section types. Reword this as non-exhaustive examples and instruct the skill to derive canonical section types from
telcoeng-blueprint-standards/README.mdfirst.🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate. In `@plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/skills/content-generation/SKILL.md` around lines 29 - 42, The hardcoded numbered section list (Document Metadata through Certification) should be reworded as non-exhaustive example section types and the skill must prefer canonical section types sourced from telcoeng-blueprint-standards/README.md; change the wording to indicate these are examples, add a short instruction for the generator to first load/parse telcoeng-blueprint-standards/README.md to derive canonical section taxonomy, and only fall back to the example list when no standards mapping exists.
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
Duplicate comments:
In `@plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/skills/content-generation/SKILL.md`:
- Around line 151-187: The SKILL.md section titled "Common deviation patterns to
detect..." hardcodes profile-specific rules (RAN-DU deviations, Core deviations,
Hub deviations, Shared deviations) which risks drifting from RDS standards;
change the text to present these entries explicitly as illustrative examples
only and update the scanning instructions to require loading the authoritative
deviation patterns at runtime from the canonical standards source before
performing any matching (i.e., replace any wording that treats these lists as
authoritative rules with language like "examples — load current patterns at
runtime"), and add a clear note to tag any auto-detected items with <!-- TODO:
Confirm rationale and file SUPPORTEX ticket --> when the runtime source or
rationale is ambiguous; reference the "Common deviation patterns to detect from
blueprint content" section and the RAN-DU/Core/Hub/Shared deviations headings to
locate the content to revise.
- Around line 29-42: The hardcoded numbered section list (Document Metadata
through Certification) should be reworded as non-exhaustive example section
types and the skill must prefer canonical section types sourced from
telcoeng-blueprint-standards/README.md; change the wording to indicate these are
examples, add a short instruction for the generator to first load/parse
telcoeng-blueprint-standards/README.md to derive canonical section taxonomy, and
only fall back to the example list when no standards mapping exists.
In `@plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/skills/deviation-tracking/SKILL.md`:
- Around line 122-135: The SKILL.md table rows (the hardcoded "Signal in
Blueprint / Likely Deviation / RDS Expectation" entries currently listed) and
the fixed rubric value ("6 points") must be removed as authoritative text and
replaced with a clearly labeled example/placeholder that states detection
expectations and point values are derived at runtime from the canonical
standards/rubric service; update the table block to be an "Examples
(non-authoritative)" snippet and replace any literal "6 points" with a
runtime-derived placeholder (e.g., "points: <derived_at_runtime>") and an
implementation note that the actual detection rules and rubric score must be
fetched from the canonical standards/rubric source at evaluation time so they
cannot drift.
ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration
Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Enterprise
Run ID: 07bacf09-7cb0-4f3d-82c8-b9c981209f42
📒 Files selected for processing (18)
.claude-plugin/marketplace.jsonPLUGINS.mddocs/data.jsonplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/.claude-plugin/plugin.jsonplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/README.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/commands/fix.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/commands/generate.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/commands/ingest.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/commands/search.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/commands/validate.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/reference/blueprint-sections.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/reference/compliance-rubric.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/reference/mcp-tools.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/skills/blueprint-structure/SKILL.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/skills/compliance-scoring/SKILL.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/skills/content-generation/SKILL.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/skills/deviation-tracking/SKILL.mdplugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/skills/kube-compare-integration/SKILL.md
✅ Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (9)
- plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/.claude-plugin/plugin.json
- plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/reference/blueprint-sections.md
- plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/commands/validate.md
- plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/reference/mcp-tools.md
- plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/commands/search.md
- plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/skills/kube-compare-integration/SKILL.md
- plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/skills/compliance-scoring/SKILL.md
- plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/commands/fix.md
- plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/README.md
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (5)
- PLUGINS.md
- plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/skills/blueprint-structure/SKILL.md
- plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/commands/ingest.md
- plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/commands/generate.md
- plugins/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow/reference/compliance-rubric.md
mgonzalezo
force-pushed
the
feat/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow
branch
from
May 7, 2026 13:06
09feac5 to
5344f09
Compare
mgonzalezo
force-pushed
the
feat/telcoeng-blueprint-workflow
branch
from
May 7, 2026 13:07
5344f09 to
76821fa
Compare
Author
|
@bryan-cox ptal |
Contributor
|
/approve |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: bryan-cox, mgonzalezo The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here DetailsNeeds approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
openshift-ci
Bot
added
the
approved
openshift-ci
Bot
added
the
needs-rebase
|
PR needs rebase. DetailsInstructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository. |
|
Stale PRs are closed after 21d of inactivity. If this PR is still relevant, comment to refresh it or remove the stale label. If this PR is safe to close now please do so with /lifecycle stale |
openshift-ci
Bot
added
the
lifecycle/stale
Author
|
/remove-lifecycle stale |
openshift-ci
Bot
removed
the
lifecycle/stale
|
Stale PRs are closed after 21d of inactivity. If this PR is still relevant, comment to refresh it or remove the stale label. If this PR is safe to close now please do so with /lifecycle stale |
openshift-ci
Bot
added
the
lifecycle/stale
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What this PR does / why we need it:
Adds the telcoeng-blueprint-workflow plugin (v0.1.0) — five commands that automate the partner blueprint lifecycle against telcoeng-blueprint-standards:
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
N/A, this is a new plugin contribution.
Special notes for your reviewer:
Checklist:
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Documentation