Skill: Publish Evidence

The orchestrator owns this verdict and human-verification step. It derives the verdict from completed evidence; publishing makes that verdict inspectable and never reruns a test.

Declare the verdict

• Passed: every claim has an observable assertion in the completed test run.
• Failed: an assertion disproves at least one expected outcome.
• Incomplete: requirements, tooling, or evidence are missing. A skip is always Incomplete, never Passed.
• Prose, screenshots, and recordings do not decide the verdict.

Make every claim auditable

• Show the test name and verdict, each claim's assertion evidence, the relevant test artifacts, the source test run, and the reproduction command.
• Publish one compact sticky comment linking to a report with a section for every claimed test. The report must show assertion evidence and original records. When the review app is not configured, keep those sections in the comment. If a claim has no inspectable evidence, report the PR Incomplete.
• Write the <!-- test-evidence --> marker. The publisher recognizes old sticky markers only to update comments created before the migration.

Publish the PR head

Run checks on the final PR head after any rebase or cherry-pick. Test runs are bound to a commit SHA, so history rewrites require rerunning and republishing. After a multi-test run, publish the complete selection together:

pnpm evals:e2e --publish --pr <n> --all
# Or select runs explicitly; repeat --test-run for each claimed run.
pnpm evals:e2e --publish --pr <n> --test-run <dir|name> --test-run <dir|name>

--all selects stored runs matching the current PR head. Include a DocShot receipt with --docshot <image.png.review.json>. It must match that commit too. Names and captions provide the default report; --title and repeatable --gap are optional context. No separate report-writing step is required.

Publication reads recorded evidence. It never runs tests, captures images, or judges pending visual claims. If visual judging is needed, use the existing pnpm --dir evals evidence:judge -- --test-run <dir|name> command explicitly. Pending judgments remain visible and make the evidence Incomplete.

Set OPENWORK_REVIEW_URL and BLOB_READ_WRITE_TOKEN to publish to the private review app. Setup is documented in apps/review/README.md. Upload errors must be reported as publication failures, independently of the test verdict; report publication is not a required CI check or a release dependency.

• Omitting --test-run selects the most recent run. Prefer explicit selection or --all when making claims about several tests.
• Publication updates the compact comment with the complete selected report. Confirm its commit and included tests. Reference images make no pass/fail claim.
• A successful publisher exit means published, not tests passed. Derive the PR verdict from recorded results and gaps. Failed and incomplete reports are useful evidence and can be published.
• Single-run legacy publication remains available without the review app.

Stacked PRs

• Inspect gh pr view <n> --json baseRefName,headRefName,headRefOid before merging. A merged base can retarget the stack and recreate commits with new SHAs, orphaning their evidence.
• Check for stray commits with git log --oneline <branch> ^origin/dev. If the stack is wrong, cherry-pick only the intended commits onto current dev, then rerun and republish every check.

Refuse misleading evidence

• Never use --force to hide a SHA mismatch. Re-run the spec on the PR head.
• Use --force only to deliberately publish historical or red test evidence. The output is annotated; call the exception out explicitly. Red tapes are valid human-verification artifacts and should be published when they explain a Failed or Incomplete verdict.
• Screenshots are attached with gh pr comment --attach (gh ≥ 2.99). Without it the publisher still posts verdicts with a no-screenshots note.