allow external_directory reads — not a security boundary

Made-with: Cursor
This commit is contained in:
Colin McDonnell
2026-03-30 21:37:36 +00:00
committed by pullfrog[bot]
parent 51659fee71
commit 6c5d228c04
5 changed files with 12 additions and 8 deletions
+1 -1
View File
@@ -52,7 +52,7 @@ function buildSecurityConfig(ctx: AgentRunContext, model: string | undefined): s
edit: "allow", edit: "allow",
read: "allow", read: "allow",
webfetch: "allow", webfetch: "allow",
external_directory: "deny", external_directory: "allow",
skill: "allow", skill: "allow",
}, },
mcp: { mcp: {
+5 -3
View File
@@ -148198,7 +148198,8 @@ ${learningsStep(6)}`,
6. Submit: 6. Submit:
- **actionable issues found**: call \`${ghPullfrogMcpName}/create_pull_request_review\` with \`approved: false\`, all comments, and an **empty body** \u2014 inline comments speak for themselves, and a top-level body clutters the PR conversation on every re-review cycle. Then call \`report_progress\` with a 1-sentence summary. - **actionable issues found**: call \`${ghPullfrogMcpName}/create_pull_request_review\` with \`approved: false\`, all comments, and an **empty body** \u2014 inline comments speak for themselves, and a top-level body clutters the PR conversation on every re-review cycle. Then call \`report_progress\` with a 1-sentence summary.
- **no actionable issues found**: do NOT submit a review. Call \`${ghPullfrogMcpName}/report_progress\` with a brief note (e.g., "Re-reviewed \u2014 no new issues found.").`, - **no actionable issues, but substantive changes or prior fixes confirmed**: post a brief comment (1-3 sentences) via \`${ghPullfrogMcpName}/create_issue_comment\` confirming the review happened and listing which prior review issues were resolved. Substantive = new functionality, behavior changes, architectural changes, or fixes to previously flagged issues.
- **no actionable issues, non-substantive changes only** (e.g., trivial formatting, import reordering, comment tweaks with no functional impact): do NOT submit a review. Call \`${ghPullfrogMcpName}/report_progress\` with a brief note (e.g., "Re-reviewed \u2014 no new issues found.").`,
Plan: `### Checklist Plan: `### Checklist
1. Analyze the task and gather context: 1. Analyze the task and gather context:
@@ -149048,7 +149049,8 @@ ${permalinkTip}
7. **SUBMIT** \u2014 Determine whether to submit a review: 7. **SUBMIT** \u2014 Determine whether to submit a review:
- **Issues found**: Submit via ${ghPullfrogMcpName}/create_pull_request_review with \`approved: false\`, the inline comments from step 6, and an **empty body** \u2014 inline comments speak for themselves, and a top-level body clutters the PR conversation on every re-review cycle. Then call \`report_progress\` with a 1-sentence summary (e.g., "Re-reviewed \u2014 found 2 issues in the new commits."). - **Issues found**: Submit via ${ghPullfrogMcpName}/create_pull_request_review with \`approved: false\`, the inline comments from step 6, and an **empty body** \u2014 inline comments speak for themselves, and a top-level body clutters the PR conversation on every re-review cycle. Then call \`report_progress\` with a 1-sentence summary (e.g., "Re-reviewed \u2014 found 2 issues in the new commits.").
- **No issues found**: Do NOT submit a review. Call \`report_progress\` with a brief note (e.g., "Re-reviewed \u2014 no new issues found."). - **No issues, but substantive changes or prior fixes confirmed**: Post a brief comment (1-3 sentences) via ${ghPullfrogMcpName}/create_issue_comment confirming the review happened and listing which prior review issues were resolved. Substantive = new functionality, behavior changes, architectural changes, or fixes to previously flagged issues.
- **No issues, non-substantive changes only** (e.g., trivial formatting, import reordering, comment tweaks with no functional impact): Do NOT submit a review. Call \`report_progress\` with a brief note (e.g., "Re-reviewed \u2014 no new issues found.").
${permalinkTip} ${permalinkTip}
` `
@@ -149376,7 +149378,7 @@ function buildSecurityConfig(ctx, model) {
edit: "allow", edit: "allow",
read: "allow", read: "allow",
webfetch: "allow", webfetch: "allow",
external_directory: "deny", external_directory: "allow",
skill: "allow" skill: "allow"
}, },
mcp: { mcp: {
+2 -1
View File
@@ -135,7 +135,8 @@ ${learningsStep(6)}`,
6. Submit: 6. Submit:
- **actionable issues found**: call \`${ghPullfrogMcpName}/create_pull_request_review\` with \`approved: false\`, all comments, and an **empty body** — inline comments speak for themselves, and a top-level body clutters the PR conversation on every re-review cycle. Then call \`report_progress\` with a 1-sentence summary. - **actionable issues found**: call \`${ghPullfrogMcpName}/create_pull_request_review\` with \`approved: false\`, all comments, and an **empty body** — inline comments speak for themselves, and a top-level body clutters the PR conversation on every re-review cycle. Then call \`report_progress\` with a 1-sentence summary.
- **no actionable issues found**: do NOT submit a review. Call \`${ghPullfrogMcpName}/report_progress\` with a brief note (e.g., "Re-reviewed — no new issues found.").`, - **no actionable issues, but substantive changes or prior fixes confirmed**: post a brief comment (1-3 sentences) via \`${ghPullfrogMcpName}/create_issue_comment\` confirming the review happened and listing which prior review issues were resolved. Substantive = new functionality, behavior changes, architectural changes, or fixes to previously flagged issues.
- **no actionable issues, non-substantive changes only** (e.g., trivial formatting, import reordering, comment tweaks with no functional impact): do NOT submit a review. Call \`${ghPullfrogMcpName}/report_progress\` with a brief note (e.g., "Re-reviewed — no new issues found.").`,
Plan: `### Checklist Plan: `### Checklist
+2 -1
View File
@@ -154,7 +154,8 @@ ${permalinkTip}
7. **SUBMIT** — Determine whether to submit a review: 7. **SUBMIT** — Determine whether to submit a review:
- **Issues found**: Submit via ${ghPullfrogMcpName}/create_pull_request_review with \`approved: false\`, the inline comments from step 6, and an **empty body** — inline comments speak for themselves, and a top-level body clutters the PR conversation on every re-review cycle. Then call \`report_progress\` with a 1-sentence summary (e.g., "Re-reviewed — found 2 issues in the new commits."). - **Issues found**: Submit via ${ghPullfrogMcpName}/create_pull_request_review with \`approved: false\`, the inline comments from step 6, and an **empty body** — inline comments speak for themselves, and a top-level body clutters the PR conversation on every re-review cycle. Then call \`report_progress\` with a 1-sentence summary (e.g., "Re-reviewed — found 2 issues in the new commits.").
- **No issues found**: Do NOT submit a review. Call \`report_progress\` with a brief note (e.g., "Re-reviewed — no new issues found."). - **No issues, but substantive changes or prior fixes confirmed**: Post a brief comment (1-3 sentences) via ${ghPullfrogMcpName}/create_issue_comment confirming the review happened and listing which prior review issues were resolved. Substantive = new functionality, behavior changes, architectural changes, or fixes to previously flagged issues.
- **No issues, non-substantive changes only** (e.g., trivial formatting, import reordering, comment tweaks with no functional impact): Do NOT submit a review. Call \`report_progress\` with a brief note (e.g., "Re-reviewed — no new issues found.").
${permalinkTip} ${permalinkTip}
`, `,
+2 -2
View File
@@ -23,8 +23,8 @@ exports[`latest model per provider snapshot > matches snapshot 1`] = `
"releaseDate": "2026-03-17", "releaseDate": "2026-03-17",
}, },
"opencode": { "opencode": {
"modelId": "mimo-v2-pro-free", "modelId": "qwen3.6-plus-free",
"releaseDate": "2026-03-18", "releaseDate": "2026-03-30",
}, },
"openrouter": { "openrouter": {
"modelId": "xiaomi/mimo-v2-pro", "modelId": "xiaomi/mimo-v2-pro",