Colin McDonnell 5f3e46c42d fix: don't reuse disabled proxy key on workflow re-runs; non-fatal title-gen errors (#636)
* fix: don't reuse disabled proxy key on workflow re-runs; non-fatal title-gen errors

Three small surgical fixes addressing run https://github.com/pullfrog/app/actions/runs/25580969379:

1. **`/api/proxy-token` idempotency now checks `finalizedAt`.** GitHub re-runs
   share the same `run_id` (only `run_attempt` increments), so attempt N+1's
   action calls /api/proxy-token and inherits attempt N's `proxyKeyId`. The
   `workflow_run.completed` webhook between attempts retires that key on
   OpenRouter (`disableKey`), so attempt N+1 was getting back a disabled key
   and OpenRouter responded with `401 User not found` on every call. Falling
   through when finalized routes through the same billing gate
   (`handleRouterBilling` balance check), so no new attack surface.

2. **OpenCode title-gen / small-model errors no longer fatal.** OpenCode
   auto-spawns a small `agent=title small=true` background call at session
   start to name the thread, defaulting to `anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5`
   (anomalyco/opencode#1243). Pre-fix, the wrapper's `error` event handler
   treated any `type=error` as fatal, so a cosmetic title failure killed the
   run before primary inference even started. Now: stderr matching `small=true`
   sets a one-shot suppression flag for the next stdout `error` event, which
   is logged as a warning instead.

3. **Provider-error classifier puts auth patterns above rate-limit.** OpenRouter
   401 payloads bundle `x-ratelimit-*` response headers, and the loose
   `\brate[_ ]limit/i` pattern was winning. Added 401/403 status, `User not
   found`, `Invalid authentication`, `No auth credentials found` patterns
   ahead of rate-limit. Updated the existing 401-headers regression test to
   assert correct auth classification rather than `null`.

* opencode: correlate small-model error suppression by message, not by next-event

Pullfrog self-review on #636 flagged a real concurrency hole. OpenCode forks
the title-gen call (`session/prompt.ts:1452-1457` via `Effect.forkIn(scope)`)
so it races primary inference. The previous one-shot `suppressNextErrorEvent`
boolean had no per-call correlation: it was consumed by whichever stdout
`type=error` event landed next, regardless of which subagent produced it.
Under concurrent failures, a primary-agent error landing first could be
silently downgraded to a warning while the small-model error then propagated
fatally — the inverse of the bug the suppression was meant to prevent.

Replaced the boolean with a `Set<string>` of pending small-model error
messages. stderr extracts the inner `"message":"..."` from any classified
provider error tagged `small=true`; the stdout `error` handler suppresses
only when `event.error.data.message` matches a pending entry. Set is capped
at 32 entries so a long stream of small-model failures can't wedge memory.

Also corrected the comment that referenced "session summarizer" — verified
in opencode source that summarize() does NOT use `small: true`; only the
title generator does today (only `small: true` match in the codebase).

* revert: drop opencode title-gen suppression

We have no evidence — and can't construct a realistic scenario — where
title-gen fails on an otherwise-successful run. Title-gen and primary share
the same OPENROUTER_API_KEY and hit the same proxy/upstream; whatever breaks
one breaks the other. The original repro on run 25580969379 is fully
explained by the stale proxy key (fix #1) — title-gen happened to be the
first call that surfaced the auth error, but every subsequent primary call
would have died the same way.

Suppression code adds complexity (cross-stream correlation logic, message
matching, set capping) and a real failure mode of its own (a small-model
error with a unique message could mask an unrelated primary error landing
shortly after). Net negative. Removing.
2026-05-08 23:00:41 +00:00
2026-01-16 08:00:16 +00:00
2026-03-12 05:22:51 +00:00
2025-08-27 16:53:48 -07:00
2026-01-19 08:41:56 +00:00
2026-05-08 21:32:06 +00:00
2026-03-12 05:22:51 +00:00

Green Pullfrog logo
Pullfrog

Bring your favorite coding agent into GitHub


🚀 Pullfrog is in beta! We're onboarding users in waves. Get on the waitlist →


What is Pullfrog?

Pullfrog is a GitHub bot that brings the full power of your favorite coding agents into GitHub. It's open source and powered by GitHub Actions.

  • Tag @pullfrog — Tag @pullfrog in a comment anywhere in your repo. It will pull in any relevant context using the action's internal MCP server and perform the appropriate task.
  • Prompt from the web — Trigger arbitrary tasks from the Pullfrog dashboard
  • Automated triggers — Configure Pullfrog to trigger agent runs in response to specific events. Each of these triggers can be associated with custom prompt instructions.
    • issue created
    • issue labeled
    • PR created
    • PR review created
    • PR review requested
    • and more...

Pullfrog is the bridge between your preferred coding agents and GitHub. Use it for:

  • 🤖 Coding tasks — Tell @pullfrog to implement something and it'll spin up a PR. If CI fails, it'll read the logs and attempt a fix automatically. It'll automatically address any PR reviews too.
  • 🔍 PR review — Coding agents are great at reviewing PRs. Using the "PR created" trigger, you can configure Pullfrog to auto-review new PRs.
  • 🤙 Issue management — Via the "issue created" trigger, Pullfrog can automatically respond to common questions, create implementation plans, and link to related issues/PRs. Or (if you're feeling lucky) you can prompt it to immediately attempt a PR addressing new issues.
  • Literally whatever — Want to have the agent automatically add docs to all new PRs? Cut a new release with agent-written notes on every commit to main? Pullfrog lets you do it.

Standalone Usage

You can also use pullfrog/pullfrog as a step in your own workflows. The action exposes a result output that can be consumed by subsequent steps.

Example: Auto-generate release notes on new tags

name: Release
on:
  push:
    tags: ['v*']

permissions:
  contents: write

jobs:
  release:
    runs-on: ubuntu-latest
    steps:
      - name: Checkout
        uses: actions/checkout@v4
        with:
          fetch-depth: 0

      - name: Generate release notes
        id: notes
        uses: pullfrog/pullfrog@v0
        with:
          prompt: |
            Generate release notes for ${{ github.ref_name }}.
            Compare commits between this tag and the previous tag.
            Format as markdown: summary paragraph, then ### Features, ### Fixes, ### Breaking Changes sections.
            Omit empty sections. Be concise.
        env:
          ANTHROPIC_API_KEY: ${{ secrets.ANTHROPIC_API_KEY }}

      # write to file to avoid shell escaping issues with special characters
      - name: Create GitHub release
        run: |
          notesfile="$RUNNER_TEMP/release-notes-$GITHUB_RUN_ID.md"
          printf '%s' "$NOTES" > "$notesfile"
          gh release create ${{ github.ref_name }} --title "${{ github.ref_name }}" --notes-file "$notesfile"
        env:
          GH_TOKEN: ${{ github.token }}
          NOTES: ${{ steps.notes.outputs.result }}

Example: Structured Output with Zod Schema

You can force the agent to return structured JSON output by providing a JSON schema. This allows you to reliably parse and use the agent's response in subsequent workflow steps.

You can define your JSON schema directly or uou can use any validation library that converts to JSON Schema. Here's an example using Zod:

name: Release Check
on:
  pull_request:
    types: [closed]

jobs:
  check-release:
    if: github.event.pull_request.merged == true
    runs-on: ubuntu-latest
    steps:
      - uses: actions/checkout@v4

      - name: Install dependencies
        run: npm install --no-save --no-package-lock zod @actions/core

      - name: Generate Schema
        id: schema
        run: |
          node -e '
            import { z } from "zod";
            import { setOutput } from "@actions/core";
            const schema = z.object({
              version: z.string().describe("Semantic version number (e.g. 1.0.0)"),
              isBreaking: z.boolean().describe("Whether this release contains breaking changes"),
              changelog: z.array(z.string()).describe("List of changes in this release"),
            });
            setOutput("schema", JSON.stringify(z.toJSONSchema(schema)));
          '

      - name: Analyze PR
        id: analysis
        uses: pullfrog/pullfrog@v0
        with:
          prompt: |
            Analyze this PR and determine semantic versioning impact.
            Return a JSON object matching the provided schema.
          output_schema: ${{ steps.schema.outputs.schema }}
        env:
          ANTHROPIC_API_KEY: ${{ secrets.ANTHROPIC_API_KEY }}

      - name: Process Result
        run: |
          # Parse the JSON result using fromJSON()
          echo "Version: ${{ fromJSON(steps.analysis.outputs.result).version }}"
          echo "Breaking: ${{ fromJSON(steps.analysis.outputs.result).isBreaking }}"
S
Description
Self-hosted Ollama-powered code review bot for Gitea Actions based on pullfrog
Readme MIT 27 MiB
Languages
TypeScript 97.9%
Shell 0.7%
Dockerfile 0.7%
JavaScript 0.7%