* router: fix unspendable signup credit on no-card private repos (#791)
The bug
-------
`run-context/route.ts` gated `proxyModel` minting on `isInfraCovered`,
which is `oss || hasCard`. So a no-card account with positive wallet
balance (signup credit, top-up, etc.) on a private repo would never
get a `proxyModel` set on the run context. The action runtime then
fell through to whatever provider keys happened to be in the workflow
env — using the user's BYOK keys without their knowledge if any were
configured, or failing the run entirely otherwise.
Meanwhile `proxy-token/route.ts` already gated correctly on
`oss || hasCard || balance > 0`. The two routes disagreed, with
run-context being strictly more restrictive, so the agent never even
attempted to call proxy-token for these accounts. The wiki at
`billing.md:1052` documented the *intended* behavior ("a Router usage
row can debit a wallet with no card on file"), aspirational against
the actual code.
The action side had a parallel bug at `action/utils/proxy.ts:151` —
it re-derived `isInfraCovered({ isOss, plan })` and short-circuited
mint even when the server set `proxyModel`. Belt-and-suspenders that
was strictly more restrictive than the server.
Production impact
-----------------
Queried 55 router-mode no-card accounts holding signup credit:
- ALL have wallet balance = exactly $10.00 (untouched)
- ALL have 0 router proxy keys ever minted, 0 hwm usage
- ~25 have successful runs (using BYOK env vars from their workflow,
unaware their credit isn't being touched)
- The rest have zero successes; some accumulated 25+ failures
(e.g. `onechannelpe`: 25 failures, 0 successes, no card, $10 credit).
The fix
-------
- `run-context/route.ts`: widen `useRouter` to match proxy-token's
gate. OSS short-circuits as before. Otherwise: router mode + card
on file → mint; router mode + no card + positive balance → fetch
balance, mint if > 0. Skip the balance read when a card is on file
(auto-reload covers it without needing pre-flight balance — keeps
the hot path single-query).
- `action/utils/proxy.ts`: drop the redundant `isInfraCovered` check.
`ctx.proxyModel` IS the signal — the server is the authority on
funding decisions; the action just trusts and mints.
- `wiki/pricing.md`: correct the Router proxy key minting gate row
+ add a paragraph explaining why this gate diverges from
`isInfraCovered`.
- `wiki/billing.md`: rewrite the misleading "proxy-token returns 402"
paragraph to describe what actually happens at both routes.
`isInfraCovered` is unchanged. It still gates Pullfrog-paid features
(learnings writes, indexing). The bug was in conflating "Pullfrog
pays for marginal infra" with "user can fund a Router run via wallet"
— different concerns, now untangled.
* action: drop dead isInfraCovered + plan param post-fix
Cleanup the action-side dead code introduced by the previous commit's
removal of the redundant `isInfraCovered` re-derivation in proxy.ts:
- delete `isInfraCovered` from action/utils/runContext.ts (was the only
callsite; mirror in server's utils/billing.ts is unchanged and still
load-bearing for learnings/indexing)
- drop unused `plan: AccountPlan` param from `resolveProxyModel` /
`runProxyResolution` (and the corresponding `AccountPlan` import +
the `plan: runContext.plan` arg at the main.ts call site)
- update the action/mcp/server.ts comment that pointed at the now-gone
action mirror to reference the server-side `utils/billing.ts` instead
`AccountPlan` itself is still load-bearing (mcp/server, runContextData,
run-context fetch), only `isInfraCovered` and the dead `plan` parameter
go away.
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:Releaseon:push:tags:['v*']permissions:contents:writejobs:release:runs-on:ubuntu-lateststeps:- name:Checkoutuses:actions/checkout@v4with:fetch-depth:0- name:Generate release notesid:notesuses:pullfrog/pullfrog@v0with: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 releaserun:| 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:${{ steps.notes.outputs.result }}
Example: Structured Output with Zod Schema
You can force the agent to return structured JSON output by providing a JSON schema. This allows you to reliably parse and use the agent's response in subsequent workflow steps.
You can define your JSON schema directly or uou can use any validation library that converts to JSON Schema. Here's an example using Zod:
name:Release Checkon:pull_request:types:[closed]jobs:check-release:if:github.event.pull_request.merged == trueruns-on:ubuntu-lateststeps:- uses:actions/checkout@v4- name:Install dependenciesrun:npm install --no-save --no-package-lock zod @actions/core- name:Generate Schemaid:schemarun:| node -e '
import { z } from "zod";
import { setOutput } from "@actions/core";
const schema = z.object({
version: z.string().describe("Semantic version number (e.g. 1.0.0)"),
isBreaking: z.boolean().describe("Whether this release contains breaking changes"),
changelog: z.array(z.string()).describe("List of changes in this release"),
});
setOutput("schema", JSON.stringify(z.toJSONSchema(schema)));
'- name:Analyze PRid:analysisuses:pullfrog/pullfrog@v0with:prompt:| Analyze this PR and determine semantic versioning impact.
Return a JSON object matching the provided schema.output_schema:${{ steps.schema.outputs.schema }}env:ANTHROPIC_API_KEY:${{ secrets.ANTHROPIC_API_KEY }}- name:Process Resultrun:| # Parse the JSON result using fromJSON()
echo "Version: ${{ fromJSON(steps.analysis.outputs.result).version }}"
echo "Breaking: ${{ fromJSON(steps.analysis.outputs.result).isBreaking }}"