All checks were successful
Enterprise AI Code Review / ai-review (pull_request) Successful in 20s
441 lines
12 KiB
Markdown
441 lines
12 KiB
Markdown
# Feature Ideas & Roadmap
|
||
|
||
This document outlines recommended feature additions for OpenRabbit, ordered by value/effort ratio.
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
## Quick Reference
|
||
|
||
| Feature | Value | Effort | Time Estimate | Status |
|
||
|---------|-------|--------|---------------|--------|
|
||
| [@codebot help Command](#1-codebot-help-command) | HIGH | LOW | 1-2 hours | ⭐ Recommended |
|
||
| [Automatic Label Creator](#2-automatic-label-creator) | HIGH | MEDIUM | 2-3 hours | Planned |
|
||
| [PR Changelog Generator](#3-pr-changelog-generator) | MEDIUM | MEDIUM | 3-4 hours | Planned |
|
||
| [Code Diff Explainer](#4-code-diff-explainer) | MEDIUM-HIGH | MEDIUM | 2-3 hours | Planned |
|
||
| [Smart Test Suggestions](#5-smart-test-suggestions) | HIGH | HIGH | 5-6 hours | Planned |
|
||
| [@codebot review-again](#6-codebot-review-again) | MEDIUM | LOW | 1-2 hours | Planned |
|
||
| [Dependency Update Advisor](#7-dependency-update-advisor) | VERY HIGH | HIGH | 6-8 hours | Planned |
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
## 1. @codebot help Command
|
||
|
||
**⭐ HIGHEST PRIORITY - Quick Win**
|
||
|
||
### Problem
|
||
Users have no way to discover what commands are available. They don't know what the bot can do without reading documentation.
|
||
|
||
### Solution
|
||
Add a `@codebot help` command that lists all available commands with descriptions and examples.
|
||
|
||
### Implementation
|
||
- Add `help` to `config.yml` commands list
|
||
- Add `_command_help()` method to IssueAgent
|
||
- Format response with all commands + descriptions
|
||
|
||
### Example Output
|
||
```markdown
|
||
@username
|
||
|
||
**Available @codebot Commands:**
|
||
|
||
**Issue Triage & Analysis:**
|
||
- `@codebot triage` - Full issue triage with auto-labeling and priority assignment
|
||
- `@codebot summarize` - Generate 2-3 sentence summary
|
||
- `@codebot explain` - Detailed explanation of the issue
|
||
- `@codebot suggest` - Solution suggestions or next steps
|
||
|
||
**Interactive Chat:**
|
||
- `@codebot [question]` - Ask questions about the codebase
|
||
|
||
**Codebase Analysis:**
|
||
- `@codebot codebase` - Trigger full codebase health analysis
|
||
|
||
**Utility:**
|
||
- `@codebot help` - Show this message
|
||
|
||
**Examples:**
|
||
- `@codebot explain` - Get detailed explanation
|
||
- `@codebot how does authentication work?` - Chat about codebase
|
||
```
|
||
|
||
### Impact
|
||
- Immediate UX improvement
|
||
- Reduces support burden
|
||
- Makes all future commands discoverable
|
||
- Foundation for growth
|
||
|
||
### Files to Modify
|
||
- `/tools/ai-review/config.yml`
|
||
- `/tools/ai-review/agents/issue_agent.py`
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
## 2. Automatic Label Creator
|
||
|
||
### Problem
|
||
Major setup pain point: users must manually create 10+ labels (`priority: high`, `type: bug`, etc.). Bot silently fails to apply labels if they don't exist.
|
||
|
||
### Solution
|
||
Add `@codebot setup-labels` command that:
|
||
1. Checks which required labels are missing
|
||
2. Creates them with proper colors
|
||
3. Or provides CLI commands for manual creation
|
||
|
||
### Implementation
|
||
- Add `setup-labels` command
|
||
- Query repository labels via Gitea API
|
||
- Compare against required labels in config
|
||
- Auto-create missing labels or show creation commands
|
||
|
||
### Example Output
|
||
```markdown
|
||
@username
|
||
|
||
**Label Setup Analysis:**
|
||
|
||
**Missing Labels:**
|
||
- `priority: high` (color: #d73a4a)
|
||
- `priority: medium` (color: #fbca04)
|
||
- `type: bug` (color: #d73a4a)
|
||
|
||
**Creating labels...**
|
||
✅ Created `priority: high`
|
||
✅ Created `priority: medium`
|
||
✅ Created `type: bug`
|
||
|
||
All required labels are now set up!
|
||
```
|
||
|
||
### Impact
|
||
- Removes major setup friction
|
||
- Ensures auto-labeling works immediately
|
||
- Better onboarding experience
|
||
|
||
### Files to Modify
|
||
- `/tools/ai-review/config.yml`
|
||
- `/tools/ai-review/agents/issue_agent.py`
|
||
- `/tools/ai-review/clients/gitea_client.py` (add create_label method)
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
## 3. PR Changelog Generator
|
||
|
||
### Problem
|
||
Developers spend time writing release notes and changelogs. Bot already analyzes PR content.
|
||
|
||
### Solution
|
||
Add `@codebot changelog` command that generates human-readable changelog from PR.
|
||
|
||
### Implementation
|
||
- Add `changelog` command for PRs
|
||
- Analyze PR diff + commit messages
|
||
- Generate bullet-point summary
|
||
- Format for CHANGELOG.md
|
||
|
||
### Example Output
|
||
```markdown
|
||
@username
|
||
|
||
**Changelog for PR #123:**
|
||
|
||
### Added
|
||
- User authentication system with JWT tokens
|
||
- Password reset functionality via email
|
||
|
||
### Changed
|
||
- Updated database schema for user table
|
||
- Refactored login endpoint for better error handling
|
||
|
||
### Fixed
|
||
- Session timeout bug causing premature logouts
|
||
- Security vulnerability in password validation
|
||
|
||
### Technical Details
|
||
- 15 files changed, 450 insertions, 120 deletions
|
||
- Main components: auth/, api/users/, database/
|
||
```
|
||
|
||
### Impact
|
||
- Saves time on release documentation
|
||
- Consistent changelog format
|
||
- Can copy-paste into CHANGELOG.md
|
||
|
||
### Files to Modify
|
||
- `/tools/ai-review/config.yml`
|
||
- `/tools/ai-review/agents/pr_agent.py`
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
## 4. Code Diff Explainer
|
||
|
||
### Problem
|
||
Complex PRs are hard to understand, especially for:
|
||
- Non-expert reviewers
|
||
- New team members
|
||
- Documentation purposes
|
||
|
||
### Solution
|
||
Add `@codebot explain-diff` command that breaks down what changed in simple terms.
|
||
|
||
### Implementation
|
||
- Add `explain-diff` command for PRs
|
||
- Analyze PR diff section by section
|
||
- Generate plain-language explanations
|
||
- Identify architectural changes
|
||
|
||
### Example Output
|
||
```markdown
|
||
@username
|
||
|
||
**PR Explanation:**
|
||
|
||
**Overview:**
|
||
This PR adds user authentication to the application using JWT tokens.
|
||
|
||
**Key Changes:**
|
||
|
||
1. **auth/jwt.py** (new file)
|
||
- Creates JSON Web Tokens for authenticated users
|
||
- Validates tokens on protected endpoints
|
||
- Handles token expiration (24 hour lifetime)
|
||
|
||
2. **api/users.py** (modified)
|
||
- Added `/login` endpoint that accepts username/password
|
||
- Returns JWT token on successful authentication
|
||
- Added `/logout` endpoint to invalidate tokens
|
||
|
||
3. **database/schema.sql** (modified)
|
||
- Added `users` table with columns: id, username, password_hash, email
|
||
- Passwords are hashed using bcrypt (secure)
|
||
|
||
**Architecture Impact:**
|
||
- Introduces authentication layer across all API endpoints
|
||
- Adds dependency on PyJWT library
|
||
- Requires database migration to create users table
|
||
```
|
||
|
||
### Impact
|
||
- Makes code review accessible
|
||
- Great for learning/onboarding
|
||
- Documentation generation
|
||
|
||
### Files to Modify
|
||
- `/tools/ai-review/config.yml`
|
||
- `/tools/ai-review/agents/pr_agent.py`
|
||
- `/tools/ai-review/prompts/` (add explain_diff.md)
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
## 5. Smart Test Suggestions
|
||
|
||
### Problem
|
||
Test coverage is critical but developers often miss edge cases or forget to update tests.
|
||
|
||
### Solution
|
||
Add `@codebot suggest-tests` command that:
|
||
1. Analyzes changed functions/classes
|
||
2. Identifies what needs testing
|
||
3. Suggests specific test cases
|
||
|
||
### Implementation
|
||
- Add `suggest-tests` command for PRs
|
||
- Parse changed code to identify functions
|
||
- Use LLM to suggest test scenarios
|
||
- Could integrate with coverage reports
|
||
|
||
### Example Output
|
||
```markdown
|
||
@username
|
||
|
||
**Test Suggestions for PR #123:**
|
||
|
||
### auth/jwt.py - `create_token()` function
|
||
|
||
**Recommended Test Cases:**
|
||
1. ✅ Valid user creates token successfully
|
||
2. ⚠️ **Missing:** Token expiration after 24 hours
|
||
3. ⚠️ **Missing:** Invalid user ID handling
|
||
4. ⚠️ **Missing:** Token creation with special characters in username
|
||
|
||
### api/users.py - `/login` endpoint
|
||
|
||
**Recommended Test Cases:**
|
||
1. ✅ Successful login with correct credentials
|
||
2. ⚠️ **Missing:** Login with wrong password
|
||
3. ⚠️ **Missing:** Login with non-existent user
|
||
4. ⚠️ **Missing:** SQL injection attempt in username field
|
||
5. ⚠️ **Missing:** Rate limiting after failed attempts
|
||
|
||
**Coverage Impact:**
|
||
- Current coverage: ~60%
|
||
- With suggested tests: ~85%
|
||
```
|
||
|
||
### Impact
|
||
- Improves test coverage
|
||
- Catches edge cases
|
||
- Reduces production bugs
|
||
|
||
### Files to Modify
|
||
- `/tools/ai-review/config.yml`
|
||
- `/tools/ai-review/agents/pr_agent.py`
|
||
- `/tools/ai-review/prompts/` (add test_suggestions.md)
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
## 6. @codebot review-again
|
||
|
||
### Problem
|
||
Current workflow: developer fixes issues → pushes commit → bot auto-reviews. Sometimes developers want re-review without creating new commits (e.g., after only changing comments).
|
||
|
||
### Solution
|
||
Add `@codebot review-again` command that re-runs PR review on current state.
|
||
|
||
### Implementation
|
||
- Add `review-again` command for PRs
|
||
- Re-run PR agent on current diff
|
||
- Update existing review comment
|
||
- Compare with previous review (show what changed)
|
||
|
||
### Example Output
|
||
```markdown
|
||
@username
|
||
|
||
**Re-review Complete:**
|
||
|
||
**Previous Review:** 5 issues (2 HIGH, 3 MEDIUM)
|
||
**Current Review:** 1 issue (1 MEDIUM)
|
||
|
||
✅ Fixed: SQL injection in login endpoint
|
||
✅ Fixed: Hardcoded JWT secret
|
||
⚠️ Remaining: Missing error handling in password reset
|
||
|
||
**Status:** Changes Required → Approved (pending fix)
|
||
```
|
||
|
||
### Impact
|
||
- Smoother PR workflow
|
||
- No unnecessary commits
|
||
- Faster feedback loop
|
||
|
||
### Files to Modify
|
||
- `/tools/ai-review/config.yml`
|
||
- `/tools/ai-review/agents/pr_agent.py`
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
## 7. Dependency Update Advisor
|
||
|
||
### Problem
|
||
Security vulnerabilities often exist in dependencies. Keeping dependencies up-to-date is critical but tedious.
|
||
|
||
### Solution
|
||
Add `@codebot check-deps` command that:
|
||
1. Parses requirements.txt, package.json, etc.
|
||
2. Checks for outdated packages
|
||
3. Warns about CVEs
|
||
4. Suggests upgrade commands
|
||
|
||
### Implementation
|
||
- Add `check-deps` command
|
||
- Support multiple package formats (pip, npm, cargo, go)
|
||
- Integrate with vulnerability databases (CVE, npm audit)
|
||
- Generate upgrade instructions
|
||
|
||
### Example Output
|
||
```markdown
|
||
@username
|
||
|
||
**Dependency Analysis:**
|
||
|
||
### Outdated Packages (5)
|
||
|
||
| Package | Current | Latest | Severity |
|
||
|---------|---------|--------|----------|
|
||
| requests | 2.28.0 | 2.31.0 | <20><> HIGH - CVE-2023-32681 |
|
||
| django | 3.2.0 | 4.2.8 | 🟡 MEDIUM - Multiple CVEs |
|
||
| flask | 2.0.0 | 3.0.0 | 🟢 LOW - New features |
|
||
| pyyaml | 5.4.1 | 6.0.1 | 🔴 HIGH - CVE-2022-38752 |
|
||
| sqlalchemy | 1.4.0 | 2.0.23 | 🟢 LOW - Performance improvements |
|
||
|
||
### Recommended Actions
|
||
|
||
**Immediate (Security Vulnerabilities):**
|
||
```bash
|
||
pip install --upgrade requests==2.31.0
|
||
pip install --upgrade pyyaml==6.0.1
|
||
pip install --upgrade django==4.2.8
|
||
```
|
||
|
||
**Optional (Feature Updates):**
|
||
```bash
|
||
pip install --upgrade flask==3.0.0
|
||
pip install --upgrade sqlalchemy==2.0.23
|
||
```
|
||
|
||
### Breaking Changes to Review
|
||
- **Django 4.x:** Requires Python 3.8+, check compatibility
|
||
- **Flask 3.x:** Async support added, review async patterns
|
||
- **SQLAlchemy 2.x:** ORM API changes, review queries
|
||
|
||
### Resources
|
||
- [requests CVE-2023-32681](https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-32681)
|
||
- [pyyaml CVE-2022-38752](https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-38752)
|
||
```
|
||
|
||
### Impact
|
||
- Critical for security
|
||
- Keeps projects up-to-date
|
||
- Prevents technical debt
|
||
- Reduces manual checking
|
||
|
||
### Files to Modify
|
||
- `/tools/ai-review/config.yml`
|
||
- `/tools/ai-review/agents/issue_agent.py`
|
||
- Add new module: `/tools/ai-review/dependency_checker.py`
|
||
|
||
### External APIs Needed
|
||
- PyPI JSON API for Python packages
|
||
- npm registry API for JavaScript
|
||
- NVD (National Vulnerability Database) for CVEs
|
||
- Or use `pip-audit`, `npm audit` CLI tools
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
## Implementation Priority
|
||
|
||
### Phase 1: Quick Wins (1-3 hours total)
|
||
1. `@codebot help` command
|
||
2. `@codebot review-again` command
|
||
|
||
### Phase 2: High Impact (5-8 hours total)
|
||
3. Automatic Label Creator
|
||
4. Code Diff Explainer
|
||
|
||
### Phase 3: Strategic Features (10-15 hours total)
|
||
5. Smart Test Suggestions
|
||
6. PR Changelog Generator
|
||
7. Dependency Update Advisor
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
## Contributing
|
||
|
||
Have an idea for a new feature? Please:
|
||
1. Check if it's already listed here
|
||
2. Consider value/effort ratio
|
||
3. Open an issue describing:
|
||
- Problem it solves
|
||
- Proposed solution
|
||
- Expected impact
|
||
- Example use case
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
## See Also
|
||
|
||
- [future_roadmap.md](future_roadmap.md) - Long-term vision (SAST, RAG, etc.)
|
||
- [configuration.md](configuration.md) - How to configure existing features
|
||
- [agents.md](agents.md) - Current agent capabilities
|