You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Window evaluated: last 24 full hours (UTC), 2026-08-20T23:28Z → 2026-08-21T23:28Z
Total runs analyzed: 254
Detection-enabled runs: 239 (94.1%)
Regular runs: 15 (5.9%)
Misconfigured workflows found: 0
Note
No misconfigured workflows were detected against the four rules in this window (detection-disabled on high-frequency workflows, audit/monitor-style names missing detection, detection-step-specific failures, or inconsistent detection flags across runs). See caveats below.
Comparison Chart
Detection-enabled runs had a higher success rate (91.2% vs 80.0%) and consumed more tokens on average (29,540 vs 19,712) — consistent with the added detection processing, though the sample of regular runs (n=15) is small relative to detection runs (n=239).
Misconfigured Workflows
No misconfigured workflows detected in this window.
Caveats on rule coverage:
Rule 1 (gh-aw-detection: false on a workflow with >3 runs in the last 7 days) could only be evaluated against the ~24h of logs actually available (all 254 runs with aw_info.json fall in the last 11 hours), not a full 7-day history. No regular-only workflow exceeded 3 runs in the available window (max was 2, Issue Arborist).
Rule 2 (name implies audit/monitor/report role but lacks detection): no workflow in this window had a name matching audit, analyzer, report, detector, monitor, or inspector while running with detection disabled. The documented opt-out (Daily Agentic Workflow AIC Usage Audit) did not run in this window.
Rule 3 (detection-enabled run failed on detection-specific steps): 21 detection-enabled runs failed in the window (e.g. AI Moderator 7/7 failures, Code Scanning Fixer 2/2). These runs show TokenUsage: 0 and ErrorCount: 0 in their run summaries, indicating the agent job did not execute (likely trigger/permission issues) rather than a failure isolated to a detection step. Flagging these would be speculative without step-level logs distinguishing detection-job failures from full-job failures, so they are not included as misconfigurations — worth a follow-up if step-level detection logs become available.
Rule 4 (alternates detection true/false within the window): no workflow showed mixed flags across its runs in this window.
View All Run Metrics
Workflow
Detection Enabled
Runs
Success Rate
Avg Tokens
PR Sous Chef
Yes
36
97.2%
40,658
Design Decision Gate 🏗️
Yes
19
94.7%
12,110
Impeccable Skills Reviewer
Yes
19
100.0%
7,112
Matt Pocock Skills Reviewer
Yes
19
100.0%
11,704
PR Code Quality Reviewer
Yes
19
100.0%
33,022
Ponytail Reviewer
Yes
19
100.0%
8,304
Test Quality Sentinel
Yes
18
100.0%
7,764
Avenger
Yes
10
90.0%
13,188
AI Moderator
Yes
7
0.0%
0
Issue Monster
Yes
7
85.7%
26,307
Auto-Triage Issues
Yes
6
83.3%
14,973
PR Description Updater
Yes
6
100.0%
10,389
Daily Go Test Parallelizer
Yes
5
100.0%
524,326
Contribution Check
Yes
3
100.0%
28,976
Code Scanning Fixer
Yes
2
0.0%
6,079
Issue Arborist
No
2
0.0%
0
[aw] Failure Investigator (6h)
Yes
2
100.0%
68,220
(56 workflows with a single run each, omitted for brevity — full list in metrics.json artifact)
—
1 each
—
—
Regular-only workflows with a single run in the window: Agentic Workflow AIC Usage Optimizer, Daily Secrets Analysis Agent, Dead Code Removal Agent, Issue Triage Agent, Linter Miner, Lockfile Statistics Analysis Agent, PR Triage Agent, Package Specification Librarian, Repository Quality Improvement Agent, Slide Deck Maintainer, Smoke Copilot Sub Agents, UK AI Operational Resilience, Workflow Normalizer — none exceed the >3-run threshold for Rule 1.
View Historical Trend
This is the first recorded data point for detection-comparison trending in cache-memory (/tmp/gh-aw/cache-memory/trending/detection/history.jsonl). No trend chart is shown since a single point isn't yet a trend — future runs will build up history for a trend chart.
Recommendations
No immediate action needed — detection coverage is high (94.1% of runs) and no rule-based misconfigurations were found.
Investigate the 21 detection-enabled runs that failed with TokenUsage: 0/ErrorCount: 0 (e.g. AI Moderator, Code Scanning Fixer, Agentic Workflow Audit Agent) — these look like job-startup failures unrelated to detection, but are worth a separate triage pass since AI Moderator failed 7/7 times in this window.
Re-run this analysis once 7 days of logs are available to properly evaluate Rule 1 (frequency-based detection gaps).
reacted with thumbs up emoji reacted with thumbs down emoji reacted with laugh emoji reacted with hooray emoji reacted with confused emoji reacted with heart emoji reacted with rocket emoji reacted with eyes emoji
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Summary
Note
No misconfigured workflows were detected against the four rules in this window (detection-disabled on high-frequency workflows, audit/monitor-style names missing detection, detection-step-specific failures, or inconsistent detection flags across runs). See caveats below.
Comparison Chart
Detection-enabled runs had a higher success rate (91.2% vs 80.0%) and consumed more tokens on average (29,540 vs 19,712) — consistent with the added detection processing, though the sample of regular runs (n=15) is small relative to detection runs (n=239).
Misconfigured Workflows
No misconfigured workflows detected in this window.
Caveats on rule coverage:
gh-aw-detection: falseon a workflow with >3 runs in the last 7 days) could only be evaluated against the ~24h of logs actually available (all 254 runs withaw_info.jsonfall in the last 11 hours), not a full 7-day history. No regular-only workflow exceeded 3 runs in the available window (max was 2,Issue Arborist).audit,analyzer,report,detector,monitor, orinspectorwhile running with detection disabled. The documented opt-out (Daily Agentic Workflow AIC Usage Audit) did not run in this window.AI Moderator7/7 failures,Code Scanning Fixer2/2). These runs showTokenUsage: 0andErrorCount: 0in their run summaries, indicating the agent job did not execute (likely trigger/permission issues) rather than a failure isolated to a detection step. Flagging these would be speculative without step-level logs distinguishing detection-job failures from full-job failures, so they are not included as misconfigurations — worth a follow-up if step-level detection logs become available.View All Run Metrics
metrics.jsonartifact)Regular-only workflows with a single run in the window:
Agentic Workflow AIC Usage Optimizer,Daily Secrets Analysis Agent,Dead Code Removal Agent,Issue Triage Agent,Linter Miner,Lockfile Statistics Analysis Agent,PR Triage Agent,Package Specification Librarian,Repository Quality Improvement Agent,Slide Deck Maintainer,Smoke Copilot Sub Agents,UK AI Operational Resilience,Workflow Normalizer— none exceed the >3-run threshold for Rule 1.View Historical Trend
This is the first recorded data point for detection-comparison trending in cache-memory (
/tmp/gh-aw/cache-memory/trending/detection/history.jsonl). No trend chart is shown since a single point isn't yet a trend — future runs will build up history for a trend chart.Recommendations
TokenUsage: 0/ErrorCount: 0(e.g.AI Moderator,Code Scanning Fixer,Agentic Workflow Audit Agent) — these look like job-startup failures unrelated to detection, but are worth a separate triage pass sinceAI Moderatorfailed 7/7 times in this window.All reactions