Skip to content

feat(registry): deprecated action enforcement#2704

Open
jordan-umusu wants to merge 2 commits into
mainfrom
feat/deprecated-action-enforcement
Open

feat(registry): deprecated action enforcement#2704
jordan-umusu wants to merge 2 commits into
mainfrom
feat/deprecated-action-enforcement

Conversation

@jordan-umusu
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

@jordan-umusu jordan-umusu commented May 15, 2026

Summary by cubic

Block execution of deprecated registry actions and surface a clear deprecation message to guide migrations. This prevents deprecated actions from running in workflows.

  • New Features
    • Added DeprecatedActionError with action name and deprecation message.
    • Plumbed deprecated flag from registry manifests into ActionImplementation.
    • Enforced at runtime in _invoke_step: raise when an action is deprecated.
    • Extended ActionImplementation schema with an optional deprecated field.

Written for commit e83b7ac. Summary will update on new commits. Review in cubic

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

jordan-umusu commented May 15, 2026

@zeropath-ai
Copy link
Copy Markdown

zeropath-ai Bot commented May 15, 2026

No security or compliance issues detected. Reviewed everything up to 5284377.

Security Overview
Detected Code Changes
Change Type Relevant files
Enhancement ► tracecat/exceptions.py
    Add DeprecatedActionError exception
► tracecat/executor/registry_resolver.py
    Add deprecated field to ActionImplementation
► tracecat/executor/schemas.py
    Add deprecated field to ActionImplementation
► tracecat/executor/service.py
    Raise DeprecatedActionError when a deprecated action is resolved
► tests/unit/test_executor_manifest_resolution.py
    Add test for DeprecatedActionError on resolved context
    Add test for DeprecatedActionError on step context preparation

@jordan-umusu jordan-umusu marked this pull request as ready for review May 15, 2026 16:13
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@cubic-dev-ai cubic-dev-ai Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

No issues found across 4 files

Confidence score: 5/5

  • Automated review surfaced no issues in the provided summaries.
  • No files require special attention.

Re-trigger cubic

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: e83b7ac5be

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

Comment thread tracecat/executor/service.py Outdated
@jordan-umusu jordan-umusu force-pushed the feat/deprecated-action-enforcement branch from e83b7ac to 7cf4ee3 Compare May 15, 2026 16:39
@jordan-umusu jordan-umusu force-pushed the refactor/title-autogen-litellm branch from 53bb972 to 9c1704c Compare May 15, 2026 16:39
Copy link
Copy Markdown

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 7cf4ee30ec

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

Comment thread tracecat/executor/service.py Outdated
@jordan-umusu jordan-umusu force-pushed the refactor/title-autogen-litellm branch from 9c1704c to 9323e5f Compare May 15, 2026 18:31
@jordan-umusu jordan-umusu force-pushed the feat/deprecated-action-enforcement branch from 7cf4ee3 to 5284377 Compare May 15, 2026 18:31
Copy link
Copy Markdown

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 528437745d

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

Comment on lines +666 to 668
if action_impl.deprecated:
raise DeprecatedActionError(action_name, action_impl.deprecated)
action_secrets = await registry_resolver.collect_action_secrets_from_manifest(
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

P2 Badge Validate deprecated template steps before secret collection

prepare_resolved_context now rejects a deprecated root action, but it still calls collect_action_secrets_from_manifest immediately afterward, and that resolver recursively pulls secrets for all template steps before any step-level deprecation check runs. In a template that references a deprecated child action, missing/inaccessible child secrets can still fail first, so users get a secret-resolution error instead of the intended deprecation guidance. This means deprecated-action enforcement is still inconsistent for nested template actions and should be applied before recursive secret collection/evaluation.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

@jordan-umusu jordan-umusu force-pushed the refactor/title-autogen-litellm branch from 9323e5f to 27b4c4d Compare May 22, 2026 14:26
Base automatically changed from refactor/title-autogen-litellm to main May 22, 2026 18:14
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant