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
{{ message }}
Repository navigation
pm context summary.blocked and pm list-blocked ignore dependency-blocked items (inconsistent with pm next) #578
pm next (post GH-489) correctly treats items with open blocked_by dependency edges as blocked: they are excluded from the recommendation and listed in the blocked companion with open_blocker_count/blockers. But the two other surfaces agents use to assess blockage still count onlystatus: "blocked" items and report 0 for dependency-blocked work:
pm context (ctx) → summary.blocked: 0 at every depth (brief through full)
pm list-blocked → count: 0
Since ctx is advertised as "a token-efficient project context snapshot for next-work decisions", an orchestrator reading blocked: 0 will conclude everything is dispatchable, while pm next (edge-aware) disagrees. Two commands, two silent definitions of "blocked".
Either (a) ctx summary and list-blocked adopt the same edge-aware semantics as pm next (count items whose open blockers > 0, regardless of status), or (b) they report both dimensions explicitly, e.g. blocked_status: 0 + blocked_by_dependencies: 1, so the number can never silently disagree with pm next.
Option (a) or (b) both fix the real problem: an agent should never have to know that "blocked" means status here and edges there.
#37 - Improve agent token UX and blocked dependency handling [closed] #390 - Fix pm next closeout-row projection [merged] #502 - Atomic agent work selection, dependency integrity, and recovery primitives [merged] #545 - SDK contract integrity: workspace paths, dependency truth, validation, and MCP parity [merged] #559 - SDK durable relationship history and bounded context adapters [merged]
📝 Issue Planner
Check the box below or use the @coderabbitai plan command to generate an implementation plan and prompts that you can use with your favorite coding assistant.
Create Plan
🧪 Issue enrichment is currently in open beta.
You can configure auto-planning by selecting labels in the issue_enrichment configuration.
To disable automatic issue enrichment, add the following to your .coderabbit.yaml:
issue_enrichment:
auto_enrich:
enabled: false
💬 Have feedback or questions? Drop into our discord!
Activity
coderabbitai commentedon Jul 17, 2026
🔗 Related PRs
#37 - Improve agent token UX and blocked dependency handling [closed]
#390 - Fix pm next closeout-row projection [merged]
#502 - Atomic agent work selection, dependency integrity, and recovery primitives [merged]
#545 - SDK contract integrity: workspace paths, dependency truth, validation, and MCP parity [merged]
#559 - SDK durable relationship history and bounded context adapters [merged]
📝 Issue Planner
Check the box below or use the
@coderabbitai plancommand to generate an implementation plan and prompts that you can use with your favorite coding assistant.🧪 Issue enrichment is currently in open beta.
You can configure auto-planning by selecting labels in the issue_enrichment configuration.
To disable automatic issue enrichment, add the following to your
.coderabbit.yaml:💬 Have feedback or questions? Drop into our discord!
unbraind commentedon Jul 17, 2026
pm tracker item: pm-uxkf
chore(pm): review pass #95 — GH-578 filed as pm-uxkf (status-only blo…
docs(changelog): describe delivered GH-578 behavior
feat(sdk): semantic graph governance and shared actionability (#579)
chore(pm): review pass #97 — PR#579 lane reconciled zero-leak (uxkf/q…