Repository navigation
[detection-analysis] Detection Analysis Report — 2026-10-02 #65128
Closed
Replies: 1 comment
|
This discussion was automatically closed because it expired on 2026-10-05T23:34:06.535Z.
|
0 replies
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Summary
2026-10-01T23:26:45Z→2026-10-02T23:26:45Zgh-aw-detection: false): 4 (1.9%)Note
No misconfigured workflows were detected in this window. All
gh-aw-detection: falseusage is low-volume (≤3 runs per workflow), nodetectionjob showed a failing conclusion, and no workflow alternated its detection setting within the window.Comparison Chart
Misconfigured Workflows
No misconfigured workflows detected in this window.
View All Run Metrics
View Historical Trend
Trend covers 8 data points over the last 30 days from the cache-memory history store. Detection-enabled run volume and success rate have both fluctuated significantly day over day (e.g. detection success rate ranged from 35% to 92% across recent samples), which is worth monitoring but did not meet any of this run's misconfiguration rules.
Recommendations
gh-aw-detectionconfiguration this window — detection remains the default on 98%+ of runs, and the handful of explicit opt-outs (Smoke Dispatch Work Coordinator,Smoke Claude) are low-volume smoke-test workflows, consistent with intentional configuration.agentjob on all 6 runs in this window (engine_id: codex, 0 tokens recorded) while itsdetectionjob itself succeeded each time — this is an agent/engine issue, not a detection misconfiguration.run.jsonwith no downloadedaw_info.json/run_summary.json(agent job likely never triggered, e.g. activation conditions not met). These were excluded from detection classification since nofeatures.gh-aw-detectiondata was available; if broader coverage is desired, the log-download step would need to capture artifacts for these runs too.All reactions