@yemi33/minions 0.1.313 → 0.1.315

package/CHANGELOG.md

@@ -1,8 +1,12 @@
 # Changelog
 
-## 0.1.313 (2026-04-03)
+## 0.1.315 (2026-04-03)
+
+### Fixes
+-  show reviewer names in dashboard Signed Off By column
 
 ### Other
+- cleanup: remove evaluate.md (re-created by agents), fix stale references
 - perf: CC message handling — debounce localStorage, cap array, batch scroll
 
 ## 0.1.312 (2026-04-03)

package/dashboard/js/render-plans.js

@@ -70,7 +70,7 @@ function derivePlanStatus(prdFile, mdFile, prdJsonStatus, workItems) {
     w.sourcePlan === prdFile || w.sourcePlan === mdFile ||
     (w.type === 'plan-to-prd' && (w.planFile === prdFile || w.planFile === mdFile))
   );
-  const implementWi = wi.filter(w => w.type !== 'plan-to-prd' && w.type !== 'verify' && w.type !== 'evaluate');
+  const implementWi = wi.filter(w => w.type !== 'plan-to-prd' && w.type !== 'verify');
   const hasPendingPrd = wi.some(w => w.type === 'plan-to-prd' && (w.status === 'pending' || w.status === 'dispatched'));
   const hasActiveWork = implementWi.some(w => w.status === 'pending' || w.status === 'dispatched');
   const allDone = implementWi.length > 0 && implementWi.every(w => w.status === 'done');

package/dashboard/js/render-prs.js

@@ -24,7 +24,7 @@ function prRow(pr) {
     '<td><span class="pr-agent">' + escHtml(pr.agent || '—') + '</span></td>' +
     '<td><span class="pr-branch">' + escHtml(pr.branch || '—') + '</span></td>' +
     '<td><span class="pr-badge ' + reviewClass + '">' + escHtml(reviewLabel) + '</span></td>' +
-    '<td>' + (sq.reviewer && sq.status !== 'waiting' ? '<span class="pr-agent" title="' + escHtml(sq.note || '') + '">' + escHtml(sq.reviewer) + '</span>' : sq.reviewer && sq.status === 'waiting' ? '<span class="pr-agent" style="color:var(--muted)" title="Vote pending confirmation">' + escHtml(sq.reviewer) + '…</span>' : '<span style="color:var(--muted);font-size:11px">—</span>') + '</td>' +
+    '<td>' + (sq.reviewer && sq.status !== 'waiting' ? '<span class="pr-agent" title="' + escHtml(sq.note || '') + '">' + escHtml(sq.reviewer) + '</span>' : sq.reviewer && sq.status === 'waiting' ? '<span class="pr-agent" style="color:var(--muted)" title="Vote pending confirmation">' + escHtml(sq.reviewer) + '…</span>' : pr.reviewedBy && pr.reviewedBy.length ? '<span class="pr-agent">' + escHtml(pr.reviewedBy.join(', ')) + '</span>' : '<span style="color:var(--muted);font-size:11px">—</span>') + '</td>' +
     '<td><span class="pr-badge ' + buildClass + '">' + escHtml(buildLabel) + '</span></td>' +
     '<td><span class="pr-badge ' + statusClass + '">' + escHtml(statusLabel) + '</span></td>' +
     '<td><span class="pr-date">' + escHtml(pr.created || '—') + '</span></td>' +

package/engine/ado.js

@@ -151,6 +151,19 @@ async function pollPrStatus(config) {
       else newReviewStatus = 'pending';
     }
 
+    // Store human reviewer names who approved or requested changes
+    const reviewedBy = reviewers
+      .filter(r => r.vote >= 5 || r.vote === -10)
+      .map(r => r.displayName)
+      .filter(Boolean);
+    // Fallback: if PR was merged and no decisive votes, use completedBy
+    if (!reviewedBy.length && newStatus === 'merged' && prData.closedBy?.displayName) {
+      reviewedBy.push(prData.closedBy.displayName);
+    }
+    if (JSON.stringify(pr.reviewedBy || []) !== JSON.stringify(reviewedBy)) {
+      pr.reviewedBy = reviewedBy; updated = true;
+    }
+
     if (pr.reviewStatus !== newReviewStatus) {
       log('info', `PR ${pr.id} reviewStatus: ${pr.reviewStatus} → ${newReviewStatus}`);
       pr.reviewStatus = newReviewStatus;

package/engine/github.js

@@ -154,6 +154,19 @@ async function pollPrStatus(config) {
       }
       const states = [...latestByUser.values()];
 
+      // Store human reviewer names who approved or requested changes
+      const reviewedBy = [...latestByUser.entries()]
+        .filter(([, state]) => state === 'APPROVED' || state === 'CHANGES_REQUESTED')
+        .map(([user]) => user)
+        .filter(Boolean);
+      // Fallback: if PR was merged and no decisive reviews, use merged_by
+      if (!reviewedBy.length && prData.merged && prData.merged_by?.login) {
+        reviewedBy.push(prData.merged_by.login);
+      }
+      if (JSON.stringify(pr.reviewedBy || []) !== JSON.stringify(reviewedBy)) {
+        pr.reviewedBy = reviewedBy; updated = true;
+      }
+
       let newReviewStatus = pr.reviewStatus || 'pending';
       if (states.some(s => s === 'CHANGES_REQUESTED')) newReviewStatus = 'changes-requested';
       else if (states.some(s => s === 'APPROVED')) newReviewStatus = 'approved';

package/package.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "@yemi33/minions",
-  "version": "0.1.313",
+  "version": "0.1.315",
   "description": "Multi-agent AI dev team that runs from ~/.minions/ — five autonomous agents share a single engine, dashboard, and knowledge base",
   "bin": {
     "minions": "bin/minions.js"

package/playbooks/evaluate.md

@@ -1,114 +0,0 @@
-# Evaluate: {{item_name}}
-
-> Agent: {{agent_name}} ({{agent_role}}) | Team root: {{team_root}}
-
-## Context
-
-Project: {{project_name}}
-Repo: {{repo_name}} | Org: {{ado_org}} | ADO Project: {{ado_project}}
-PR: {{pr_url}}
-Work Item: {{item_id}}
-
-## Acceptance Criteria
-
-{{acceptance_criteria}}
-
-## Task Description
-
-{{task_description}}
-
-## Your Task
-
-You are the **Evaluator** in the Planner-Generator-Evaluator pattern. Your job is to independently verify whether the implementation in the PR branch meets the acceptance criteria. You are NOT the implementer — you are the skeptic.
-
-**Mindset: Do not pass unless build succeeds AND all acceptance criteria are demonstrably met.** Assume the implementation is incomplete or wrong until proven otherwise. Look for edge cases, missing requirements, and silent failures.
-
-## Step 1: Check Out the PR Branch
-
-```bash
-cd {{project_path}}
-git fetch origin
-git checkout {{branch_name}}
-git pull origin {{branch_name}}
-```
-
-## Step 2: Build
-
-Run the project build. Check `CLAUDE.md`, `package.json`, or `README` for build instructions.
-
-```bash
-# Typical:
-npm install && npm run build
-# Or whatever the project uses
-```
-
-Record: **PASS** or **FAIL** with error output.
-
-If the build fails, **stop here** — the verdict is `pass: false`. Include the build error in feedback.
-
-## Step 3: Run Tests
-
-Run the full test suite:
-
-```bash
-npm test
-```
-
-Record: **X passed / Y failed / Z skipped**.
-
-If any tests fail, note which ones and whether they are related to the changes.
-
-## Step 4: Diff Review Against Acceptance Criteria
-
-Review the actual code changes:
-
-```bash
-git diff {{main_branch}}...{{branch_name}} --stat
-git diff {{main_branch}}...{{branch_name}}
-```
-
-For **each** acceptance criterion, determine:
-- **Met**: The diff demonstrably satisfies this criterion. Cite the specific file/line.
-- **Not met**: The diff does not satisfy this criterion, or satisfies it only partially. Explain what's missing.
-
-Be precise. "Looks good" is not an evaluation — cite file paths and line numbers.
-
-## Step 5: Output Structured Verdict
-
-After completing your evaluation, output the following JSON block as your final output. This MUST be valid JSON wrapped in a `json` fenced code block:
-
-```json
-{
-  "pass": false,
-  "build": true,
-  "tests": "42/42",
-  "criteria_met": [
-    "criterion 1 — met because X (source: path/to/file.js:42)"
-  ],
-  "criteria_failed": [
-    "criterion 2 — not met because Y is missing"
-  ],
-  "feedback": "Summary of what needs to change for this to pass. Be specific — file names, line numbers, what to add/fix."
-}
-```
-
-Field definitions:
-- `pass`: `true` only if build succeeds AND **all** acceptance criteria are met. Otherwise `false`.
-- `build`: `true` if the build completed without errors, `false` otherwise.
-- `tests`: String in format `"passed/total"` (e.g., `"38/40"`). Use `"N/A"` if no test suite exists.
-- `criteria_met`: Array of strings — one per criterion that IS met. Include source references.
-- `criteria_failed`: Array of strings — one per criterion that is NOT met. Explain why.
-- `feedback`: Actionable feedback for the implementer. Be specific about what to fix. If `pass` is `true`, use this for minor suggestions or "LGTM".
-
-## Rules
-
-- **No Playwright / browser testing** — this phase evaluates build, tests, and code review only.
-- **Do NOT fix code** — only evaluate and report. You are the evaluator, not the implementer.
-- **Do NOT rubber-stamp** — if a criterion is ambiguous, evaluate conservatively (fail it and explain).
-- **Build failure is an automatic fail** — do not evaluate criteria if the build doesn't pass.
-- **Every criterion must be addressed** — `criteria_met` + `criteria_failed` should cover all acceptance criteria.
-- **Cite sources** — reference file paths and line numbers for every met/failed criterion.
-
-{{references}}
-
-**Note:** Do NOT write to `agents/*/status.json` — the engine manages your status automatically.