Enhancement/106 Migrate the review flow to Opus 5 / Sonnet 5 - #105
Open
s100ian wants to merge 3 commits into
Open
Enhancement/106 Migrate the review flow to Opus 5 / Sonnet 5#105s100ian wants to merge 3 commits into
s100ian wants to merge 3 commits into
Conversation
Move the frontend reviewer subagent to Opus 5 (deep bug-finding is the highest-value step in the review) and the CI review orchestrator to Sonnet 5 (diff classification, subagent dispatch, comment posting). Both replace claude-sonnet-4-6. No other API surface changes are needed: neither call site sets budget_tokens, sampling parameters, or assistant prefills, and effort: high remains valid on Opus 5. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01NkKxkLYPzNDTWUak4Wsb8D
Follow-up to the model migration, covering prompt-side adjustments the model IDs alone did not address. - Reviewer: cap finding length at one to two sentences. Opus 5 writes longer user-facing text than Sonnet 4.6, and this output is posted verbatim as a PR comment. Verbosity responds to prompting, not effort. - Reviewer: effort high -> medium. Opus 5 holds review accuracy at lower effort; revert to high if recall drops on real PRs. The skill/workflow CI override and the review-only guardrail this repo already had are what the uniplan side was brought in line with. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01NkKxkLYPzNDTWUak4Wsb8D
Reverts the medium step-down from the previous commit. Review recall is worth more here than the token saving; the finding length cap is unaffected. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01NkKxkLYPzNDTWUak4Wsb8D
s100ian
changed the title
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Closes #106
Migrates this repo's Claude model references off
claude-sonnet-4-6, plus the prompt-side tuning that the model swap alone doesn't cover.Companion to uni-dev-lab/uniplan#135, which makes the equivalent change on the backend side.
What changed
.claude/agents/uniplan-web-fe-reviewer.mdclaude-sonnet-4-6→claude-opus-5; added a finding-length cap.github/workflows/claude-code-review.ymlclaude-sonnet-4-6→claude-sonnet-5Why the split. The reviewer subagent does the actual bug-finding, where Opus 5's precision and recall gain is worth the most. The CI
--modelflag drives the orchestrator, which classifies the diff, dispatches the subagent, merges findings, and posts the comment — plumbing that Sonnet 5 handles at lower cost. Both paths stay behind thereviewers-onlyenvironment gate, so token spend is bounded either way.Finding-length cap. Opus 5 writes longer user-facing text than Sonnet 4.6, and the reviewer's output is posted verbatim as a PR comment. The cap holds review length steady. It's prompting rather than an
effortchange because on Opus 5 verbosity responds to instructions, not to effort level.effort: highis retained. An intermediate commit stepped it down tomediumon the basis that Opus 5 holds review accuracy at lower effort; that was reverted, so the net diff leaveseffortuntouched. Recall was judged worth more than the token saving.This repo's
review-prskill already had a proper CI override and its workflow already carried the review-only guardrail — those are what the uniplan side was brought in line with, so there was nothing to change here.Verification
No API-surface migration was required: the reviewer sets no
budget_tokens, no sampling parameters, and no assistant prefills, so nothing in the 4.6 → 5 breaking-change set applies. The workflow YAML was re-parsed after editing. No behaviour was executed — this diff is configuration and prompt text only, and the review flow it configures runs onworkflow_dispatchagainst a PR.Not included
claude-opus-5uses a different tokenizer than Sonnet 4.6 and thinks by default, so a review run will spend more tokens than before. Worth watching on the first few real PRs; revert either model line if the cost profile doesn't hold.🤖 Generated with Claude Code
https://claude.ai/code/session_01NkKxkLYPzNDTWUak4Wsb8D