feat(ci): add Codex AI review pipeline for Woodpecker

Adds automated code quality and security review pipeline that runs on pull requests using OpenAI Codex with structured output schemas. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-02-09 22:04:34 -06:00
parent 281c7ab39b
commit af2e2b083d
4 changed files with 408 additions and 0 deletions
--- a/.woodpecker/README.md
+++ b/.woodpecker/README.md
@@ -0,0 +1,120 @@
+# Woodpecker CI Configuration for Mosaic Stack
+
+## Codex AI Review Pipeline
+
+This directory contains the Codex AI review pipeline configuration for automated code and security reviews on pull requests.
+
+### Setup
+
+1. **Add Codex API key to Woodpecker:**
+   - Go to mosaic-stack repo at `https://ci.mosaicstack.dev`
+   - Settings → Secrets
+   - Add secret: `codex_api_key` with your OpenAI API key
+
+2. **Enable the pipeline:**
+   - The `codex-review.yml` pipeline will automatically run on all PRs
+   - The main `.woodpecker.yml` handles primary CI tasks
+   - This codex pipeline is independent and focused solely on reviews
+
+### What Gets Reviewed
+
+**Code Review (`code-review` step):**
+
+- Correctness — logic errors, edge cases, error handling
+- Code Quality — complexity, duplication, naming
+- Testing — coverage, test quality
+- Performance — N+1 queries, blocking ops
+- Dependencies — deprecated packages
+- Documentation — comments, API docs
+
+**Security Review (`security-review` step):**
+
+- OWASP Top 10 vulnerabilities
+- Hardcoded secrets/credentials
+- Injection flaws (SQL, NoSQL, OS command)
+- XSS, CSRF, SSRF
+- Auth/authz gaps
+- Data exposure in logs
+
+### Pipeline Behavior
+
+- **Triggers:** Every pull request
+- **Runs:** Code review + Security review in parallel
+- **Fails if:**
+  - Code review finds **blockers**
+  - Security review finds **critical** or **high** severity issues
+- **Outputs:** Structured JSON results in CI logs
+
+### Local Testing
+
+Test the review scripts locally before pushing:
+
+```bash
+# Code review of uncommitted changes
+~/.claude/scripts/codex/codex-code-review.sh --uncommitted
+
+# Security review of uncommitted changes
+~/.claude/scripts/codex/codex-security-review.sh --uncommitted
+
+# Code review against main branch
+~/.claude/scripts/codex/codex-code-review.sh -b main
+
+# Security review and save JSON
+~/.claude/scripts/codex/codex-security-review.sh -b main -o security.json
+```
+
+### Schema Files
+
+The `schemas/` directory contains JSON schemas that enforce structured output from Codex:
+
+- `code-review-schema.json` — Defines output for code quality reviews
+- `security-review-schema.json` — Defines output for security reviews
+
+These schemas ensure consistent, machine-readable findings that the CI pipeline can parse and fail on.
+
+### Integration with Main Pipeline
+
+The main `.woodpecker.yml` in the repo root handles:
+
+- Type checking (TypeScript)
+- Linting (ESLint)
+- Unit tests (Vitest)
+- Integration tests (Playwright)
+- Docker image builds
+
+This `codex-review.yml` is independent and focuses solely on:
+
+- AI-powered code quality review
+- AI-powered security vulnerability scanning
+
+Both pipelines run in parallel on PRs.
+
+### Troubleshooting
+
+**Pipeline fails with "codex: command not found"**
+
+- Check that the node image in `codex-review.yml` matches a version with npm
+- Current: `node:22-slim`
+
+**Pipeline fails with auth errors**
+
+- Verify `codex_api_key` secret is set in Woodpecker
+- Test the key locally: `CODEX_API_KEY=<key> codex exec "test"`
+
+**Pipeline passes but should fail**
+
+- Check the failure conditions in `codex-review.yml`
+- Current thresholds: blockers, critical, or high findings
+
+## Files
+
+| File                                  | Purpose                                |
+| ------------------------------------- | -------------------------------------- |
+| `codex-review.yml`                    | Codex AI review pipeline configuration |
+| `schemas/code-review-schema.json`     | Code review output schema              |
+| `schemas/security-review-schema.json` | Security review output schema          |
+| `README.md`                           | This file                              |
+
+## Parent CI Pipeline
+
+The main `.woodpecker.yml` is located at the repository root and handles all build/test tasks.
--- a/.woodpecker/codex-review.yml
+++ b/.woodpecker/codex-review.yml
@@ -0,0 +1,90 @@
+# Codex AI Review Pipeline for Woodpecker CI
+# Drop this into your repo's .woodpecker/ directory to enable automated
+# code and security reviews on every pull request.
+#
+# Required secrets:
+#   - codex_api_key: OpenAI API key or Codex-compatible key
+#
+# Optional secrets:
+#   - gitea_token: Gitea API token for posting PR comments (if not using tea CLI auth)
+
+when:
+  event: pull_request
+
+variables:
+  - &node_image "node:22-slim"
+  - &install_codex "npm i -g @openai/codex"
+
+steps:
+  # --- Code Quality Review ---
+  code-review:
+    image: *node_image
+    environment:
+      CODEX_API_KEY:
+        from_secret: codex_api_key
+    commands:
+      - *install_codex
+      - apt-get update -qq && apt-get install -y -qq jq git > /dev/null 2>&1
+
+      # Generate the diff
+      - git fetch origin ${CI_COMMIT_TARGET_BRANCH:-main}
+      - DIFF=$(git diff origin/${CI_COMMIT_TARGET_BRANCH:-main}...HEAD)
+
+      # Run code review with structured output
+      - |
+        codex exec \
+          --sandbox read-only \
+          --output-schema .woodpecker/schemas/code-review-schema.json \
+          -o /tmp/code-review.json \
+          "You are an expert code reviewer. Review the following code changes for correctness, code quality, testing, performance, and documentation issues. Only flag actionable, important issues. Categorize as blocker/should-fix/suggestion. If code looks good, say so.
+
+        Changes:
+        $DIFF"
+
+      # Output summary
+      - echo "=== Code Review Results ==="
+      - jq '.' /tmp/code-review.json
+      - |
+        BLOCKERS=$(jq '.stats.blockers // 0' /tmp/code-review.json)
+        if [ "$BLOCKERS" -gt 0 ]; then
+          echo "FAIL: $BLOCKERS blocker(s) found"
+          exit 1
+        fi
+        echo "PASS: No blockers found"
+
+  # --- Security Review ---
+  security-review:
+    image: *node_image
+    environment:
+      CODEX_API_KEY:
+        from_secret: codex_api_key
+    commands:
+      - *install_codex
+      - apt-get update -qq && apt-get install -y -qq jq git > /dev/null 2>&1
+
+      # Generate the diff
+      - git fetch origin ${CI_COMMIT_TARGET_BRANCH:-main}
+      - DIFF=$(git diff origin/${CI_COMMIT_TARGET_BRANCH:-main}...HEAD)
+
+      # Run security review with structured output
+      - |
+        codex exec \
+          --sandbox read-only \
+          --output-schema .woodpecker/schemas/security-review-schema.json \
+          -o /tmp/security-review.json \
+          "You are an expert application security engineer. Review the following code changes for security vulnerabilities including OWASP Top 10, hardcoded secrets, injection flaws, auth/authz gaps, XSS, CSRF, SSRF, path traversal, and supply chain risks. Include CWE IDs and remediation steps. Only flag real security issues, not code quality.
+
+        Changes:
+        $DIFF"
+
+      # Output summary
+      - echo "=== Security Review Results ==="
+      - jq '.' /tmp/security-review.json
+      - |
+        CRITICAL=$(jq '.stats.critical // 0' /tmp/security-review.json)
+        HIGH=$(jq '.stats.high // 0' /tmp/security-review.json)
+        if [ "$CRITICAL" -gt 0 ] || [ "$HIGH" -gt 0 ]; then
+          echo "FAIL: $CRITICAL critical, $HIGH high severity finding(s)"
+          exit 1
+        fi
+        echo "PASS: No critical or high severity findings"
--- a/.woodpecker/schemas/code-review-schema.json
+++ b/.woodpecker/schemas/code-review-schema.json
@@ -0,0 +1,92 @@
+{
+  "type": "object",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "summary": {
+      "type": "string",
+      "description": "Brief overall assessment of the code changes"
+    },
+    "verdict": {
+      "type": "string",
+      "enum": ["approve", "request-changes", "comment"],
+      "description": "Overall review verdict"
+    },
+    "confidence": {
+      "type": "number",
+      "minimum": 0,
+      "maximum": 1,
+      "description": "Confidence score for the review (0-1)"
+    },
+    "findings": {
+      "type": "array",
+      "items": {
+        "type": "object",
+        "additionalProperties": false,
+        "properties": {
+          "severity": {
+            "type": "string",
+            "enum": ["blocker", "should-fix", "suggestion"],
+            "description": "Finding severity: blocker (must fix), should-fix (important), suggestion (optional)"
+          },
+          "title": {
+            "type": "string",
+            "description": "Short title describing the issue"
+          },
+          "file": {
+            "type": "string",
+            "description": "File path where the issue was found"
+          },
+          "line_start": {
+            "type": "integer",
+            "description": "Starting line number"
+          },
+          "line_end": {
+            "type": "integer",
+            "description": "Ending line number"
+          },
+          "description": {
+            "type": "string",
+            "description": "Detailed explanation of the issue"
+          },
+          "suggestion": {
+            "type": "string",
+            "description": "Suggested fix or improvement"
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "severity",
+          "title",
+          "file",
+          "line_start",
+          "line_end",
+          "description",
+          "suggestion"
+        ]
+      }
+    },
+    "stats": {
+      "type": "object",
+      "additionalProperties": false,
+      "properties": {
+        "files_reviewed": {
+          "type": "integer",
+          "description": "Number of files reviewed"
+        },
+        "blockers": {
+          "type": "integer",
+          "description": "Count of blocker findings"
+        },
+        "should_fix": {
+          "type": "integer",
+          "description": "Count of should-fix findings"
+        },
+        "suggestions": {
+          "type": "integer",
+          "description": "Count of suggestion findings"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": ["files_reviewed", "blockers", "should_fix", "suggestions"]
+    }
+  },
+  "required": ["summary", "verdict", "confidence", "findings", "stats"]
+}
--- a/.woodpecker/schemas/security-review-schema.json
+++ b/.woodpecker/schemas/security-review-schema.json
@@ -0,0 +1,106 @@
+{
+  "type": "object",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "summary": {
+      "type": "string",
+      "description": "Brief overall security assessment of the code changes"
+    },
+    "risk_level": {
+      "type": "string",
+      "enum": ["critical", "high", "medium", "low", "none"],
+      "description": "Overall security risk level"
+    },
+    "confidence": {
+      "type": "number",
+      "minimum": 0,
+      "maximum": 1,
+      "description": "Confidence score for the review (0-1)"
+    },
+    "findings": {
+      "type": "array",
+      "items": {
+        "type": "object",
+        "additionalProperties": false,
+        "properties": {
+          "severity": {
+            "type": "string",
+            "enum": ["critical", "high", "medium", "low"],
+            "description": "Vulnerability severity level"
+          },
+          "title": {
+            "type": "string",
+            "description": "Short title describing the vulnerability"
+          },
+          "file": {
+            "type": "string",
+            "description": "File path where the vulnerability was found"
+          },
+          "line_start": {
+            "type": "integer",
+            "description": "Starting line number"
+          },
+          "line_end": {
+            "type": "integer",
+            "description": "Ending line number"
+          },
+          "description": {
+            "type": "string",
+            "description": "Detailed explanation of the vulnerability"
+          },
+          "cwe_id": {
+            "type": "string",
+            "description": "CWE identifier if applicable (e.g., CWE-79)"
+          },
+          "owasp_category": {
+            "type": "string",
+            "description": "OWASP Top 10 category if applicable (e.g., A03:2021-Injection)"
+          },
+          "remediation": {
+            "type": "string",
+            "description": "Specific remediation steps to fix the vulnerability"
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "severity",
+          "title",
+          "file",
+          "line_start",
+          "line_end",
+          "description",
+          "cwe_id",
+          "owasp_category",
+          "remediation"
+        ]
+      }
+    },
+    "stats": {
+      "type": "object",
+      "additionalProperties": false,
+      "properties": {
+        "files_reviewed": {
+          "type": "integer",
+          "description": "Number of files reviewed"
+        },
+        "critical": {
+          "type": "integer",
+          "description": "Count of critical findings"
+        },
+        "high": {
+          "type": "integer",
+          "description": "Count of high findings"
+        },
+        "medium": {
+          "type": "integer",
+          "description": "Count of medium findings"
+        },
+        "low": {
+          "type": "integer",
+          "description": "Count of low findings"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": ["files_reviewed", "critical", "high", "medium", "low"]
+    }
+  },
+  "required": ["summary", "risk_level", "confidence", "findings", "stats"]
+}